Is a New American Reichstag in the Works?

By Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
August 17, 2011

That is what chatter coming from the United States government seems to suggest. A few weeks ago, we reported on how a video from the Department of Homeland Security(DHS) incited fear of ‘white Al-Qaeda’ terrorists and just a day after publication, Anders Breivik blew up a government building in Oslo, Norway.

The U.S. government is preaching the idea that a new Oklahoma City style attack is coming.

Since Oslo, the very same Department of Homeland Security has put out a new Public Service Announcement where they go at it again. The white American is the threat. Somehow the U.S. Government found a way to move the threat from Islamic fundamentalists to Americans who support Constitutionalism.

In the new ad, DHS presents new ‘white faces’ while calling for a high state of vigilance from the part of the citizenry to report any ‘suspicious’ or ‘out of the ordinary’ activity. As in previous occasions, no clear definition of ‘suspicious’ or ‘out of the ordinary’ is given. This technique, as we reported before, is a psychological operation to instigate fear and distrust on the public so that they not only accept the government’s message of fear, but also turn against their neighbors and family members and tattle tale about their questioning of government policies.

Back in the days of the infamous Nazi party, Adolf Hitler used the false threat of a foreign force planning to attack Germany in order to push the public to accept his insane power grab, that ended in the death of Jews, Christians, and any other members of groups that opposed his policies. Hitler only failed on his attempt to take over Europe and the world, because his handlers had already achieved their goal to ramp up the war movement by playing Hitler against other military forces.

The threat of a ‘lone wolf’ style terror attack in the United States then is the solution to save the drastically faded Obama presidency. If you think this is insane, take a look at this article on the Financial Times of London, where Robert Shapiro, a former White House aide to Bill Clinton suggested that barring a terror attack, the Obama administration was doomed. We must add to this Barack Obama’s own assessment which included his thought that the United States could absorb another terror attack of the size of 9/11.

Yesterday, Barack Obama came out to reinforce even more the supposed threat of homegrown terrorism during an interview on CNN. While responding to a comment from Wolf Blitzer, Obama identified the possibility that a single person could cause a major terror attack. “We are vigilant and constantly monitoring the threat of a terrorist attack… The risk is always there… The risk we are concerned now is the ‘lone wolf’ threat, a single person with a weapon, someone being able to carry out the type of massacre we saw in Norway recently.” Of course, it has been proven that Anders Breivik did not act alone. In fact, even main stream media reports confirm that Breivik called police several times to turn himself in before the attacks.

A couple of days ago, New York Times writer Paul Krugman came out and suggested the United States would benefit greatly if a new threat such as the invasion of aliens happened because it would allow the government to launch wars and therefore revive the economy. This train of thought would be funny if it wasn’t because what Krugman suggested was exactly the agenda carried out in World Wars I and II. Upon the evident economic crisis, the Globalists decided to play nations against nations in order to spur manufacturing of war machinery, create jobs within the military industrial complex and start fresh again after the wars were over. But at what human cost?

What does the new DHS Ad say?

Picking up where they left off a few weeks ago, the Department of Homeland Security headed by Secretary Janet Napolitano, continues its fear mongering campaign to get people to accept the next big terrorist attack and the Police State measures that will stem from it.

In the video, DHS shows a white young man driving a cab. He stops by what seems to be a bus or train station, opens the trunk of the cab and activates what appears to be an explosive device. At the same time, two passengers inside the station see a suspicious looking woman walking inside the station as she flies by them. And guess what, she’s white, too. A white man who observes the white taxi driver walking away from the cab is then shown talking to a police officer in a supposed attempt to denounce the suspicious activity.

What can we get from this? When looked at it in more than one dimension, it is clear that once again the DHS intends to portray whites as dangerous, especially white middle class people. In order to understand this trick, one needs to connect the ad to the current financial situation, where mostly middle class and the poor (taxi drivers and public transportation users) are being robbed of their future. Everywhere in the world, it is the middle and poor class the ones rising up against the Globalist attempt to further consolidate economic and military power. After Anders Breivik allegedly attacked the federal building in Oslo, authorities beefed up security in the capital and other cities in Norway. After the last riots in London, in another Problem, Reaction, Solution scheme, a crowd of criminals attacked local businesses and homes. The British government decided to use face recognition technology on the streets to scan and store imagery from anyone who “may be or act suspicious”. Previous to the attacks, police stood down and let the looters do whatever they wanted and now they want to scan everyone’s faces.

