» Economist: World Leaders Will Exploit Charlie Hebdo to Eliminate Encryption Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

» Economist: World Leaders Will Exploit Charlie Hebdo to Eliminate Encryption Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

'They will use this to strip us of all rights'.







Image Credits: Twitter, ‏@David_Cameron



by PAUL JOSEPH WATSON | JANUARY 13, 2015





Economist Martin Armstrong warns that the twin attacks in France will be used by world leaders to push for restrictions on Internet privacy and the total elimination of encrypted communications.



Armstrong, who correctly predicted the 1987 Black Monday crash as well as the 1998 Russian financial collapse, writes that, “They are using this latest event precisely as they used 911 to strip us of all rights.”



“David Cameron, PM of Britain, wants to block WhatsApp and Snapchat if he wins the next election, as part of his plans for new surveillance. Britain will lead the charge to outlaw encryption altogether when Britain has been walking hand-in-hand with the NSA. They are using this latest event precisely as they used 911 to strip us of all rights,” adds Armstrong.

The economist also relates how he has been told behind the scenes that, “They are looking to use this as a new push to gather all taxes they stupidly think will keep them operating.”



“They are BRAIN-DEAD and cannot see that what they are doing is destroying everything,” concludes Armstrong.



The Charlie Hebdo shooting and the subsequent attack on a Jewish grocery store were followed by an alleged ISIS hack of the Pentagon’s Twitter accounts.



Despite the fact that, according to the group which calls itself Anonymous, the hack leads back to Maryland, home of the NSA, the White House is likely to cite the incident as another reason to push for the reanimation of controversial legislation, as well as executive action, which will impose new controls on the world wide web.



The Sony hack, which was blamed on North Korea but was more likely to have been an inside job according to experts, was also used togrease the skids for cybersecurity measures that had previously been considered dead.



Despite world leaders marching in defense of freedom in Paris just a day after the terrorists were killed, French President Francois Hollande’s initial response was to put 10,000 troops on the streets. There has also been discussion of tighter surveillance laws and a French-style ‘Patriot Act’, despite the fact that stringent surveillance measures already in place failed to stop the attacks.



As the Guardian’s Trevor Timm writes, the attacks were quickly seized upon by western governments to put a halt to NSA reforms, while Prime Minister Cameron called for the state to be given more powers to intercept Internet communications in the name of fighting terror.



During a speech yesterday, Cameron stated that there should be no “means of communication” which “we cannot read,” preparing the groundwork for back-doors to be introduced into software that would allow continuous government monitoring.

Americans March For Charlie Hebdo Dead

Charlie Hebdo: Whose Fault Is it? Russell Brand The Trews (E231)

Paris Attackers Funded by Pentagon Dinner Guest, and 5 Other “Coincidences”

 

Tony Cartalucci
Activist Post
Corroborating claims by French security agencies, a bizarre interview conducted just before the death of terror suspect Chérif Kouachi reveals that he had been in Yemen and in direct contact with none other than Anwar Al Awlaki - the notorious Al Qaeda leader allegedly killed in a drone strike in Yemen in 2011. 

Image: The Kouachi brothers, arrested twice for terrorism, convicted and imprisoned for terrorism, having met senior leadership of Al Qaeda, having trained with and fought alongside Al Qaeda, French intelligence would - 6 months ago - deem the dangerous duo a "low risk." 6 months also happens to be the perfect time frame within which they could plan, fund, and begin executing their grand finale. Are we to believe it is a coincidence French intelligence turned the spotlight off just in time for them to piece together the worst terror attack in France in decades? Who is it French intelligence considers "high risk" and isn't immediately arresting?

The UK Mirror in an article titled, "Paris shootings: Listen to terrorist Amedy Coulibaly's bizarre conversation with hostage during supermarket siege," quoted Kouachi as saying: 

We are just telling you we are the defenders of the prophet and that I Chérif Kouachi have been sent by Al Qaida of Yemen and that I went over there and that Anwar Al Awaki financed me.

