I was in the middle of working on an article covering real U.S. economic stats versus manipulated statistics when the Charlie Hebdo shootings took place. And though I knew the implications of the event would be far-reaching, I was originally undeterred from my financial subject matter. I had already covered in previous articles the inevitability of ISIS attacks on Europe and America, including the “warnings” of Saudi Arabia in August of last year that jihadists would target the EU within months and the U.S. a month later.
In September of last year, ISIS publicly urged attacks on French and U.S. citizens.
I have also published extensive analysis on the covert funding and training of ISIS militants by Saudi Arabia and Western intelligence agencies, including my article “The Time Is Ripe For A False Flag Attack On American Soil.”
The bottom line is the Paris attack was not surprising in the slightest. I have no doubt whatsoever that such attacks are going to increase in frequency, that the U.S. will be hit soon, and that our government will do little to nothing to stop such tragedies. However, a Reuters article titled “White House to hold global security summit Feb (sic) 18: U.S. official” caught my eye. And after reading it, I’m afraid I have to set aside my financial piece until next week and break down the insanity that is now taking place in the world of geopolitics.
It is clear by the language being used by the political elite that the “global summit” called in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo attacks is about far more than radical Islamic terrorism. Set aside the fact that our government essentially created ISIS in order to destabilize Syria. Set aside the fact that globalist middlemen like John McCain and “former” covert ops goons like Gen. Paul Vallely have met directly with groups like the Nusra Front that are providing support for ISIS. Set aside the fact that Saudi Arabia has been openly funneling cash and arms to Syrian terrorist factions tied to ISIS, and realize that the mere existence of ISIS, regardless of its origins, is being used as a rationale for the erasure of civil liberties and the establishment of martial law on both sides of the Atlantic. Such federalized reactions CANNOT be allowed to continue, regardless of the threats each nation faces.
As far as the Reuters article is concerned, one does not need to read very far between the lines to see the true message being conveyed.
First, the focus of the summit is not necessarily indicated as “Islamic terrorism.” In fact, the word “terrorism” is barely mentioned. Now politicos are shifting their language to the term “extremism,” which is far broader in its implications. It should be noted that while the terrorist label has been bandied about rather liberally by both the Bush and Obama administrations, “extremism” offers greater cover for governments to persecute or attack political opponents. A terrorist is generally someone who initiates or at least plans a large-scale attack designed to illicit a fear response in a population. An extremist, on the other hand, could literally be anyone who holds views or initiates activism outside acceptable forms of mainstream thought. Attorney General Eric Holder did not use the words “terrorism” or “jihadist” in his announcement of the global summit in February; he used the phrase “violent extremism”:
We will bring together all of our allies to discuss ways in which we can counteract this violent extremism that exists around the world…
Throughout history, “violence,” according to governments, is often attributed to ideas as well as actions. The point is the change in vocabulary over to the extremist label is not accidental or coincidental. The establishment is conditioning the public to think in broad terms and to identify numerous groups as the enemy, rather than focusing on radical Islam. As I have said for years, Islamic terror is nothing but an advantageous excuse for governments to make war on all of us. Do not forget, constitutionalists are often referred to in the mainstream media and by Orwellian institutions like the Department of Homeland Security as “extremists.” How long before we are artificially linked as being suspect? How long before Charlie Hebdo-style attacks come to the U.S.? How long before the liberty minded are categorized as accessories to terrorism due to our anti-corrupt-government philosophies?
It is disturbing to witness the lack of conviction in principles in the average person. Self-proclaimed leftists railed against the degeneration of civil liberties and constitutional protections under George W. Bush, but rallied in support of the same weakening of freedoms under Barack Obama. Self-proclaimed conservatives today are shocked and infuriated by the trampling of the constitution through executive orders displayed by the Obama administration. Yet, I suspect that many of them will willingly jump on the fascist bandwagon in the event of “Islamic” attacks on American soil. Neither side seems to grasp the reality that the disruptions of liberty we enact in the name of stopping jihadists today will eventually fall back on the rest of us tomorrow.
The lockdown of the populace is already ramping up. The EU is currently discussing the creation of a European Passenger Name Record database (national ID database), meaning officials hope to create a centralized database with a file on every single citizen. Think the no-fly list is a terrifying concept? Wait until it becomes publicly accepted for all web comments, Facebook posts, and blog posts to be added to an ongoing record that determines whether you are allowed to travel. Wait until it becomes a mainstream notion that every travel destination you visit is tracked, recorded on permanent record, and scrutinized by some pencil necked bureaucrat who then determines whether or not you are suspect. Apparently, French officials are supportive of the idea. And given the proclamations of “unity” surrounding the upcoming summit, I suspect actions undertaken in Europe will eventually be exported to the United States. Reuters reports:
French Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve said after the meeting that European interior ministers had agreed to boost cooperation in an effort to thwart further jihadist attacks.
“We all agree that we need to put in place better control on certain passengers, on the basis of objective criteria and with respect for fundamental liberties and without disrupting cross-border travel,” he said.
He said Europe needed urgent progress in establishing a European Passenger Name Record database, which would facilitate the exchange of data about passengers between member states.
“We are convinced of the need for such a tool, to follow those who travel to terrorist operating theaters or who return from there,” he said, adding that this database would also be useful in the fight against other serious crimes.
Unfortunately, travel is the least of our concerns. Free speech is a primary target for the elites, and the Internet is clearly outlined as a threat by politicians claiming concern for public safety. This comes in the form of one of the oldest rationalizations for tyranny - the trade-off between freedom and security. The French argue that while free speech is important, some “exceptions” must be made in order to thwart extremist ideas:
Cazeneuve said the Internet needs to remain a space for free expression, but that Europe should fight against abusive use of the web (sic) to spread hate speech, anti-Semitic messages and the recruiting vulnerable young people for violence.