Back in the United States the corporate prostitute media continues to eco Obama’s speech about the threat of a ‘lone wolf’ attack. On Tuesday, CBS News said the next attack would not come from Islamic terrorists, but from a member of the “Sovereign Citizen” movement in the United States, that is everyone calling for the end of the Federal Reserve, the end of the wars, the reactivation of the economy, the adoption of sound fiscal and monetary policies and the end of interventionism and empire building. Going by the recent polls, this group of people now labeled as “dangerous” by the federal government, includes a powerful minority who is armed and ready to defend their rights to speak freely, own and carry weapons to protect themselves and their families from rising crime, public protest against insane government policies and anyone who supports Ron Paul and anyone and anything that smells like Constitutionalism.

Naturally, the government knows that it does not take a majority to get the government back to the people, but a really well-educated and armed minority to eject the current invaders who occupy the United States of America, or for that matter every other country in the western world. That is why the government continues to move initiatives to discretely ban the second amendment carrying out stings in gun shows and invading private property to look for legally held fire arms. Obama himself is an “in the closet” gun grabber. So are Rick Perry and Mitt Romney. In April, the newspaper the Star-Tribune reported that the Federal Bureau of Investigation is spying on citizens in Wyoming to keep tabs on their use of fire arms. FBI agent Kathy Wright said that “the bureau has kept an eye on the movement because some sovereigns have taken the logical step from belief in the illegitimacy of the current system to acting violently against it.”

What could come from a situation where a disarmed society is unable to protect itself from crime and the abuses of government? Ask relatives of people who survived the Nazi atrocities, ask the people of Oklahoma City, the people from Virginia Tech, from New York, and more recently from Norway. What could stem from an educated society that freely carries fire arms to defend itself? Ask the citizens of Switzerland and Texas.

Top Government Insider: Bin Laden Died In 2001

Paul Joseph Watson
May 4, 2011

Top US government insider Dr. Steve R. Pieczenik, a man who held numerous different influential positions under three different Presidents and still works with the Defense Department, shockingly told The Alex Jones Show yesterday that Osama Bin Laden died in 2001 and that he was prepared to testify in front of a grand jury how a top general told him directly that 9/11 was a false flag inside job.

Pieczenik cannot be dismissed as a “conspiracy theorist”. He served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State under three different administrations, Nixon, Ford and Carter, while also working under Reagan and Bush senior, and still works as a consultant for the Department of Defense. A former US Navy Captain, Pieczenik achieved two prestigious Harry C. Solomon Awards at the Harvard Medical School as he simultaneously completed a PhD at MIT.

Recruited by Lawrence Eagleburger as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Management, Pieczenik went on to develop, “the basic tenets for psychological warfare, counter terrorism, strategy and tactics for transcultural negotiations for the US State Department, military and intelligence communities and other agencies of the US Government,” while also developing foundational strategies for hostage rescue that were later employed around the world.

Pieczenik also served as a senior policy planner under Secretaries Henry Kissinger, Cyrus Vance, George Schultz and James Baker and worked on George W. Bush’s election campaign against Al Gore. His record underscores the fact that he is one of the most deeply connected men in intelligence circles over the past three decades plus.

The character of Jack Ryan, who appears in many Tom Clancy novels and was also played by Harrison Ford in the popular 1992 movie Patriot Games, is also based on Steve Pieczenik.

Back in April 2002, over nine years ago, Pieczenik told the Alex Jones Show that Bin Laden had already been “dead for months,” and that the government was waiting for the most politically expedient time to roll out his corpse. Pieczenik would be in a position to know, having personally met Bin Laden and worked with him during the proxy war against the Soviets in Afghanistan back in the early 80′s.

Pieczenik said that Osama Bin Laden died in 2001, “Not because special forces had killed him, but because as a physician I had known that the CIA physicians had treated him and it was on the intelligence roster that he had marfan syndrome,” adding that the US government knew Bin Laden was dead before they invaded Afghanistan.

Marfan syndrome is a degenerative genetic disease for which there is no permanent cure. The illness severely shortens the life span of the sufferer.

“He died of marfan syndrome, Bush junior knew about it, the intelligence community knew about it,” said Pieczenik, noting how CIA physicians had visited Bin Laden in July 2001 at the American Hospital in Dubai.

“He was already very sick from marfan syndrome and he was already dying, so nobody had to kill him,” added Pieczenik, stating that Bin Laden died shortly after 9/11 in his Tora Bora cave complex.

“Did the intelligence community or the CIA doctor up this situation, the answer is yes, categorically yes,” said Pieczenik, referring to Sunday’s claim that Bin Laden was killed at his compound in Pakistan, adding, “This whole scenario where you see a bunch of people sitting there looking at a screen and they look as if they’re intense, that’s nonsense,” referring to the images released by the White House which claim to show Biden, Obama and Hillary Clinton watching the operation to kill Bin Laden live on a television screen.