Not only was Anwar Al Awlaki a senior leader in Al Qaeda, he also infamously spent dinner with top brass at the Pentagon shortly after the September 11, 2001 attacks in Washington, New York, and over Pennsylvania.
CBS News would report in their article, "Qaeda-Linked Imam Dined at Pentagon after 9/11," that:  

Anwar al-Awlaki - the radical spiritual leader linked to several 9/11 attackers, the Fort Hood shooting, and the attempted Christmas Day bombing of an airliner - was a guest at the Pentagon in the months after 9/11, a Pentagon official confirmed to CBS News.

Awlaki was invited as "...part of an informal outreach program" in which officials sought contact "...with leading members of the Muslim community," the official said. At that time, Awlaki was widely viewed as a "moderate" imam at a mosque in Northern Virginia.

At the same time, the FBI was also interviewing Awlaki about his contacts with three of the 9/11 attackers - Nawaf al-Hazmi, Khalid al Midhar and Hani Hanjour - who were all part of the crew of five that hijacked the American Airlines jet that hit the Pentagon.

Image: Just another coincidence ... Senior Al Qaeda leader Anwar Al Awlaki
was clicking glasses together at the Pentagon with American military brass
just months after the 9/11 attacks in 2001. Also, "coincidentally," he had in
fact met at least one of the several alleged hijackers. He also, just before
being liquidated by a US drone attack in 2011, allegedly funded the terror cell
responsible for the recent Paris shootings.

Indeed, Anwar Al Awlaki would admit to having met Hazmi - in yet another incident the general public is supposed to believe is simply an astonishing coincidence.
The list of "coincidences" and "accidents" is so far impressive and include the following:
1. French authorities arrested and imprisoned Chérif Kouachi in 2005 for terrorism. He would be released in 2008 after sentencing was suspended for "time served," this despite evidence suggesting Kouachi may have even gone as far with his plot as travel to Yemen. Slate Magazine would report in their article, "The Details of Paris Suspect Cherif Kouachi’s 2008 Terrorism Conviction," that:

Kouachi was arrested in January 2005, accused of planning to join jihadists in Iraq. He was said to have fallen under the sway of Farid Benyettou, a young "self-taught preacher" who advocated violence, but had not actually yet traveled to Iraq or committed any acts of terror. Lawyers at the time said he had not received weapons training and "had begun having second thoughts," going so far as to express "relief" that he'd been apprehended.

2. Kouachi and brother Said would be implicated in another terrorist plot again in 2010 but were not prosecuted due to a lack of evidence. The BBC in their report titled, "Charlie Hebdo attack: Suspects' profiles," would state: 

In 2010 Cherif Kouachi was named in connection with a plot to spring another Islamist, Smain Ait Ali Belkacem, from jail - a plot hatched by Beghal, according to French anti-terror police.

Belkacem used to be in the outlawed Algerian Islamic Armed Group (GIA) and was jailed for life in 2002 for a Paris metro station bombing in 1995 which injured 30 people.

Said Kouachi, 34, was also named in the Belkacem plot, but the brothers were not prosecuted because of a lack of evidence.

3. With French intelligence agencies' knowledge, the Kouachi brothers would then travel to Yemen in 2011, receiving weapons training directly from Al Qaeda.  CNN's report titled, "France tells U.S. Paris suspect trained with al Qaeda in Yemen," would report:

A U.S. official says the United States was given information from the French intelligence agency that Said Kouachi traveled to Yemen as late as 2011 on behalf of the al Qaeda affiliate there. Once in Yemen, the older brother of the two received a variety of weapons training from al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) -- the affiliate in Yemen -- the official said, including on how to fire weapons. It is also possible Said was trained in bomb making, a common jihadist training in Yemen. Two other U.S. officials confirmed that information about the Yemeni travel was passed to the U.S. from French intelligence agencies.
In addition, French Justice Minister Christiane Taubira told CNN's Christiane Amanpour in an interview broadcast on CNN International that one of the brothers traveled to Yemen in 2005. Taubira would not say which brother.