“We need to work more closely with Internet companies to guarantee the reporting and if possible removal of all content that amounts to an apology of terrorism or calls for violence and hatred,” he said.
Who gets to determine what speech amounts to an “apology of terrorism?” Who is the all-benevolent and wise sage who gets to decide what we can and cannot say? Will he be fair and just? Or will he use the power of censorship to attack any and all websites critical of the establishment? What do you think the most likely outcome of such legal precedence would be?
Again, how long before websites like the one you are reading now are vilified by the extremist label? How long before liberty-minded speech is categorized as violent speech or hate speech?
Sen. Dianne Feinstein and the White House are now kindly warning the public that terrorist “sleeper cells” have been activated and that some are present in the United States. On CNN, Feinstein said:
So I think this calls for vigilance. It calls for seeing that the national security organizations of our country, the intelligence community is funded fully, is directed ably, is cooperating with whether it be British intelligence, French intelligence, German intelligence, as we do.
And the French are good at it, and so are the British and the Germans. So, we can even be more active in terms of doing those things which enable us to find terrorists, to see who they’re communicating with in this country, and to track that.
She means mass Internet and phone surveillance, the same National Security Agency surveillance exposed by Edward Snowden, which now has a convenient justification in the form of an ever-present fear of terrorism.
Finally, it is only a matter of time before a militarized response is activated in the U.S., just as it has been in France. One shooting event has led to the fielding of over 10,000 French troops on French soil, as well as an extra 5,000 heavily armed police.
Frankly, this is where I — and many people like me — draw the line. Martial law is not acceptable under any circumstances. I don't care if we one day see a mushroom cloud over an American city, there is no measure of government security (false security) that is worth the degradation of essential liberties. I suspect the loss of liberty, usurping of the constitution and the deployment of the military on U.S. soil would trigger revolution — a revolution I’m sure the establishment would attempt to marginalize as mere terrorism. Ultimately, though, there is no other option.
As I have been discussing constantly over the past several months, community preparation and organization comprise the only action plan worth the effort and energy at this time. The French are disarmed and utterly socialized. Millions of them march in Paris in a display of solidarity, but solidarity behind what solution? Even more government; the same government that created the problem in the first place? Even more centralization? The globalization of despotic security policies? The French have dug their grave, and now they are going to have to lie down in it.
Americans do not have to follow the same path.
We do not need more government. We do not need more surveillance, more police militarization or more troops on the streets. What we need is to take back responsibility for own defense. The French government could not or would not protect the staff of Charlie Hebdo, and the U.S. government will not protect you. That means you must train to protect yourself and those you care about. Whether we face a false flag attack or a legitimate terrorist action, the response is the same: Fight back. It is times like these that separate the courageous from the cowardly; those with principles and conscience versus the treacherous and self-serving. Make no mistake; as I wrote in my last article, many illusions are about to be shattered. You can be caught up in the storm as a helpless spectator and victim or you can become a barrier, a wall of defense against the dangerous riptides. These are your choices. Choose wisely.
REMINDER: Alt-Market's winter donation drive is now underway! If you would like to support the publishing of articles like the one you have just read, visit our donations page here. We greatly appreciate your patronage.
You can contact Brandon Smith at:
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
written by Brabantian , January 14, 2015
French are not 'disarmed'. They have 18 million privately owned handguns, shotguns & rifles. Many French farmers have arsenals that would be the envy of Americans. Funny how Yanks always think Europeans don't have guns. 25 million civilian guns in Germany, most Swiss houses have guns, etc. EU doesn't have carry permits but does have 100 million legal private firearms, plus plenty illegal from Nato / Balkans. See gunpolicy org for stats.
At US borders, Europeans are already getting quizzed & harassed & threatened with entry refusal, because of Facebook posts. "We have all your Facebook!" say US border control to shocked European travellers.
US & other statutes define of terrorism is 'threat or action of politically-related murder' - does not require 'large-scale' or producing mass fear, but that can be part of it.
Edward Snowden is a fake, EU intelligence agencies already know that, Putin nearly says it out loud. Liar & sock-puppet Snowden is active CIA agent, friend of Dick Cheney Zbig Brzezinski, largely re-hashing things on internet 5 years old from 5+ earlier NSA whistleblowers. Purpose of 'Operation Snowden' was to terrorise the world with US surveillance abilities, pump up corrupt CIA-tied media companies like New York Times & Guardian; & likely entrap US dissidents and whistleblowers into contacting frauds like the Guardian & Glenn Greenwald who assist CIA, & who may have helped silence and murder dissidents who trusted them.
See 'Russia gov FSB SVR report, Snowden Greenwald are CIA frauds'
EDITOR'S NOTE: Brabantian, clearly you have not researched French gun laws, or you are a liar. The 18 million guns in France you cite includes ILLEGAL firearms. Look it up:'
http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/france
Only 4.4 out of 100 French people owns a legally registered firearm. Of those that are legal, most are hunting firearms, not designed for active self defense against an attack like Charlie Hebdo. France has a strict permit system which includes regular "psychological evaluations". The person applying must provide a reason of "utility" for ownership of the firearm (i.e. Farmer need one for hunting) Semi automatics and pistols are strictly prohibited. Most Americans would laugh heartily at the gun collection of the average European.
The Swiss are some of the only people in the EU with widespread ownership of military grade firearms because they are the only country with a militia system. Funny how you forgot to mention that little piece of info.
