Tag: police state

The Rise of the FALSE False Flag

Afalse flag operation is generally defined as ”an act committed with the intent of disguising the actual source of responsibility and pinning blame on another party”

The phrase originates in naval warfare, when ships would literally fly a flag of another nation’s navy.

Historically speaking, they are covert military operations carried out with the aim of creating a cassus belli, either initiating, justifying or perpetuating a war.

The attack is very real, only the flag is false.

But recent years have seen the rise of a new idea – the false false flag.  That is to say – entirely fake “events” with only the barest relationship to objective reality. Blanks and crisis actors, fake victims and fake shooters.

This concept has been the subject of discussion recently, with the civil suit against Alex Jones for calling Sandy Hook a “hoax” and the on-going trial of journalist Richard D Hall in the UK for suggesting the Manchester Arena bombing was fake. Similar suggestions have been raised about the Boston bombing of 2013 as well. Others, including Riley Waggaman, have raised questions about the recent “terrorist attack” in Moscow too.

Now, I’m not definitively claiming any or all of those events were faked – though of course they may have been. What I’m pointing up is the shift in discussion.

But then, we don’t need to look far for the greatest provably “fake event” in recent times: “Covid”, which was purely a construction of media hype and corrupt science creating an entirely fake pandemic.

Once you’ve absorbed all the facts of the case, that’s the only interpretation that stands up to scrutiny.

In fact it was such a vast infestation of fakery it spawned mini-fakes. It wasn’t so much a fake event as a flock of fakes of varying sizes.

Covid alone proves that the powers-that-be certainly do engage in staged or faked events. And, as highlighted in the first part of this series, it’s been known for decades that news reports are regularly faked, on both the small and large scale.

Yet, still, the question that gets asked whenever the possibility of fakery is invoked is “why?”

Why would a state apparatus with the power to really do something, opt to only pretend to do it?

This is a standard argument made against the idea of state-sponsored fakery, and although it is logically flawed as being purely an argument from incredulity, it is a question we can and probably should endeavour to answer.

So – why would the state, or powerful actors within the state, choose to fake something rather than simply do it? 

Keep reading

UN’s Antonio Guterres unveils global game plan for surveillance, control and censorship

United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres recently released a framework program titled “Global Principles for Information Integrity,” which outlines key recommendations on population control, surveillance and censorship.

The said project promotes the globalist rhetoric of ending “harmful misinformation, disinformation and hate speech” online. It claims to make information spaces safer while “upholding human rights such as the freedom of speech.”

“At a time when billions of people are exposed to false narratives, distortions and lies, these principles lay out a clear path forward, firmly rooted in human rights, including the rights to freedom of expression and opinion,” Guterres said, addressing the media at the UN headquarters in New York.

Guterres urged governments, tech companies, advertisers and the public relations (PR) industry to take responsibility for spreading and monetizing content that results in harm. He also demanded that the media and advertisers take control and establish official narratives while suppressing opposition.

For SHTF Plan‘s Mac Slavo, the international organization is building an information surveillance and control system that crafts authoritarian narratives that limit access to the truth. These will not only censor but will dictate and will police people on what to say and think and how to behave.

“The UN wants to create a world of simps who surrender their sovereignty and bow down to manipulative and abusive entities and false authorities,” Slavo said.

He added that Big Tech’s algorithms or automated review processes will be programmed to filter and remove content deemed objectionable or politically sensitive, including blocking websites, social media posts or entire platforms that would criticize their chosen stakeholders. Slavo further predicted possible internet shutdowns or access restrictions to specific websites in times of political unrest or during manufactured crises.

Keep reading

“It’s a wrong policy”: Questions arise after Buffalo Outer Harbor takes down kites

Questions are being raised about kite rules after a man was surrounded by five park police officers at Buffalo Outer Harbor State Park on Sunday.

“A park ranger came and said you need to take those down. And we were nice to him and said no sir it’s a special day, it doesn’t come around in Buffalo that often where you have a perfect sunny day and 10 mph winds” said Jim Emanuele, who was flying about 10 kites with a friend in the park.

After refusing to take down the kites, the situation escalated.

“I’ve been here before and they told me to take it down. That’s why I don’t come here often” said Emanuele.

As it turns out, kite flying is not allowed in Buffalo State Park without a permit.

“It’s a wrong policy, why you can’t fly kites here right here on the outer harbor. People enjoy, there’s no risk, there’s no powerlines there’s no airport around here so what is the reason that you cannot fly kites here”

Channel Two reached out to New York State Parks for an answer. In a statement released to us, they said quote:

“large kites such as the ones in question can pose a safety risk to park patrons or result in property damage, which is why state park regulations require permits to fly such kites. In this case, no permit was requested or granted.”