Admissions that one of the brothers had traveled to Yemen in 2005, suggests the possibility he may indeed have received weapons training from Al Qaeda before his arrest and imprisonment later that same year.
4. It was reported that the brothers then fought in Syria before returning last summer, approximately 6 months ago. USA Today would report in an article titled, "Manhunt continues for two French terror suspects," that:

The brothers were born in Paris of Algerian descent. Cherif was sentenced to three years in prison on terrorism charges in May 2008. Both brothers returned from Syria this summer.

5. Also about 6 months ago, French intelligence decided the suspects' serial offenses along with their direct contact with Al Qaeda - including the receiving of terrorist training and battlefield experience fighting along side them in Syria - were "low risk" cases and therefore not worthy of their attention.
Astoundingly, UK's Daily Mail would report in their article, "Revealed: Police stopped watching Paris killers six months ago after terror cell of kosher deli attacker and his crossbow jihadi wife - who has fled to Syria - were deemed 'low-risk'," that:

The world’s most wanted female terrorist has fled to Syria, it was revealed last night – as police admitted they stopped surveillance on her deadly Parisian cell six months ago because they were deemed ‘low-risk’.

The Daily Mail would go on to report on other cell members including Amedy Coulibaly, also killed by police during the recent shootings and attacks in Paris - also a notorious serial offender, known terrorist, and also previously arrested, convicted, and sentenced to prison for terrorism. 

Who decided this cell was "low risk" six months ago? That is probably where the French people should begin searching for justice - if justice is in fact what they seek.

Six months, coincidentally, is also about the typical length (6-10 months) of security and intelligence "sting operations" targeting terrorists. It provides an appropriate time frame within which an event like the recent attacks could have been planned, funded, and eventually carried out. The public is expected to believe this obvious terror cell who had been in and out of prison for terrorism over the course of a decade and in direct contact with Al Qaeda, was suddenly dropped from the attention of French intelligence just in time for them to carry out their most spectacular crime to date?
Who decided this cell was "low risk" six months ago? That is probably where the French people should begin searching for justice - if justice is in fact what they seek.
Europe Has Been Here Before
Unfortunately, these "coincidences" and "accidents" are not coincidences and accidents at all. They fit an obvious pattern of staged provocations within the context of an intentionally engineered "strategy of tension," identical but scaled up from what NATO was exposed to have committed during the Cold War as part of its "stay behind networks," more commonly known as "Operation Gladio."
Indeed, if NATO could carry out attacks during the Cold War, targeting Western Europeans in deadly brutality designed to appear as the work of NATO's enemies, why would NATO now be suddenly excused from the investigation as a prime suspect? With the "coincidences" and "accidents" described above, those occupying the highest of France's political, military, and intelligence offices, should be removed, tried, and imprisoned for criminal negligence at the very least.
As the puzzle pieces continue to fit together, the picture that appears is one of brazen, intentional provocation either to divide society at home, or wage war abroad, or both. And as this picture comes into focus, the rhetoric designed to distract the public from seeing it will reach a fever pitch.
Tony Cartalucci's articles have appeared on many alternative media websites, including his own at
Land Destroyer Report, Alternative Thai News Network and LocalOrg. Read other contributed articles by Tony Cartalucci here.

Paris Attackers Funded by Pentagon Dinner Guest, and 5 Other ''Coincidences''
Activist
Sun, 11 Jan 2015 23:47:00 GMT

Obama Declares War On ‘Extremism’ – Are You An ‘Extremist’ According To His Definition?

 