As far as Edward Snowden is concerned, I have seen the evidence presented that he is an "agent" (none of which you presented here), and it is not substantial. There is far more evidence that Putin is an elitist insider. The files he released to newspapers like Der Spiegal contained top secret NSA equipment catalogs and methods that were NOT available to the public before hand. However, even if he were a puppet, the information he released was still correct. So, I'm not sure what your point is. The NSA is indeed using mass surveillance methods which they denied before Snowden, and now admit to after Snowden.
- Brandon Smith
written by Spirit , January 14, 2015
Think how much safer the world would be if all the people in this photograph were behind bars...
written by sodbuster , January 14, 2015
We had martial law in 2008 after our hurricane, most obeyed including my wife, I did not. Yes, I provide security for myself and my family. When I call 911 its for assistance with medical or fire, not police. Don't depend on the government for anything, they will only disappoint us.
Someone once posted, THANKS
Stay fit
Stay calm
Stay quiet (hard for me)
Stay proficient
Stay liquid
written by PatFields , January 14, 2015
If any attempt is made to apply it to me, I intend to initiate a common-law suit against whatever deprivation of private property ('natural rights') would cause Trespass.
“[E]mergency does not create power. Emergency does not increase granted power or remove or diminish the restrictions upon power granted or reserved. The Constitution was adopted in a period of grave emergency. Its grants of power to the Federal Government and its limitations of the power of the States were determined in the light of emergency and they are not altered by emergency. --Home Building & Loan Association v. Blaisdell, 290 U.S. 398, 425 (1934)
written by justanobserver , January 14, 2015
Spirit,
Now, now, just because Angela Merkel once said "The freedom of the individual needs to be limited if it takes away freedom from others"- does not mean she should behind bars. Honestly, would you accept a drink from that?
Although some of the people in that picture are terrorists and war criminals.
written by been counted , January 14, 2015
concerning the french false flag:
there is a video that clearly shows that the french policeman who was reportedly "shot in the head" is questionable at best.
you can see the shot hit the pavement, and there was no movement of his body, clearly if he was hit by a 7.62x39 his head would move, and probably his brains would be on the pavement. you see none of this.
I thought I could provide a link, but for some reason, I can no longer watch the video,
funny how the truth is much harder to find these days.
we are being lied to.
they are planning for the worst, the game is going to change.
plan accordingly.
written by Brandon Smith , January 14, 2015
@Brabantian
Clearly you have not researched French gun laws, or you are a liar. The 18 million guns in France you cite includes ILLEGAL firearms. Look it up:'
http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/france
Only 4.4 out of 100 French people own a legally registered firearm. Of those that are legal, most are hunting firearms, not designed for active self defense against an attack like Charlie Hebdo. France has a strict permit system which includes regular "psychological evaluations". The person applying must provide a reason of "utility" for ownership of the firearm (i.e. Farmer need one for hunting) Semi automatics and pistols are strictly prohibited. Most Americans would laugh heartily at the gun collection of the average European.
The Swiss are some of the only people in the EU with widespread ownership of military grade firearms because they are the only country with a militia system. Funny how you forgot to mention that little piece of info.
As far as Edward Snowden is concerned, I have seen the evidence presented that he is an "agent" (none of which you presented here), and it is not substantial. There is far more evidence that Putin is an elitist insider. The files he released to newspapers like Der Spiegal contained top secret NSA equipment catalogs and methods that were NOT available to the public before hand. However, even if he were a puppet, the information he released was still correct. So, I'm not sure what your point is. The NSA is indeed using mass surveillance methods which they denied before Snowden, and now admit to after Snowden.
- Brandon Smith
written by Implied Violins , January 14, 2015
Great timely article. The financial one will be worth the wait, though.
On Snowden: I do wonder about him, simply because he has been vilified in the press but the man who pays Glenn Greenwald to present his information, Pierre Omidyar, is an American - yet has not (to my knowledge) been equally vilified for backing Snowden/Greenwald's supposedly 'damaging' revelations.
Also, the fact his name is the same as a tragic character in the book 'Catch 22' caught my eye as well. Nevertheless, I credit him for waking up a large number of Americans with the truths that he has revealed to the public.
On the media: is it me, or does there seem to be some controlled opposition in the alternate media as well? I personally have been a fan of Paul Craig Roberts, for example, but paying close attention to what he writes it is obvious to anyone who has read Gary Allen and Antony Sutton that he skirts the real truth of what is really going on. Not by lying, as everything he writes is pretty much true, but sometimes omission of the truth is a much bigger lie.
I have noticed some of the same patterns with other alt-media personna like Alex Jones and Rense: they always have nuggets of truth worth listening to, but there is always stuff that makes you just shake your head.
Anyway, just an observation and I appreciate your work.
written by Brandon Smith , January 14, 2015
@Implied
I'm always open to the possibility that certain elements of the Liberty Movement are controlled opposition, but I have to see substantiated evidence or serious circumstantial evidence. Gen. Paul Vallely, for example, is clearly controlled opposition; his history with the CIA and NSA, his history with Michael Aquino, and now his history with ISIS militants in Syria, all scream that he is a fraud.
As far as the men you mentioned, while a disagree with the direction of Paul Craig Roberts' work, I cannot say one way or the other if he is deliberately omitting information or not. I think at the very least he only sees half the picture. I can criticize him for that, but I can't call him controlled opposition, for I myself have been accused of being controlled opposition, and I know what it is like to face down people who think EVERYONE is somehow the enemy. It always becomes an exercise in absurdity.
Ultimately, only the information matters. Whether it is true, whether it is false, and whether it presents the full story. The people who relay the information are rarely if ever important. The facts matter. The truth matters. Media personalities do NOT matter, even if they are part of the liberty movement.
written by Ideas Time , January 14, 2015
http://www.tomheneghanbriefings.com/ What do you think about Tom H.? He gives details like no other.
