Canadian Government Cracking Down On Israeli Criticism

Special Note: the article below is from when Stephen Harper was Prime Minister, but, we have to question how much anything has really changed. As the articles here, here, here, here and here show, it seems that for the most part, Justin Trudeau is continuing to spearhead a domestic and foreign policy that is very favorable to Israeli interests.

===========================================================================

Criticism against police officers isn't the only thing that Canadian authorities are cracking down on. Now the Harper government is looking to use hate crime laws against Canadian advocacy groups that try to encourage boycotts of Israel. There are a number of organizations which could be implicated from this move, from large labor unions to the United Church of Canada ---- and many others.

It is no secret that the Harper administration and Israeli officials have had a close relationship over the years, and Canadian officials now look wiling to place that support for their friends, above the basic Charter-protected rights to free speech of Canadian citizens they are in place to represent. Israel has continued to gain a lot of criticism throughout the years for its questionable military actions, one movement in particular that has caught the attention of officials in Canada is the Boycott, Divest, and Sanction (BDS) movement.

When it comes to arresting those who speak-out, Harper has the ability to assign priorities to the RCMP  for investigation purposes; emphasizing the need to find those engaging in hate speech regarding Israel. However, the prosecution of those individuals would ultimately require an assent from a provincial attorney general. When it comes to hate speech laws in Canada, there are believed to be several limits which have been set to prevent the state's ability to criminalize your words. In order for you to be prosecuted for your hate speech, all of these (7) conditions must be met:

1. The hate speech must be the most severe of the genre;

2. The hate speech must be targeted to an identifiable group;

3. It must be public;

4. It must be deliberate, not careless;

5. Excluded from hate speech are good faith interpretations of religious doctrine, discussion of issues of public interest, and literary devices like sarcasm and irony;

6. The statements must be hateful when considered in their social and historical context;

7. No prosecution can proceed without approval, of the attorney-general, which introduces political accountability because the attorney-general is a cabinet minister.

Hopefully, these types of checks-and-balances in the Canadian legal system would prevent any peaceful individual from being wrongfully incarcerated, simply for sharing their non-violent viewpoints. Civil liberties groups are insisting that the new move by the Harper administration would be challenged in court because of the seeming infringement on basic rights to free speech. Public Security Minister Steven Blaney has deemed boycotts of Israel to be on par with anti-Semitic hate speech and violence. Blaney says the government should show zero tolerance when dealing with BDS and this type of criticism.

It appears as if there are efforts being made in a number of ways that contribute to the overall action of suppressing dissent from the status quo. Is it going to soon get to the point where you cannot criticize the government at all? Is that a pillar one would expect to find in any "free and democratic" society? Especially a nation which has an international reputation as being a bastion for human rights. Over the last few months in Canada we've seen piano players losing contracts over controversial political tweets regarding Russia and Ukraine, mail employees refusing to carry mail that had too strong a message for their personal feelings, student activists being jailed and fined for sharing controversial anti-police street art, citizens being bullied into feeling like they're "with the terrorists" if they don't support unjust anti-terror legislation, and now anyone who vocalizes dissent against the nation of Israel is also going to have problems. We can only imagine what's next.

U.S. Jewish NGOs to Get 97% of Homeland Security's Defence Grant in 2012

Natasha Mozgovaya

While the budget has shrunk in recent years, the threat to Jewish institutions has not changed; as a result, Jewish non-profits will receive a record percentage of the funds.

Jewish non-profit organizations in the United States will receive 97 percent of the funds granted by the Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year 2012, money which is aimed at dealing with security threats those institutions face.

In 2012, Jewish institutions in the U.S. will receive $9.7 million, or 97 percent of the funds intended for dealing with security threats, as part of the Vital Nonprofit Security Grants distributed by the Department of Homeland Security.

In 2009, when the white supremacist James W. von Brunn opened fire at the Washington Holocaust Museum, killing a guard, Jewish NGOs received over $9 million out of $15 million allocated to 227 non-profit organizations, aimed to "bolster the security of nonprofit institutions deemed by the Department of Homeland Security to be vulnerable to terrorist attacks."