Michael Snyder
Activist Post
Do you know what an “extremist” is?  In the wake of the horrible terror attacks on the offices of Charlie Hebdo in France, Barack Obama is speaking very boldly about the need to win the war against “extremists”, and he has announced plans to host a major global summit on “extremism” next month.  And on the surface that sounds great.  But precisely how are we supposed to determine whether someone is an “extremist” or not?  What criteria should we use?
As you will see below, your definition of an “extremist” may be far, far different from the definition that Barack Obama is using.  When you do a Google search, you will find that an “extremist” is defined as “a person who holds extreme or fanatical political or religious views, especially one who resorts to or advocates extreme action.”  According to Wikipedia, “extremism” is “an ideology (particularly in politics or religion), considered to be far outside the mainstream attitudes of a society or to violate common moral standards.  Extremism can take many forms, including political, religious and economic.”
Please notice that neither of those definitions uses the word violence.  In this day and age, you can be considered an “extremist” simply based on what you believe, and as you will see later in this article there are now tens of millions of Americans that are considered to be “extremists” and “potential terrorists” according to official U.S. government documents.
When you use the word “extremist”, you may have in your mind a picture of ISIS fighters or the terrorists from the Charlie Hebdo massacre.
But for elitists such as Barack Obama, the word “extremist” has a much broader meaning.  In recent years, it has become a code word for those who do not have an “enlightened” view of the world.  If your views on politics, religion or social issues are extremely different from the liberal, progressive views of “the mainstream” (as defined by the mainstream media and by “mainstream” politicians such as Barack Obama), then they consider you to be an extremist.

Early in the presidency of George W. Bush, we were told that Islamic terrorists were the enemy.  And so most of the country got behind the idea of the War on Terrorism.  But over the years that has morphed into a War on Extremism.  In fact, the Obama administration has gone so far as to remove almost all references to Islam from government terror training materials…

Deputy U.S. Attorney General James Cole confirmed on Wednesday that the Obama administration was pulling back all training materials used for the law enforcement and national security communities, in order to eliminate all references to Islam that some Muslim groups have claimed are offensive.

“I recently directed all components of the Department of Justice to re-evaluate their training efforts in a range of areas, from community outreach to national security,” Cole told a panel at the George Washington University law school.

Now, much of the focus in law enforcement training materials is on “domestic extremists”.  We are being told that “domestic extremism” is just as great a threat to our national security as terror groups overseas are.
But exactly who are these “domestic extremists”?
Well, the truth is that you may be one of them.
I want to share with you a list that I have shared in a couple of previous articles.  It is a list of 72 types of Americans that are considered to be “extremists” or “potential terrorists” in official U.S. government documents.  This list will really give you a good idea of what Barack Obama means when he uses the word “extremist”.  Each of these 72 items is linked, so if you would like to go see the original source document for yourself, just click on the link.  As you can see, this list potentially includes most of the country…
1. Those that talk about “individual liberties”
2. Those that advocate for states’ rights
3. Those that want “to make the world a better place”
4. “The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule”
5. Those that are interested in “defeating the Communists”
6. Those that believe “that the interests of one’s own nation are separate from the interests of other nations or the common interest of all nations”
7. Anyone that holds a “political ideology that considers the state to be unnecessary, harmful,or undesirable”
8. Anyone that possesses an “intolerance toward other religions”
9. Those that “take action to fight against the exploitation of the environment and/or animals”
10. “Anti-Gay”
11. “Anti-Immigrant”
12. “Anti-Muslim”
13. “The Patriot Movement”
14. “Opposition to equal rights for gays and lesbians”
15. Members of the Family Research Council
16. Members of the American Family Association
17. Those that believe that Mexico, Canada and the United States “are secretly planning to merge into a European Union-like entity that will be known as the ‘North American Union’”
18. Members of the American Border Patrol/American Patrol
19. Members of the Federation for American Immigration Reform
20. Members of the Tennessee Freedom Coalition
21. Members of the Christian Action Network
22. Anyone that is “opposed to the New World Order”
23. Anyone that is engaged in “conspiracy theorizing”
24. Anyone that is opposed to Agenda 21
25. Anyone that is concerned about FEMA camps
26. Anyone that “fears impending gun control or weapons confiscations”
27. The militia movement
28. The sovereign citizen movement
29. Those that “don’t think they should have to pay taxes”
30. Anyone that “complains about bias”
31. Anyone that “believes in government conspiracies to the point of paranoia”
32. Anyone that “is frustrated with mainstream ideologies”
33. Anyone that “visits extremist websites/blogs”
34. Anyone that “establishes website/blog to display extremist views”
35. Anyone that “attends rallies for extremist causes”
36. Anyone that “exhibits extreme religious intolerance”
37. Anyone that “is personally connected with a grievance”
38. Anyone that “suddenly acquires weapons”
39. Anyone that “organizes protests inspired by extremist ideology”
40. “Militia or unorganized militia”
41. “General right-wing extremist”
42. Citizens that have “bumper stickers” that are patriotic or anti-U.N.
43. Those that refer to an “Army of God”
44. Those that are “fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation)”
45. Those that are “anti-global”
46. Those that are “suspicious of centralized federal authority”
47. Those that are “reverent of individual liberty”
48. Those that “believe in conspiracy theories”
49. Those that have “a belief that one’s personal and/or national ‘way of life’ is under attack”
50. Those that possess “a belief in the need to be prepared for an attack either by participating in paramilitary preparations and training or survivalism”
51. Those that would “impose strict religious tenets or laws on society (fundamentalists)”
52. Those that would “insert religion into the political sphere”
53. Anyone that would “seek to politicize religion”
54. Those that have “supported political movements for autonomy”
55. Anyone that is “anti-abortion”
56. Anyone that is “anti-Catholic”
57. Anyone that is “anti-nuclear”
58. “Rightwing extremists”
59. “Returning veterans”
60. Those concerned about “illegal immigration”
61. Those that “believe in the right to bear arms”
62. Anyone that is engaged in “ammunition stockpiling”
63. Anyone that exhibits “fear of Communist regimes”
64. “Anti-abortion activists”
65. Those that are against illegal immigration
66. Those that talk about “the New World Order” in a “derogatory” manner
67. Those that have a negative view of the United Nations
68. Those that are opposed “to the collection of federal income taxes”
69. Those that supported former presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin and Bob Barr
70. Those that display the Gadsden Flag (“Don’t Tread On Me”)
71. Those that believe in “end times” prophecies
72. Evangelical Christians
Do you fit into any of those categories?
Personally, I fit into a couple dozen of them.
That is why alarm bells should go off whenever Barack Obama speaks of the need to crack down on “extremism”.
If Barack Obama wants to denounce Islamic terror, he should do so.  But because of his extreme political correctness, he goes out of his way to avoid any connection between Islam and terror.  Instead, he speaks of the need to recognize “Islam’s role in advancing justice, progress, tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings” and he insists that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”
Meanwhile, our liberties and freedoms are being eroded a little bit more with each passing day.  In the name of fighting “terrorism” or “extremism”, our government is constructing a Big Brother police state control grid all around us.  I like the way that Ron Paul described what is happening to us just the other day…