Hi Brandon, I enjoy your articles and check you site every day along with a bunch of others. I think one of the best ways to sort out the Gate-Keepers is notice if they are regurgitating the gov narrative as if it were factual.
I always suggest when referring to an article, a story that reporters should use the word alleged or reported as. When they repeat the MSM and govs version without the disclaimer, it is hard to trust them anymore and these do all of us a disservice and discredit them selves in the process.
I also look to see if they will touch the real issues which most won't. Get to the core of the problems and most of this will go away.
Example the ir s is a Porto Rico Trust and is not a fed agency. Voting is rigged to keep those currently in power firmly in place. The gov is a corporation posing as a gov. See the Clear-field Doctrine.
written by Implied Violins , January 14, 2015
Thanks for your reply, Brandon.
Yes, I agree that the information is what matters. And I am grateful for what Snowden, Greenwald, Roberts et. al. have shared. My own intuition tells me that most of what they have written is true, and they (and others like them) are worth reading just for that reason.
However, I also have a pretty strong understanding of what is actually going on in the world (thanks to you and men like Rothbards, Quigley, Sutton etc.) and that same intuition tells me that there is much more to the story that men like Roberts and Greenwald are telling, and they are in some ways misleading people. Whether by design or not I am still working out, but I have reasons to question them.
I believe that those in power not only control the message that is presented to the mass media, but they also understand that there will always be a percentage of people who see through the charade; those who turn to look towards the mouth of the cave to see the real truth. And I think men like Greenwald and Roberts could be controlled opposition, placed where they are with real truths but yet truths designed to mislead or redirect from the real objective of the PTB.
In this case, I suspect - but cannot prove, to your stated standard of proof anyway - that these men, and perhaps others, have the role of demonizing the West and building up the East. I have noticed in PCR's writing, for example, he goes out of his way to excoriate the FED while never mentioning the top banks (BIS, IMF etc.) - though in his writing it is obvious he is aware of the real truths of the banking system and the history behind it. His 'half of the story' only includes anything that illustrates the supposed divide. That is my observation, in any case.
Also on PCR: have you ever visited his home page, and noticed the painting of a revolutionary figure behind him? That figure is shown hiding his hand ala Napolean. Have you ever researched the 'Hidden Hand?' It is somewhat esoteric, but that clue alone caused me top question if he is a 'White hat' in the employ of the PTB disinformation service...
Anyway: yes, the information is what matters - and ultimately is why I was drawn to your website and the articles posted here (via ZeroHedge). But I also believe that information is most useful to one who has done enough background reading to be able to trust their intuition, and in the case of the men I mentioned above I smell a rat...
written by Brandon Smith , January 14, 2015
@Ideas
I agree, MSM source material often should be preceded by "allegedly", except when that MSM information is proven fact (which does happen on occasion). The MSM is often a source for much truth, if taken in the correct context and viewed without rose-colored glasses. They tend to mix truth with lies because this makes for a better lie. I personally cite certain MSM articles because the admission of hidden truths can be found in them.
written by NM Ranchero , January 15, 2015
I read this on zerohedge first. At this point all we can do is brace for what is coming. If this means preparing with material things, martial things, or spiritual things or all of the above we simply must be prepared as it's gone past the point of a smooth landing so to speak.
We have to prepare for the worst because it's already rolling towards us at high speed. The economic situation has changed significantly since last year and people are going to get blindsided unless they are already in disaster-mode.
As an example of what I mean, let's say if you were planning to obtain everything to go off grid (power systems) but were holding off on purchasing some of the major components you may already be too late.
Even if you have the funds you may not be able to obtain what you need. Look at the BDI (Baltic Dry Index) as a measure of the economy look how low it is now.
I don't need to mention what has happened to petroleum of course. Look at the job situation (read both zerohedge and people like Paul Craig Roberts or any of a dozen reputable financial/patriotic types and you'll read so much more about the cascade effects of what the sudden price of oil manipulated downward on the US economy.
I think this is going to be the last blow that will be the cause of some thing planned and planned for by the forces of darkness.
If you don't already have everything you need I urge you to put all that first and maybe if you're really on top of it you can still get prepared.
Otherwise you need to look at other options like throwing in with like-minded people who have resources.
However, If they start talking about 'revolution' and use words like 'overthrow' counsel them to instead use words like 'restoration' and make sure they are all about supporting and defending and not tearing things down.
Otherwise don't be around people like that no matter what they call themselves, especially any "militia" ...
Agent provocateurs at every level are looking to score 'extremists' as part of their operation plans.
We are facing the full court press of the police state. I think tangibles are the most important investment but not just food.
I don't think you should buy weapons and ammunition with anything except cash and I don't think you should register anything with anybody. Enough said about that.
I hope everyone who reads this is working to educate other people it seems hopeless at times but don't give up.
I simply cannot believe how quickly things have deteriorated in the last 5-years but those who saw it coming in 2006 tried to tell everyone what was happening.
I hope everyone reading these words did begin to prepare at some point.
As the article above clearly explains we've entered some new level of the collapse/police-state-expansion and as the article reminds us we are Americans (a remnant any way.)
We still have our hearts and our guns and we have right on our side.
If you support and defend the US Constitution you are an enemy of the state and you need to start taking it seriously. They do.
I guess that was enough ranting for now.
written by Warren Celli , January 15, 2015
Another good read Brandon!
The facts become more difficult to discern as the Xtrevilist elite intentionally flood all mass media with more and more baloney each day.