Jim says that for him and many other kite flyers, permits are not ideal because you just never know when a perfect kite day will be – but despite the unpredictability, the rule still stands. 

Keep reading

GOP Lawmakers Push Justice Department To Reverse Course On Marijuana Rescheduling

Republicans in Congress sent a public comment letter this week opposing the Biden administration’s planned rescheduling of marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), alleging the government’s recommendation was based on politics rather than science.

Led by Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX) and Sen. James Lankford (R-OK), the letter opposing the move of cannabis to Schedule III was signed 23 other House and Senate GOP congressional lawmakers. It was addressed to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland at the Department of Justice (DOJ).

“The decision to disregard public safety and medical concerns to reclassify marijuana is strictly political,” Sessions claimed in a press release about the letter. “This egregious proposed rule fails to provide sufficient science and data in support. Senator Lankford and I are leading the charge in raising the alarm from Congress.”

The letter itself says it should be irrelevant to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) analysis of marijuana that 38 states and Washington, D.C. have legalized medical cannabis under state law.

“It is clear that HHS and DOJ chose the desired conclusion first and worked backwards, since the rule does not provide sufficient reason to move marijuana to schedule III,” the letter says, further alleging that the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) “was not properly consulted in the drafting of the Proposed Rule.”

To that end, the letter amplified rumors that DEA is not on board with the administration’s rescheduling plan.

“DEA Administrator [Ann] Milgram did not sign the rule, and it states many times that DEA believes additional information is needed regarding the appropriate schedule for marijuana,” it says. “The Proposed Rule references DEA’s findings from 2016, when it rejected two petitions to remove marijuana from schedule I. It seems that DEA stands by its findings from 2016- all the more reason why this rule should not have been published without sign off from the DEA Administrator.”

Since the government’s rescheduling plan was made public in April, SAM and others have amplified rumors that DEA officials might oppose the proposed change—rumors that a top Biden administration official appeared to acknowledge last month.

Asked by a reporter whether there was resistance to the move at DEA, HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra responded: “Talk to the DEA.”

“Our scientists reviewed the evidence,” he added. “FDA bases its action on the science and the evidence before us. We took action.”

The GOP lawmakers claim in the new letter that despite the popularity of medical marijuana nationwide, cannabis isn’t medicine.

Keep reading

Europol Seeks to Break Mobile Roaming Encryption

EU’s law enforcement agency Europol is another major entity that is setting its sights on breaking encryption.

This time, it’s about home routing and mobile encryption, and the justification is a well-known one: encryption supposedly stands in the way of the ability of law enforcement to investigate.

The overall rationale is that police and other agencies face serious challenges in doing their job (an argument repeatedly proven as false) and that destroying the internet’s currently best available security feature for all users – encryption – is the way to solve the problem.

Europol’s recent paper treats home routing not as a useful security feature, but, as “a serious challenge for lawful interception.” Home routing works by encrypting data from a phone through the home network while roaming.

We obtained a copy of the paper for you here.

Keep reading

Total Control: Weaponized Psyops And How The Government Normalizes Totalitarianism

“The biggest mistake I see is people waiting for A Big Sign that’ll tell them that things have gone too far. One Big Thing that police or lawmakers or the president/leaders will do that will cross the line. It’ll never come because they won’t cross it. They’ll move the line. That line you think you stand behind is shifting everyday with little actions, bills, legislations… That line will stop moving one day, & it’ll be too late… Every day, your sensitivity is being eroded by these willful atrocities. The envelope for what you’ll accept is being pushed. One day, all of these things will be your new normal.”—Nigerian writer Suyi Davies Okungbowa

The U.S. government is working to re-shape the country in the image of a totalitarian state.

This has remained true over the past 50-plus years no matter which political party held office.

This will remain true no matter who wins the 2024 presidential election.

In the midst of the partisan furor over Project 2025, a 920-page roadmap for how to re-fashion the government to favor so-called conservative causes, both the Right and the Left have proven themselves woefully naive about the dangers posed by the power-hungry Deep State.

Yet we must never lose sight of the fact that both the Right and the Left and their various operatives are extensions of the Deep State, which continues to wage psychological warfare on the American people.

Psychological warfare, according to the Rand Corporation, “involves the planned use of propaganda and other psychological operations to influence the opinions, emotions, attitudes, and behavior of opposition groups.”

For years now, the government has been bombarding the citizenry with propaganda campaigns and psychological operations aimed at keeping us compliant, easily controlled and supportive of the government’s various efforts abroad and domestically.