If Americans were honest with themselves they would acknowledge that the Republic is no more. We now live in a police state. If we do not recognize and resist this development, freedom and prosperity for all Americans will continue to deteriorate. All liberties in America today are under siege.

It didn’t happen overnight. It took many years of neglect for our liberties to be given away so casually for a promise of security from the politicians. The tragic part is that the more security was promised — physical and economic — the less liberty was protected.

With cradle-to-grave welfare protecting all citizens from any mistakes and a perpetual global war on terrorism, which a majority of Americans were convinced was absolutely necessary for our survival, our security and prosperity has been sacrificed.

It was all based on lies and ignorance. Many came to believe that their best interests were served by giving up a little freedom now and then to gain a better life.

The trap was set. At the beginning of a cycle that systematically undermines liberty with delusions of easy prosperity, the change may actually seem to be beneficial to a few. But to me that’s like excusing embezzlement as a road to leisure and wealth — eventually payment and punishment always come due. One cannot escape the fact that a society’s wealth cannot be sustained or increased without work and productive effort. Yes, some criminal elements can benefit for a while, but reality always sets in.

Reality is now setting in for America and for that matter for most of the world. The piper will get his due even if “the children” have to suffer. The deception of promising “success” has lasted for quite a while. It was accomplished by ever-increasing taxes, deficits, borrowing, and printing press money. In the meantime the policing powers of the federal government were systematically and significantly expanded. No one cared much, as there seemed to be enough “gravy” for the rich, the poor, the politicians, and the bureaucrats.