In 2010, Jewish institutions received $15 million of the total sum of $19 million distributed by Homeland Security.

However, in recent years the budget has been shrinking, while the threat level has not changed, resulting in Jewish non-profits - community centers, schools, hospitals, synagogues and charities – primed to receive a record percentage of next year's non-profit funding.

"I'd gladly trade out threat level not to qualify for these grants," William Daroff, vice president for Public Policy of The Jewish Federations of North America told Haaretz.

"Any non-profit in the largest urban areas can apply for these grants, and determinations are made solely on the threat level Homeland Security officials assess each institution faces."

Daroff explained that most of the funds are usually used for the purchase of closed circuit TVs, vehicle barriers and blast-proof glass, while a small amount is designated for training.

"In the post-9/11 era it's clear that Jewish institutions are at an increased threat level, and we are briefed more often than we wish by the local and federal officials on potential threats," Daroff said, adding that the "threats are there, but it's always a struggle to ensure funds are there during these times of fiscal hardship, so the lobbying for them is a continuous process."

Kathy Manning, chair of the Board of Trustees of The Jewish Federations of North America, noted that “the Department of Homeland Security has demonstrated a great commitment to protecting at-risk communities. These effective security grants are vital to the ongoing protection of deserving institutions, enabling us to work, worship, gather and learn without fear.”

Political Abuse of Psychiatry in the Soviet Union - Now Happening in Canada and the United States

This happened to me by someone that I used to be friends with, for more on that situation see here. Also, see here for more on discrediting political dissidents. 

Click Here to Read the Full Article

Thought Crimes in Trudeau’s Canada

In addition to the article below, I suggest that you read this and this. 

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau meets with his Israeli counterpart Benjamin Netanyahu in Paris in November 2015. (Amos Ben Gershom.)

By Davide Mastracci

The Liberal Party of Canada, which is led by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and came to power in October 2015, brands itself as a progressive alternative to the Conservatives.

When it comes to Israel and the Palestinian-led campaign for boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS), however, the Liberals have continued down the Conservatives’ troubling path, violating Canadians’ wishes and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms along the way.

On 22 February the House of Commons passed a motion by an overwhelming margin of 229-51 votes in condemnation of the BDS movement.

The Liberals have a majority in the House of Commons and the motion, introduced by two Conservative members of parliament, would not have passed without them. Only two of 184 Liberal MPs voted against the motion.

The motion emphasizes the “friendship,” economic and diplomatic relations between Canada and Israel and claims that the BDS movement “promotes the demonization and delegitimization of the State of Israel.”

Expanded political ties

Canada certainly does have a deep relationship with Israel, both politically and economically, which was significantly expanded when Stephen Harper was prime minister.

The Harper government isolated Canada from the the world when it came to Israel. His government voted against United Nations motions for Palestinian statehood, opposed UN motions demanding that Israeli nuclear facilities be opened for inspection, and cracked down on charities providing relief to Palestinians.

Lauding Israel as a “priority market” for Canada, Harper updated the free trade agreement between Israel and Canada in July 2015 to reduce tariffs and broaden investment links with Israeli businesses, including allowing goods from Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank to be exported to Canada duty free.

The two-way trade relationship between Canada and Israel now amounts to at least $1.6 billion.

Boycott as threat

The recent motion, then, is clearly a step toward crushing BDS, a movement that could threaten Israel’s status as a “priority market” for Canada. This goal has existed for years but has recently been intensified, and the Liberals aren’t willing to reverse the trend.

In 2014, the Canadian government added “national origin” into the list of identifiers covered by hate speech laws, in order to criminalize those advocating boycotts against the state of Israel.

Then, in January 2015, the Canadian government agreed to strengthen ties with Israel even further. At the announcement, then foreign affairs minister John Baird said the country would “fight any efforts internationally to delegitimize the State of Israel, including the disturbing BDS Movement.”