This is an article I posted yesterday about 'Baloneywood'. Understanding the co-option of education and 'science' and how it all relates is critical to making us all more skeptical and perceptive. The 'good guys' are really the bad guys.
http://www.boxthefox.com/articles/Xtrevilism pandemic.html
And I am still for peaceful protest. More people need to get off their dead asses and protest peacefully in the streets. At a minimum it will show others how oppressive the hi-jacked government has become.
We have to consider that maybe our heroes are really zeros...
http://www.boxthefox.com/articles/Xtrevilism pandemic.html#ceastwood
Deception is the strongest political force on the planet.
written by Christian Gains , January 15, 2015
The simplicity of these paragraphs below shows TRULY how simple the solution can be! But! It'll take courage and moxy to get out there and recruit helpers, and establish tactics and strategies. Thanks Brandon!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"...Finally, it is only a matter of time before a militarized response is activated in the U.S., just as it has been in France.
One shooting event has led to the fielding of over 10,000 French troops on French soil, as well as an extra 5,000 heavily armed police.
Frankly, this is where I — and many people like me — draw the line:
Martial law is not acceptable under any circumstances. I don't care if we one day see a mushroom cloud over an American city, there is no measure of government security (false security) that is worth the degradation of essential liberties.
I suspect the loss of liberty, usurping of the constitution, and, the deployment of the military on U.S. soil would trigger revolution — a revolution I’m sure the establishment would attempt to marginalize as mere terrorism.
Ultimately, though, there is no other option.
As I have been discussing constantly over the past several months, community preparation and organization comprise the only action plan worth the effort and energy at this time.
The French are disarmed and utterly socialized. Millions of them march in Paris in a display of solidarity, but solidarity behind what solution? Even more government; the same government that created the problem in the first place? Even more centralization? The globalization of despotic security policies?
The French have dug their grave, and now they are going to have to lie down in it.
Americans do not have to follow the same path.
We do not need more government. We do not need more surveillance, more police militarization or more troops on the streets.
What we need is to take back responsibility for own defense.
The French government could not, or would not, protect the staff of Charlie Hebdo, and the U.S. government will not protect you.
That means you must train to protect yourself, and those you care about. Whether we face a false flag attack, or a legitimate terrorist action, the response is the same: Fight back.
It is times like these that separate the courageous from the cowardly; those with principles and conscience versus the treacherous and self-serving.
Make no mistake; as I wrote in my last article, many illusions are about to be shattered. You can be caught up in the storm as a helpless spectator and victim or you can become a barrier, a wall of defense against the dangerous riptides.
These are your choices. Choose wisely
written by Tommy Von Whitmen , January 15, 2015
Living in a police state under constant martial law is just a small price to pay for "diversity" and "political correctness". In fact, I say we double down on letting in even MORE of those savage Muslims, just to prove we aren't racists. The sheep get ruled by the wolves.
written by Brandon Smith , January 15, 2015
@Tommy
I worry more about the government goons training and militarizing the Muslims than I worry about the Muslims...
written by Amelie , January 15, 2015
Look, I lived in the dear old RFD (aka France) for years in the 70's, during the worst of the Marxist rioting and the Palestinian terrorist attacks, some of which occurred in my neighborhood. Guess what? The police response was exactly the same. This is nothing new. It's just new to you.
Remember that.
written by Brandon Smith , January 15, 2015
@Amelie
I never said it was "new", I said it was wrong. Apparently you are too ignorant to understand the difference.
Also, the "Marxist" rioting and attacks in France during the 1970's were in many cases part of Operation Gladio, a now openly exposed program between European governments and the CIA to create fear in the population using false flag terrorism so that they would support greater centralization. This fear eventually led to the kinds of governments that formed the oppressive EU supranational body. You and the French people were suckered into supporting greater socialist tyranny through false flag terror attacks, just as you are being suckered into total despotism today.
written by Implied Violins , January 16, 2015
It looks like I missed this part of your comment:
"I can't call him controlled opposition, for I myself have been accused of being controlled opposition, and I know what it is like to face down people who think EVERYONE is somehow the enemy. It always becomes an exercise in absurdity."
...and then there I go, accusing Mr. Roberts of being a member of the 'Hidden Hand!" Absurd exercise, agreed...
...except...
...someone agrees with me! Ken Stephens just published this today (scroll down to his 'update 7'):
http://redefininggod.com/2015/01/globalist-agenda-watch-2015-update-4-the-swiss-national-bank-and-the-fed-mistake/
He makes a case that Nigel Farage and Marine Le Pen (sp?) are globalist agents, and PCR plays them up.
When taken in context of his other recent posts (in the links at the end of the above) it adds up to a pretty convincing case that BOTH of you are right about the BRICS.
As you pointed out early in your article, the information war is critical. Being able to identify the players makes it much easier to determine how to interpret that information though, so I guess I believe that knowing WHO is saying what can be just as important as WHAT they are saying.
You know what really gets me about all of this? These bastards have forced me to think as they do. You have to, in order to understand what they are doing...and their way of thinking and doing things is very, very unhealthy...
written by Brandon Smith , January 16, 2015
@Implied
I'm sure you could also find a couple of people out there who agree that I am controlled opposition as well. You wouldn't believe how many personalities in the movement are scared to death whenever I suggest physical self defense. Clearly, to even entertain the notion of fighting back against psychopathic government must mean I am an "insider" or "provocateur" attempting to lure the movement into "violence". Even though violence is inevitable whether I provoke it or not.
Again, I'm suspicious of anyone that refuses to acknowledge the obvious connections between the East and the NWO. However, this can be attributed to personal bias rather than conspiracy, so, as a voice in the movement, I have to be careful about throwing around terms like "controlled opposition".