The government is so confident in its Orwellian powers of manipulation that it’s taken to bragging about them. For example, in 2022, the U.S. Army’s 4th Psychological Operations Group, the branch of the military responsible for psychological warfare, released a recruiting video that touts its efforts to pull the strings, turn everything they touch into a weapon, be everywhere, deceive, persuade, change, influence, and inspire.

Keep reading

Gassy cows and pigs will face a carbon tax in Denmark, a world first

Denmark will tax livestock farmers for the greenhouse gases emitted by their cows, sheep and pigs from 2030, the first country to do so as it targets a major source of methane emissions, one of the most potent gases contributing to global warming.

The aim is to reduce Danish greenhouse gas emissions by 70% from 1990 levels by 2030, said Taxation Minister Jeppe Bruus.

As of 2030, Danish livestock farmers will be taxed 300 kroner ($43) per ton of carbon dioxide equivalent in 2030. The tax will increase to 750 kroner ($108) by 2035. However, because of an income tax deduction of 60%, the actual cost per ton will start at 120 kroner ($17.3) and increase to 300 kroner by 2035.

Keep reading

Legalizing And Regulating Drugs Is The Only Way Out Of The Overdose Crisis

Should heroin and cocaine be legally available to people who need and want them? If we are serious about stopping the crisis of drug overdose deaths, that is exactly the kind of profound change we need. Yes, extensive regulations would be necessary. In fact, the whole point of regulating drug production and sales is that we can better control what is being sold and to whom.

After British Columbia’s Provincial Health Officer Dr. Bonnie Henry testified to the all-party health committee in Ottawa in May that regulating these controlled drugs would minimize harms, B.C. Premier David Eby said he disagreed. He is quoted saying that “in a reality-based, real-world level, (it) doesn’t make any sense.” But does our current approach of drug prohibition “make sense?”

Since the overdose crisis was declared in 2016, illicit drug toxicity deaths have become the leading cause of unnatural death in B.C. and the leading cause of death from all causes for those aged 10 to 59. More than 44,000 people have died from drug poisoning in Canada since 2016, and more than one-third of those were in B.C. An average of 22 people are dying every day in Canada because the illicit supply of drugs is toxic.

Keep reading

Senate Joins House in Proposal for ‘Automatic’ Draft Registration

Contrary to earlier reports, the U.S. Senate has joined the House of Representatives in moving toward a foolhardy attempt to ‘automatically’ register all draft-eligible U.S. citizens and residents for a possible military draft, by extracting and aggregating information obtained from other Federal agencies.

The proposal for “automatic” draft registration is among several previously-undisclosed provisions related to Selective Service in the newly-release version of the National Defense [sic] Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2025 approved by the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) and to be considered by the full Senate.

The 1,197-page SASC proposal for this year’s NDAA was approved by the committee in closed session last month, and only a summary was released. At the time, a spokesperson for the SASC told me that if “automatic” Selective Service registration had been included in the bill, it would have been included in the summary. That proves to have been incorrect: The proposal for “automatic” draft registration was included in the SASC version of the bill, but not in the summary.

Keep reading

GOP Congressional Committee Approves Bill To Block Marijuana Rescheduling, While Rejecting State Cannabis Protections Amendment

A key GOP-led House committee has approved a large-scale spending bill that would block the Justice Department from rescheduling marijuana, while also amending a longstanding rider protecting medical cannabis states from federal interference by adding new language to authorize enhanced penalties for sales near schools and parks. Members also rejected an amendment that would have extended those protections to all state and tribal cannabis programs, including those allowing recreational use and sales.

At a House Appropriations Committee hearing on Tuesday, the panel passed the legislation covering Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies (CJS) with the hostile marijuana provisions attached.

The bill as approved in committee would block the Justice Department from using its funds to reschedule or deschedule marijuana. This comes amid an active rulemaking process to move cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), as DOJ formally proposed earlier this year.

SEC. 623. None of the funds appropriated or other wise made available by this Act may be used to reschedule marijuana (as such term is defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802)) or to remove marijuana from the schedules established under section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812).

GOP senators have separately tried to block the administration from rescheduling cannabis as part of a standalone bill filed last September, but that proposal has not received a hearing or vote. Including such a ban in key annual spending legislation is a way for opponents to force the issue forward. It’s far from clear that the Democratic-controlled Senate would go along with proposal, however.

The legislation as approved by the panel on Tuesday still includes a longstanding rider to prevent DOJ from using its funds to interfere in the implementation of state medical marijuana programs that has been part of federal law since 2014, but the committee added new language stipulating that the Justice Department can still enforce a section of U.S. code that calls for increased penalties for distributing cannabis within 1,000 feet of an elementary school, vocational school, college, playground or public housing unit.

Keep reading