This message was reinforced shortly afterwards at a United Nations General Assembly meeting when then public safety minister Stephen Blaney said that Canada takes a “zero-tolerance approach to anti-Semitism,” listing the BDS movement as a form of discrimination, borrowing the tactic used by Israeli government and Israel advocacy groups to undermine BDS by portraying it as being motivated by anti-Semitism.

The effort to combat BDS became more explicit by May 2015, when a government spokesperson responded to a journalist’s questions on what the government’s zero-tolerance policy response would entail by stating that “hate crimes” would not be allowed to undermine the Canadian way of life, explicitly equating human rights-based Palestine solidarity activism to criminal acts.

No divergence

These events, which have led some to fear the government will eventually move to ban BDS, took place under Conservative rule. Still, the Liberal Party’s recent vote in support of condemning BDS shouldn’t come as a surprise.

An early indicator for the Trudeau-ruled Liberals’ uncritical support of Israel came in July 2014, during Israel’s 51-day attack on Gaza, when the party released a statement claiming that “Israel has the right to defend itself and its people. Hamas is a terrorist organization and must cease its rocket attacks immediately.”

The statement failed to criticize Israel’s mass slaughter of Palestinians.

BDS specifically came under fire shortly thereafter. In March 2015, Trudeau tweeted in response to an upcoming vote to support BDS at McGill University that “The BDS movement, like Israeli Apartheid Week, has no place on Canadian campuses. As a @McGillU alum, I’m disappointed. #EnoughIsEnough.”

Rejecting rights

Trudeau became prime minister on 19 October. Within a week, he called Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, giving an assurance that Canada would continue to be a good ally. Israel’s ambassador to Canada, Rafael Barak, said the call “left his country assured that relations between Canada and the Jewish state will remain strong” since Trudeau had been consistent in supporting Israel throughout his campaign.

“I’m sure maybe the style will change,” the envoy added. “But I don’t feel there will be a change on the substance. I’m really reassured.”

This has been exactly the case as Trudeau has continued to offer Israel uncritical support. At the November 2015 UN General Assembly, a month after Trudeau had come to power, the Canadian government voted against all proposed resolutions supporting the rights of Palestinians.

The vote, which saw Canada reject 16 resolutions, was the exact same as the vote a year earlier when the Conservatives were ruling. The recent vote condemning BDS appears to be an extension of this willingness to support Israel.

Out of touch

The Liberals portrayed the vote as a necessary step in combating anti-Semitism and furthering the economic relationship with Israel, as well as a reflection of Canadian values. The reality is, however, that when it comes to BDS the Canadian government is out of touch with the people it represents.

BDS has been widely supported at Canadian universities. The undergraduate student society at McGill University, representing approximately 30,000 students, passed a motion to support BDS on 22 February, the same day the government condemned the movement (though the McGill vote ultimately failed to be ratified through an online process).

The vote at McGill was a first for the university, but only the latest in a wave of BDS votes on campus throughout the country. In the last three years alone, undergraduate student unions at McMaster University, theUniversity of Windsor, Ryerson University, York University and the University of Toronto Scarborough all passed votes endorsing BDS.

Several graduate student unions have also done the same. University students, as represented by their student societies, hold different views of Israel than the government, seeing the state as a force of oppression in the world as opposed to a friend for Canada.

The Canadian populace at large is also less supportive of Israel than the government would like to acknowledge. No polls specifically measuring support for BDS in Canada have been conducted, but there are several other indicators that Canadians are at least split on the issue at large.

A May 2014 Forum poll found that Canadians are evenly split on who is responsible for the hostilities between Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories. A 2011 BBC World Service poll, meanwhile, found that 46 percent of Canadians surveyed support the recognition of a Palestinian state, with only 25 percent opposed.

Free speech violation

Regardless of public opinion, however, the recent string of anti-BDS motions appears to violate the enshrined Charter of Rights and Freedoms in Canada. The National Council on Canada-Arab Relations issued a statementnoting that the suppression of BDS activism violates freedom of speech.