If someone can show me hard evidence of PCR having close ties to top globalists, then that would be a different story...
written by NICK.VINCENT , January 16, 2015
Brandon:
Evidence does not speak for itself. Someone must speak for it.
A someone with a track record for accuracy speaks for effectively than a novice or a someone with an imperfect record for accuracy.
A someone who shows a thorough analysis of the fact that addresses alternative explanations, and sets the dross aside, is, in my opinion, even better.
Thus, I disagree respectfully with the glib statement that only facts matter.
With respect to Gladio and French riots in the 1970's, please clarify the riots of which you speak. I think your arguments are misplaced.
First, France had conservative-leaning governments in the 1970's, led to Pres. DeGaulle (deceased 1970), Georges Pompidou (1970 - 1974), and Valery Giscard D'Estaing (1974 - 1981). Socialist Francois Mitterand gained the presidency in 1981, and served until 1995, when the conservative Jacques Chirac succeeded him.
Second, the riots of which you speak took place in Italy, not France, when it appeared that an Italian Government led by Premier Aldo Moro took steps to include the PCI (Communist Party of Italy) in the coalition government.
This leads to point three. Gladio was a post-WWII fascist violent campaign, not a communist operation. The core operators in Gladio were right wing agents "left behind" after WWII to undercut Soviet occupation in Eastern Europe, to provide a core to harass, disrupt, and sabotage any Soviet move west, and, more likely, to set the table for a "rollback" into Eastern Europe.
Brandon, you blame socialist French tyranny for false flag terrorists attacks. Kindly name such events during Pres. Mitterand's administration.
With respect to Pres. Hollande, he is a socialist in name only, just as Tony Blair was a "Labor" (English socialist) prime minister in name only, just as Pres. Obama is, in my opinion, a Democrat in name only.
Other than the Charlie Hebdo and kosher market event, what other false flag events have occurred during a French socialist's presidency? In fact, France conducted a relatively independent foreign policy under Presidents DeGaulle, Pompidou, Giscard D'Estaing, Mitterand, and Chirac. Pres. Sarkozy, elected in 2007, was the first French president who was so pro-U.S. as to be obnoxious. Hollande, the nominally socialist incumbent president, is unpopular in large part because he has continued Sarkozy's obsequious relationship with the U.S. -- when he was elected to be independent.
Charlie Hebdo is a false flag on Hollande's watch -- and a dangerous one at that with the U.S. Government a dangerous and wounded feral empire. It is not, however, the culmination of a French affair with socialism.
Rollback has taken place since the 1990 unification of Germany, through the wars in former Yugoslavia in Clinton's administration, through the accession of former Warsaw Pact nations into NATO, through the U.S.-funded Ukrainian neo-nazi putsch.
written by Brandon Smith , January 17, 2015
@Nick
Mmm, no, the facts speak for themselves. The people relaying the facts are secondary to the truth they hold. If a person relays the facts on a regular basis, then their track record will reflect that, so, we should always try to relay the facts to the best of our ability, rather than worrying about how we are perceived as individuals.
1. Operation Gladio began in the late 1940's and continued up until the 1990's. I never claimed that this was a "socialist" or "conservative" conspiracy, so I think you should keep your strawman arguments in check. I did say that the ultimate RESULT was socialism, which is just another form of statist collectivism. Operation Gladio was a GLOBALIST conspiracy designed to drive the European population towards centralization using Marxists as a foil. It was highly successful. The "conservative" politicians you cite were conservative in name only. It's funny because your bias in defense of socialism has led you to point out the false nature of men like Hollande or Obama, yet you are blinded to the same false nature in self proclaimed conservative leaders. Don't let yourself get caught up in the false left/right paradigm. Both sides are ultimately collectivist.
2. Operation Gladio began in France in 1947, when French Interior Minister Edouard Depreux revealed the existence of a secret stay-behind army in France codenamed „Plan Bleu“.
1948 In France the “Western Union Clandestine Committee” (WUCC) was created to coordinate secret unorthodox warfare. After the creation of NATO a year later the WUCC was integrated into the military alliance under the name “Clandestine Planning Committee” (CPC).
The former director of the French intelligence service DGSE, admiral Pierre Lacoste, said in a 1992 interview with The Nation, that France's 'secret army' was involved in terrorist activities against de Gaulle, whom the CIA wanted to assassinate.
De Gaulle was eventually driven out of office after the 1969 failure of the Referendum of Regionalisation. He was replaced by Georges Pompidou, who (what a surprise) was an avid promoter of European unification (centralization).
3. The communist terrorist group Action Directe carried out at least 50 different violent attacks in France in the 1970's and 1980's and was infiltrated by Gladio, along with groups like Red Army Faction, Black September, and the PLFP. I suggest you read up on them.
4. You should also look into De Galle's secret organization called Service d' Action Civique. It ended up being exposed as a training ground for Gladio Agents under Jaques Foccart. Whether De Galle was aware of this problem is not known. It was discovered that SAC had infiltrated communist student groups in the late 1960's through the 1970's and attempted to provoke violent actions, including the riots I referenced above. Read the book 'NATO's Secret Armies: Operation GLADIO and Terrorism in Western Europe' in order to learn more about the influence of Gladio over French marxist groups.
5. France is independent from NO ONE. De Gaulle was perhaps the last stalwart leader of the nation, and he was forced out. Every president of France since has been a supporter of European centralization and collectivism. What you don't seem to grasp is that socialism is just a tool used to further the goal of totalitarian government. The centralization of Europe under the EU has been accomplished in large part due to self proclaimed Socialist governments. If you are attempting to defend the socialist ideology, I suggest you not waste your energy. Socialism is just as culpable for the world's ills as corporatism and fascism. ALL of them are collectivist methodologies, and ALL are to blame.