“It’s a total make-up, make believe, we’re in an American theater of the absurd….why are we doing this again….nine years ago this man was already dead….why does the government repeatedly have to lie to the American people,” asked Pieczenik.

“Osama Bin Laden was totally dead, so there’s no way they could have attacked or confronted or killed Osama Bin laden,” said Pieczenik, joking that the only way it could have happened was if special forces had attacked a mortuary.

Pieczenik said that the decision to launch the hoax now was made because Obama had reached a low with plummeting approval ratings and the fact that the birther issue was blowing up in his face.

“He had to prove that he was more than American….he had to be aggressive,” said Pieczenik, adding that the farce was also a way of isolating Pakistan as a retaliation for intense opposition to the Predator drone program, which has killed hundreds of Pakistanis.

“This is orchestrated, I mean when you have people sitting around and watching a sitcom, basically the operations center of the White House, and you have a president coming out almost zombie-like telling you they just killed Osama Bin Laden who was already dead nine years ago,” said Pieczenik, calling the episode, “the greatest falsehood I’ve ever heard, I mean it was absurd.”

Dismissing the government’s account of the assassination of Bin Laden as a “sick joke” on the American people, Pieczenik said, “They are so desperate to make Obama viable, to negate the fact that he may not have been born here, any questions about his background, any irregularities about his background, to make him look assertive….to re-elect this president so the American public can be duped once again.”

Pieczenik’s assertion that Bin Laden died almost ten years ago is echoed by numerous intelligence professionals as well as heads of state across the world.

Bin Laden, “Was used in the same way that 9/11 was used to mobilize the emotions and feelings of the American people in order to go to a war that had to be justified through a narrative that Bush junior created and Cheney created about the world of terrorism,” stated Pieczenik.

During his interview with the Alex Jones Show yesterday, Pieczenik also asserted he was directly told by a prominent general that 9/11 was a stand down and a false flag operation, and that he is prepared to go to a grand jury to reveal the general’s name.

“They ran the attacks,” said Pieczenik, naming Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Stephen Hadley, Elliott Abrams, and Condoleezza Rice amongst others as having been directly involved.

“It was called a stand down, a false flag operation in order to mobilize the American public under false pretenses….it was told to me even by the general on the staff of Wolfowitz – I will go in front of a federal committee and swear on perjury who the name was of the individual so that we can break it open,” said Pieczenik, adding that he was “furious” and “knew it had happened”.

“I taught stand down and false flag operations at the national war college, I’ve taught it with all my operatives so I knew exactly what was done to the American public,” he added.

Pieczenik re-iterated that he was perfectly willing to reveal the name of the general who told him 9/11 was an inside job in a federal court, “so that we can unravel this thing legally, not with the stupid 9/11 Commission that was absurd.”

Pieczenik explained that he was not a liberal, a conservative or a tea party member, merely an American who is deeply concerned about the direction in which his country is heading.

Watch the full interview with Dr. Pieczenik here.

Intelligence Thugs using social networks to influence masses

RT
April 2011

Wayne Madsen has written about intelligence in America for decades, having transitioned from a Naval officer to journalist, specializing in investigative reporting.

In the past he’s written about the FBI’s Carnivore Internet monitoring program, but now, he says, the government isn’t watching what we do online, but is using the web, rather, to tell us how to do it.

Using the media for propaganda purposes is nothing new for the CIA, says Madsen. He cites the 1960s pirate station Radio Swan as an example of the American government’s attempt to discretely influence the public over 50 years ago, broadcasting messages in favor of the Bay of Pigs Invasion. Now, says Madsen, the government is taking to Twitter and Facebook to get their point across—but isn’t being clear at all on how it’s doing it.

What is happening today, says Madsen, is just the latest example of psychological operations perpetrated by the government to influence the public. Madsen attests that online messages claiming to be from US fronts overseas are actually from Americans—not the Libyans and their neighbors who we are led to believe are sending the tweets.

“I think the US is probably behind these Twitter feeds. We don’t know if they came from Libya,” he says. Madsen even suggest that the microblog messages could easily be constructed from military bases in America by our own officials—not war-ravaged and rebellious Libyans.

Madsen notes that Internet availability in Libya has barely saturated the country, with only five percent of the population having access to the web. It would make sense, then, that the tweets, blogs and status updates chronicling the drama in North Africa are being orchestrated by the US government as a means of making their message heard, even if it’s done through surreptitious means.

While these actions would jeopardize the ethics of the CIA, the organization has been sneaky before in its usage of conduits. The Agency would plant stories in foreign newspapers, which would then be picked up overseas and, from there, indirectly carried by US outlets.