The leader of the New Democratic Party, the third major party in Canada, also expressed shock with the motion, and most of his party’s MPs voted against it (though the NDP has also cracked down on pro-Palestinian protesters in the past).

Tom Mulcair, the NDP’s leader, said “This goes against the freedom of expression we hold so dear in our society,” adding that BDS can be opposed. “But to call upon the government to condemn someone for having that opinion, that’s unheard of.”

Mulcair said the motion “makes it a thought crime to express an opinion.”

It’s a shame that the Canadian government, whether Liberal or Conservative ruled, is insistent on uncritically supporting Israel. The Liberals could have taken a strong stance against Israel’s human rights violations when they got into power, as they won by a wide enough margin to throw their weight around. Instead, they’ve prioritized perceived economic and political benefits over justice, thereby undermining their claim to be more progressive than the Conservatives.

Davide Mastracci is an associate editor at the Islamic Monthly. He has written for a range of publications including Al Jazeera America, Alternet’s Grayzone Project, The Globe and Mail, and the National Post. Website: davidemastracci.com.

Project For a New American Century and Clean Break: a New Strategy for Securing the Realm for Israel = Full Spectrum Dominance

See last posts here, here, here, here, here and here. This project is being spearheaded by NATO and Israel. It must be remembered that many of these strong Israel supporters have turned on the UN and they now believe that the United States should be a world empire. To learn more about Full Spectrum Dominance see here, here and here. To learn more about the Greater Israel Project see here. To see the former Ambassador to the United States admit that choosing the Sunni over the Shia is the less of two evils, go here and here. While that is not evidence of what I am saying here, it does make it more believable. Also, see this video where two United States Generals admit the funding of radical elements of Islam in the Middle East.

How Israel Shapes America's Foreign Policy

Project for the New American Century

The Israel Lobby in the United States and Britain

Documentary Movie: About the Anti-Defamation League

Watch the movie below, I also highly recommend reading the articles located here, here and here.

The Anti-Defamation League: Covering Up Racism and Israeli War Crimes For Nearly A Century

Note: See here, here and here for past posts on the ADL and its questionable connections.

Posted by Alcibiades Bilzerian

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) was founded in 1913 after Leo Frank, a Jewish executive who raped and strangled a 13-year-old girl, was taken from jail and hung by angry citizens appalled at the governor’s decision to commute his sentence. Many American Jews believed the conviction and subsequent lynching was motivated by anti-Semitism. In response, the Anti-Defamation League was founded with the express purpose of combating anti-Semitism.

Although the ADL was supposedly formed with noble intentions, its subsequent history has been anything but honorable. The Anti-Defamation League has been marred with mob ties almost since its founding, including a close relationship with notorious Jewish mobster Moe Dalitz, who provided funding for the ADL and was rewarded with the league’s highest honor, the Torch of Liberty Award. The Anti-Defamation League also had a close connection to Jewish mob boss Meyer Lanksy, even employing his granddaughter Mira Lansky as their legal liaison today. Following in her grandfather’s footsteps, Mira paid for the luxurious vacations of the Anti-Defamation League spies who perpetrated the infamous 1993 ADL spying scandal, which will be addressed later in the article.

The noble intentions of fighting anti-Semitism and racism were completely corrupted in the 1940′s when, according to Robert Friedman in The Village Voice, May 11, 1993, Vol. XXXVIII No. 19, the ADL began destroying American gentile lives by spying on “leftists” and “communists” and sharing that information with Senator Joseph McCarthy’s House Un-American Committee. As many Americans would like to forget, this communist witch hunt was used as an excuse to destroy American’s careers and reputations based on little to no evidence.