The country that our forefathers founded is dying.
Now, individuals and organizations that attempt to restore the values that our founders once believed in so strongly are regarded as dangerous “extremists” that need to be watched carefully.
Sadly, most Americans don’t even realize what is happening to this nation.  As long as they are fed a constant diet of mindless entertainment, most Americans are perfectly content to let “the experts” do their thinking for them.
We are steamrolling toward oblivion, and most of the country is dead asleep.
So is there any hope for us?  Feel free to share what you think by posting a comment below…
This article first appeared here at the Economic Collapse Blog.  Michael Snyder is a writer, speaker and activist who writes and edits his own blogs The American Dream and Economic Collapse Blog. Follow him on Twitter here.

Obama Declares War On ‘Extremism’ – Are You An ‘Extremist’ According To His Definition?
Activist
Sun, 11 Jan 2015 23:47:00 GMT

REPORT: DRUG CARTEL PLACES $45 MILLION BOUNTY ON RICK PERRY’S HEAD

http://www.infowars.com/report-drug-cartel-places-45-million-bounty-on-rick-perrys-head/

Cartels previously set bounties on Sheriff Arpaio and Border Patrol agents

Image Credits: Gage Skidmore / Flickr

by KIT DANIELS | INFOWARS.COM | JANUARY 9, 2015

---

A Mexican drug cartel reportedly placed a $45 million bounty on Texas Gov. Rick Perry, prompting heavy security around the governor, a political insider said.

The insider, who is deep within Republican politics, said an unusual number of black-clad, heavily armed state troopers are escorting Perry to speeches and other public events, such as a recent dinner in South Carolina.

“My state representative was just at a dinner honoring Gov. Perry and observed an unusual amount of security, so [he] asked around and found Perry has a $45 million bounty on his head from [a] Mexican cartel,” he said. “They have been trying to keep it quiet for obvious reasons, but the security is humongous.”

When reached for comment, Perry’s press secretary, Lucy Nashed, confirmed the dinner but referred security questions to the Texas Department of Public Safety, which when contacted refused to give “specifics.”

Cartels placed several multi-million dollar bounties on Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio over the past several years and they also routinely set bounties on Border Patrol agents ranging from $250,000 to $2 million.

Perry previously called the cartels and drug gangs “narco-terrorists” in a 2011 speech.

“What we are seeing south of our border is nothing short of a war being waged by these narco-terrorists,” Perry told the audience. “They represent a clear and a present danger.”

In response, he spearheaded a rapid deployment of state law enforcement agencies to the border, which filled the gaps left by the Border Patrol after the White House ordered the agency to stand down from enforcing immigration and trafficking laws.

State troopers in particular heavily outnumbered the Border Patrol agents seen in and around a border highway in Texas this past summer when the U.S. was hit with a surge of illegal immigrants.

Perry even deployed National Guard troops to the border.

“As the Border Patrol is spread even thinner and thinner with this high influx of the illegal aliens, the gaps in the border have become bigger and you now are the tip of the spear protecting Americans from these cartels and gangs,” he told troops in Bastrop, Texas.

So while the feds backed off, the state of Texas stepped in, so it’s plausible a cartel has placed a price on Perry’s head.

French Terror Suspect's Pentagon Connection

Consumer Alert: High Fructose Corn Syrup Name Changed

Nous Sommes Charlie: Offence is Never Given – Only Taken | Ben Swann Truth In Media

Nous Sommes Charlie: Offence is Never Given – Only Taken | Ben Swann Truth In Media



Freedom of speech and freedom of the press are like all other rights: to keep them you have to exercise them – and sometimes that takes courage and involves risk. We should be profoundly grateful to those who help keep that right for us by exercising it.

And today, our thoughts are with our French friends – and especially with the families and friends of those who have been directly attacked for using that most important of freedoms – freedom of speech – to stimulate our use of another – freedom of thought.

And we don’t lose sight of the fact that we must stop ceding the moral high-ground in fighting against such an attack on liberty through a foreign policy that makes terrorists by killing innocents. Nor do we forget the impingement on the same liberty by our own politicians.

Offense is Always Taken – Never Given… but if it can be given, it is given by physical aggression against innocent people.

Hillary Clinton Exposed, Movie She Banned From Theaters Full Movie

#HillaryNotFitToLead