Madsen also sites that relationships between the US government and major technology and communication corporations, such as AT&T and Google, as long-standing and apparent across the board.

Regardless of whether or not the CIA is covertly casting these tweets, Madsen says that US and NATO involvement in Libya has brought the situation to a stalemate and is thus one propaganda program that has furiously failed.

The U.S.´s secret tools to force Internet Connectivity

By Spencer Ackerman
Wired.com
February 7, 2011

When Hosni Mubarak shut down Egypt’s internet and cellphone communications, it seemed that all U.S. officials could do was ask him politely to change his mind. But the American military does have a second set of options, if it ever wants to force connectivity on a country against its ruler’s wishes.

Cargo planes like the C-130J are adapted to become a command center.

There’s just one wrinkle. “It could be considered an act of war,” says John Arquilla, a leading military futurist.

The U.S. military has no shortage of devices — many of them classified — that could restore connectivity to a restive populace cut off from the outside world by its rulers. It’s an attractive option for policymakers who want an option for future Egypts, between doing nothing and sending in the Marines. And it might give teeth to the Obama administration’s demand that foreign governments consider internet access an inviolable human right.

Read about U.S. psychological operations (psy-ops) in Iraq

Arquilla, a professor at the Naval Postgraduate School, spent years urging the military to logic-bomb adversary websites, disrupt hostile online presences, and even cause communications blackouts to separate warring factions before they go nuclear. What the military can turn off, he says, it can also turn on — or at least fill dead airspace.

Consider the Commando Solo, the Air Force’s airborne broadcasting center. A revamped cargo plane, the Commando Solo beams out psychological operations in AM and FM for radio, and UHF and VHF for TV. Arquilla doesn’t want to go into detail how the classified plane could get a denied internet up and running again, but if it flies over a bandwidth-denied area, suddenly your Wi-Fi bars will go back up to full strength.

“We have both satellite- and nonsatellite-based assets that can come in and provide access points to get people back online,” Arquilla says. “Some of it is done from ships. You could have a cyber version of pirate radio.”

Then there are cell towers in the sky. The military already uses its aircraft as communications relays in places like Afghanistan. Some companies are figuring out upgrades: FastCom, an effort led by the defense firm Textron, is a project that hooks up cellular pods to the belly of a drone, the better to keep cellular and data connections in the air without pilot fatigue. Underneath the drones, a radius of a few kilometers on the ground would have 3G coverage.

Sharon Corona, a spokeswoman for the project, says that there’s an obstacle to using a technology like FastCom for an Egypt-like situation: The recipient devices need to be able to talk with the cell and data signal. But compliant phones or netbooks — small and lightweight — could conceivably be smuggled into a denied area.

Alternatively, operatives could smuggle small satellite dishes into a country. Small dishes were crucial to getting the internet back running in Haiti after last year’s earthquake. It’s how cameramen in war zones rapidly transmit high quality video from the middle of nowhere.

An image of the interior of a modified C-130J cargo plane simply identified as a Commando Solo aircraft.

Of course, slow-flying drones or a broadcasting center in the sky have an inherent weakness: They’re sitting ducks for any half-decent air defense system. (And did we mention that Hosni Mubarak became a national hero for his air defense prowess in the 1973 war against Israel?)

That leads to another possibility: “Just give people Thuraya satellite phones,” says John Pike of Globalsecurity.org. The cheapish phones hunt down signals from space hardware.

Even expanding access to the military’s own satellite communications networks is theoretically possible, Arquilla says. But he won’t say more than that: “Let’s just say that’s an area decided at the level of the commander-in-chief.”

In the absence of those options, there’s always the old-school methods of jamming a government’s communication frequencies and broadcasting favorable messages. That’s the Commando Solo’s specialty. “Jamming is something we think about in the context of shooting wars,” says Arquilla, but “it may have its place in social revolutions as well.”

The trouble is, if a government follows Egypt’s lead and turns off the internet, it’s not going to be keen to see a meddling foreign power turn it back on.

That act might not be as provocative as sending in ground troops or dropping bombs. But it’s still an act of what you might call forced online entry — by definition, a hostile one.

In situations like Egypt, siding with an uprising against a longtime ally is a difficult choice, whether analog or digital.

That might be why the military hasn’t done it. Asked about whether the Pentagon would consider deploying mobile connectivity to restore internet access for a social uprising, all a senior official would say is that such a situation was “hypothetical.”

And all that underscores how Egypt’s internet shutoff pushed the poorly defined limits of cyber hostilities. Foreign actors don’t really have a blueprint for responding. The U.S. military “has a great deal of expertise on rebuilding communications network, but that’s … very different when the government is interested in resisting,” Arquilla says. “This is far less an engineering problem and far more a political one.”