In 1967, Israel purposefully attacked the American naval ship USS Liberty with the intention of murdering every sailor on board and then blaming the attack on Egypt. Israel thought that this “hostile action by Egypt” would get America to change its neutral status on the Israeli-Arab war and form an alliance with Israel to defeat its neighbors. Unfortunately for Israel, a few survivors managed to radio the US command and tell them that Israel was the aggressor, not Egypt. Israel claimed it was an accident; although every survivor of the USS Liberty attack rejected Israel’s mistaken identity story. And Lt. General Marshall Carter, the director of the NSA, told congress the attack, “couldn’t be anything else but deliberate.” The evidence that the attack was deliberate is so overwhelming it is literally an insult to reason to suggest otherwise. The ADL became a propaganda arm of the Israeli government in the 1970′s and 80′s when it was at the forefront of the movement to keep incriminating documents about the USS Liberty Attack confidential. Even to this day the ADL still attempts to cover up the USS Liberty incident on their website, in which they claim it was an accident and call anyone who suggests otherwise, anti-Semitic.

In 1985, it was discovered that a Jewish American named Jonathan Pollard was stealing American secrets and giving them to Israel for money. The wife of Pollard’s handler, Avi Sella, worked for the ADL, and Pollard later admitted that a prominent ADL member was deeply involved in the spying. Like AIPAC, the ADL does not register under the Foreign Agent Registration Act as per the law, even though it works closely with the Mossad, and has been caught spying on Americans for Israel. Through political donations, the ADL has remained above prosecution for these documented crimes. Amazingly, the ADL even had the gumption to shamelessly appeal to President Clinton in 1993 to commute their spy’s sentence.

In 1993, San Francisco newspapers broke the story that the ADL had been paying police officers for confidential information, illegally wire-tapping phones, and even dumpster diving to acquire  private information on American citizens. The Anti-Defamation League later sold the information to the Israeli and South African governments. Among the individuals, the ADL spied on were civil rights activists deemed “anti-Israel”, Congressmen such as Nanci Pelosi, reporters, labor unions, the NAACP, African National Congress, and the Rainbow Coalition. Presumably, the ADL was going to use any damning material acquired during their spying efforts to blackmail these politicians and influential people into changing their stances on Israel. Just one of their spies, Roy Bullock, had compiled files on more than 9,800 Americans and 950 organizations spanning three decades. After the search of the ADL offices, the San Francisco District Attorney said the ADL was conducting a “national spy network.” A few months later, the DA mysteriously retracted the statement.

Robert Friedman reports that, “more than a few Jewish officials privately say the ADL has to decide whether it is a human rights group or a secret police.”

It was later revealed that the ADL was gathering private files on American businessmen of Arab descent and handing them over to the Israeli government, which subsequently harassed and detained these businessmen when they traveled to Israel. In one such case, the ADL actually spied on Arab Americans’ funerals and gave that footage to Israeli intelligence officials who later detained the innocent Arab Americans when they traveled to Israel.

The Israeli lobby in America exploited the events of September 11, 2001 in order to ship thousands of top American law enforcement officials to Israel for counter-terrorism training. The Anti-Defamation League has also boasted on their website of training more than 45,000 American police about Jewish history and even lobbying the FBI to require all new agents and analysts to attend their Jewish history course and visit the US Holocaust Memorial Museum.

Due to the Anti-Defamation League’s distrust of black people, black American academics like Tony Martin and religious figures like Louis Farrakan have been labeled anti-Semitics and threatened for merely exposing Jewish historical records that proved Jewish people actually dominated the African slave trade. The ADL has become an organization that smears people who state facts which happen to be negative to Jewish people rather than an organization that fights racism. The following site describes the anti-gentile racism professor Martin suffered at the hands of the ADL for merely assigning a text book about the African slave trade: See here

In 1975, the ADL published a report titled “Target USA: The Arab Propaganda Offensive,” which smeared peaceful Pro-Arab groups. The ADL then published the book: Pro-Arab Propaganda: Vehicles and Voices, an enemies list of 31 organizations and 34 individuals, which put an “academic hit list” on university professors and student organizations that were opposed to Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians. As a result of the book, many of the professors listed were fired or passed over for promotions. Given that nearly 80% of the top administrators at Ivy League schools are Jewish (as this article proves), the consequences of being put on the ADL’s hit list can be quite severe.