The U.S. government is a puppet government, just as the French Government has been a puppet government for decades. France is the home of the Rothschilds, after all. There is no nation today with a central bank under the Bank of International Settlements that does not answer to international financiers.
You have latched onto one part of the story, but have missed a vast majority of the narrative. There is far more going on than "American empire" - France is part of the problem, and so is socialism. Time to wake up.
written by Implied Violins , January 17, 2015
Brandon -
yes, after having read some of the comments to your articles that were posted on ZeroHedge I know that many people question you and your motives. It is more than a couple of people too - or, at least one person with multiple identities ;-)
I'm not a PCR hater, or hater of anyone else I mentioned in my previous articles. In fact, I quite enjoy his articles as he does a very good job of pointing out the fallacies of our government and the FED. He is pretty much right on in that regard.
I have, however, parsed over some of his articles and found where he has definitely chosen a narrative that does not include the real history of the FED (and the world wars etc.), and instead he has written around them in such a way that he is OBVIOUSLY ignoring what historians like Sutton and Abraham, Quigley, et. al. have written concerning them - and what he writes implies that he KNOWS that stuff but chooses to write around it.
But again: only someone conversant with the material can read what he writes and realize just how squirrely he is being!! If I can find it...I had a discourse with a knowledgeable friend (who turned me on to Rothbard etc.) a few months ago where I took apart one of his articles and showed where he was intentionally writing around known facts - but once again, there will be no smoking gun 'proof', just VERY interesting conjecture.
I have to give it to him: PCR is brilliant, an incredible spokesman for the globalists. All he writes is true... but he is DAMN good at hiding a lie.
But he and others aside: the reason I enjoy so much what you write is that you do so from a very grounded and knowledgeable perspective. You only write about what is demonstrably true in the here and now. And you are adept at finding real-world, incontrovertible proofs to support your arguments. That approach is exactly what will win people overwho are vacillating between the MSM and the real truth to your arguments, and personally as a scientist I can see the great value in that. When I present information to people about what is going on and what to expect going forth, your articles are the first thing I turn them on to.
So, thanks again for your response, and here's hoping that enough people have been enlightened by your writings to make a difference - NOW.
written by Brandon Smith , January 17, 2015
@Implied
For the record, I don't care for PCR's position at all. His manner of viewing the conflict between East and West (as if it is real rather than theater propagated by globalist financiers) is much like the manner in which Left and Right pundits perpetuate the fallacy of the left/right paradigm. My only apprehension is whether or not he is aware of what he is doing.
written by NICK.VINCENT , January 17, 2015
Brandon:
If your parting advice is to wake up, you may rest assured that I did not find your site by sleepwalking through the internet. The fact I find much with which I agree, and some which I challenge, just awakens me further.
I find your site a forum that presents uncommon sense. Like any human endeavor, Alt-Market offers one path to truth, unlike most major media outlets. Like any human endeavor, Alt-Market is a human endeavor that is incomplete, a function of all-too-human biases and default positions, yet perfectible to a degree not seen in MSM.
You are as human as I am, Brandon.
You concur that Gladio is a post-World War II operation of the CIA, Nazis of Gehlen's ex-Abwehr network who escaped through Operation Paperclip, and other reactionaries.
You concur that Gladio manipulated extant Marxist groups in France, through agents provoca
You concur that DeGaulle was a true French nationalist.
What is your basis for your statements on Pompidou?
What had you to say on D'Estaing, Chirac, and Sarkozy? Il n'y a pas rien (French for "nothing at all."
Mitterand did make an effort to take France's economy away from the-then U.S.-UK Anglosphere orbit. Retaliation was swift against the franc. To say glibly he was part of an unbroken skein of French leaders steering the nation into a New World Order does not stand up to scrutiny, and cannot
elude debate.
Strictly speaking, the Rotschilds called the UK, Germany, Austria, Naples, Italy, and Paris, France home after the father of Der Alter Rotschild, Mayer Amschel Rotschild, left Galicia, the land of shifting borders that has seen Austrian, Polish, German, Rumanian, Ukrainian, Russian, and Soviet flags flying over it, in the 18th century.
In fact, Mitterand forced the French Rotschilds to leave and resettle the business in the U.S.
It is incomplete and inaccurate to call the Rotschilds a French production. It is just as inaccurate or incomplete to call the Rotschilds an English or American production. Nathan Rotschild, the son who went to London, established the most profitable branch of the family. Augustus Schoenberg (August Belmont) was the 19th century pathfinder for the Rotschilds in the U.S., followed by Junius Morgan and his son, John Pierpont Morgan.
I do agree that the Rotschild family established a multinational structure of sovereign central bankers who influenced, controlled, or established central banks wherever they exerted influence. And that influence has caused widespread suffering, deprivation, death, and deadly concentration of wealth.
The debate resolves itself simply -- whether Russia, China, India, and other nations outside the center of the Anglosphere (U.S./UK/EU/Israel) are seeking an independent existence, or whether the former nations are seeking leverage vis-a-vis the Anglosphere to establish a suitable position for themselves in a world where the dollar is no longer the reserve currency and sovereignty yields to decisions by a commission dominated by the like of the constituents of the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) and the IMF.
To do so requires full acknowledgement of our own respective biases. So here are mine: (a) I am adult Jew-by-choice; (b) I question authority and find Abraham challenging G-d over the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah and refusing to sacrifice his son as a rule and guide to effective
challenge to arbitrary authority; (c) I find much to learn from Jesus' work on earth, including the fact that the first Christians held their property communally, just as the Children of Israel established an effective commonwealth after leaving the Wilderness; (d) the left falls short by looking for approval from the center; (e) the libertarian right falls short by refusing to address the added oppression of non-Caucasian and non-Protestant Christians as a means by which the powerful few either cow or win sufficient support from those not directly in the line of oppressive fire (see David Roediger's "The Wages of Whiteness"); (f) mutual aid amongst the self-reliant is a way to redeem the world from itself; (g) organizations who do truly derive their legitimacy from the consent of, and continuing accountability to, the governed work; (h) no matter what humans do, nature bats last; (i) corporations are not entitled sovereign rule in any area; and (i) no human endeavor that does not seek harmony between men and women or with nature (see the Real Single Law of the Iroquois Confederacy, in which the counsel of grandmothers had the final word on war and peace after male chiefs had their say) will collapse.
1. Rebellion against tyranny is obedience to G-d.
2. There is no Torah without bread, and no bread without Torah.
3. Pursuit of truth is pursuit of justice is pursuit of harmony.
4. The unexamined life is not worth living.
What are your biases, Brandon, in addition to revulsion with socialism?
The real work is the establishment of living independence from this centralizing monster in our respective homes, families, and communities. For this reason, I find your stories about Oathkeepers in Ferguson and Montana most valuable, particularly the story of the Montana meeting in which the gathering was very light on talk and very heavy on work.
Respectfully,
NICK.VINCENT
written by Brandon Smith , January 17, 2015
@Nick
I agree that the CIA and NATO were PART of the Gladio operation, however, the fact remains that many European leaders were well aware of Gladio, or were directly involved. Also, obviously, the intended result was a more socialized Europe, ironically, in the name of fighting against marxist terrorists that did not really exist.
Gladio training took place within SAC either right under De Gaulle's nose, or, with his blessing. I think it is likely he did not know the full extent of the covert war. Those that followed him were clearly more aware.
Pompidou founded the French arm of the Paneuropean Union Movement, and immediately after he took De Gaulle's position, he helped initiate the European Communities Summit which led directly to the formation of the European Union structure.
Sure, the Rothschilds are everywhere, but their base of operations has always been out of France. I think it wise to assume that their influence over French geopolitics is considerable given their history in the region. Certainly, no one is kicking them out of France today.
I wouldn't consider my distaste for socialism a "bias" so much as an educated understanding of the threat it presents. Any system that promotes the sacrifice of individualism and individual liberty in the name of some ethereal "greater good" almost always leads to the worst crimes against humanity imaginable. If my problem with this fact is a bias, then I suppose I am just as biased against Fascism and Corporatism.
My issue with your post was that you approached me as if I was not educated on the history of the subjects I was discussing. Hopefully I have clarified that I am. I never tackle subjects which I have not studied in depth.
I agree with most of your principles listed. I don't see much evidence that Libertarians overlook the oppression of anyone, or the use of false paradigms to pit social groups against each other. In fact, I would look into the Oath Keeper actions in Ferguson as an example of how we have thrown ourselves right into the middle to disrupt the exploitation of minorities and other groups as "human weapons" to foment social destabilization.
I think perhaps you do not give as much credence to the role socialism plays in elitist centralization as you should, and that is perhaps where we part ways. Other than that, I commend the path you have taken.
written by NICK.VINCENT , January 18, 2015
Brandon:
I see that we are close in our opinions, analytical processes, and pursuit of truth. I enjoy the discussions. A site keeper with a thinner skin or less patience, I can foresee, would have engaged in ad hominem attacks or barred me as a troll.
Hegel set the analysis for "thesis-antithesis-synthesis". Marx turned Hegel on his head, as others have often said. Central bankers and other power concentrators have gone further, as the Daily Bell observed, by engaging in "directed history" that manufactures the thesis, antithesis, and finally, the always-desired synthesis, camouflaging it as "the only reasonable" alternative. I see this phenomenon with examples of socialism and corporatism.
Your highlighting "the greater good" analysis as a threat to life and honor of the individual with unalienable rights is one with which I agree. Interestingly, Sec'y Paul C. Roberts discussed Bentham's dangerous "greater good" theory in his book "The Tyranny of Good Intentions". And yes, he attacked "the greater good" as the dangerous false pretext for concentration of government and commercial power at the expense of individuals, the republic ("publc thing" in Latin), and "the rights of Englishmen" as Blackstone, the authors of the 1688 Bill of Rights, and the author of the Magna Carta described.
As far as Libertarians having difficulty addressing oppression of disempowered and usually non-Caucasian, non-Protestant communities, I have seen Ron Paul and Rand Paul showing some unfamiliarity and unease in addressing these issues in speeches. They do, however, show a willingness to climb a learning curve and to address the common threat of ever-centralizing government and commercial oppression.
Let me digress for a moment and address an "alt-market" issue relating to communications. Has Alt-Market addressed the matter of secure communications? For example, I am seeing discussion lately, on lawyers' discussion groups of which I am a member, of the pros and cons of "Pretty Good Privacy (PGP), Blackphone, and Silent Circle resources.
Here is an historical novel I commend to you, which a Russian emigre in my synagogue recommended to me: "Life and Fate" by Vassily Grossman. It is an historical novel of the Battle of Stalingrad. Neither the Communists nor the Nazis come out looking good. The story goes that Khrushchev even ordered the KGB to confiscate the ribbon off the typewriter that Grossman used to compose his work. The fact that several of us in shul read the novel is proof enough for me that Khrushchev's censorship failed, and the pursuit of truth lives in spite of all manner of oppression.
Carry on, Brandon. I am sticking around on account of the uncommon sense you share on the site.
Nick