The ADL also puts the names of reporters, activists, and others who speak out about Israel’s human rights abuses on discriminatory lists. Because Jewish Americans control many of the most powerful positions in America, this can be a death sentence for a career in banking, politics, or the media.

Even ardent Jewish organizations have criticized the ADL for inhibiting free speech. The Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) Executive Director Matt Brooks said:

“This effort to stifle debate on US policy toward Israel runs counter to this American tradition. Accordingly, the RJC will not be silenced on this or any issue.”

The Emergency Committee for Israel, one of the most despicable Israeli lobbies in America who launched a massive advertising campaign accusing the OWS movement of anti-Semitism and calling Ron Paul a bad politician, issued the following statement:

“You must be kidding.” It promised that “this attempt to silence those of us who have questioned the current administration’s foreign policy approach vis-a-vis Israel will reenergize us.” ”Directors Harris and Foxman need a refresher course on the virtues of free speech and robust debate in a democracy. Their effort to stifle discussion and debate is unworthy of the best traditions of America, and of Israel.”

In 1990, a former Mossad agent, Victor Ostrovsky, came out and admitted that he worked with the ADL to label people who criticized Israel legitimately as anti-Semitic so they would be discredited and no one would listen to them. Ostrovsky gave an example of a reporter who criticized Israel for cluster bombing Lebanon, which was true. Victor made a call to the New York ADL office and asked them to label the reporter anti-Semitic, which the ADL promptly did. Ostrovsky’s first book sold 8 million copies worldwide, yet his second book was not reviewed in any newspaper in North America because it revealed the truth about the Mossad and its relationship to the ADL. This censorship set a world record in the book publishing industry.

The ADL came under heavy controversy in 2006 after it made a concerted effort to get the Polish Consul General to cancel a speech by civil rights activist Tony Judt that was to be held on their land. The ADL immediately denied having any role in the cancelation of the speech, which would have discussed the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Polish Consul General later told The Washington Post that the ADL had put concerted pressure on him to cancel the event.

The Anti-Defamation League has turned into the exact type of hate group that it was designed to prevent. A former ADL spy, David Gurvitz, actually admitted his involvement in the Anti-Defamation League’s support of the Apartheid in South Africa. Apparently the ADL was illegally obtaining information on anti-apartheid activists and selling that information to the South African government. The ADL’s support for apartheid regimes in the past may explain why they have consistently supported and covered up Israel’s apartheid policies of separating Jewish and Palestinian children in separate and unequal schools. Palestinian schools receive far less funding than Jewish schools. The ADL also supports Israel’s policy of giving Jewish Israelis five times greater access to water than their Arab neighbors and limitations on Palestinians ability to travel and attend sporting events that Jewish Israelis are allowed to attend.

It is surprising that the Anti-Defamation League would cover up an association for civil rights in Israel (ACRI) poll that highlights incredible, rising rates of anti-Arab attitudes in Israel given the ADL’s propensity to publish polls demonstrating anti-Semitism. In 2007, The Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) took a poll which found that 66% of Israeli teens believe Arabs are less intelligent, uncultured, and violent. Fifty percent of the Israelis taking the poll said they would not share an apartment with an Arab, befriend an Arab or let their kids befriend Arabs, or even let Arabs into their homes. A poll taken by the ACRI in 2008 found that these trends were increasing. Another poll taken in 2007 by the Center Against Racism found that 75% of Israeli Jews did not approve of Jews living in the same apartment buildings as Arabs, and that more than 50% of Jews would not have an Arab boss and thought that marrying an Arab was tantamount to national treason. Fifty percent of Israelis also thought Arabs should not be allowed in the same entertainment sites, and 40% wanted Arab’s voting rights rescinded.

The truth is that most Jewish people are not really Semites at all and therefore, this Jewish racism should be called anti-Semitism and fall under the official mandate of the ADL. Some Jewish scholars estimate that 85-95% of modern day Jews are descendants of Khazars, who aren’t Semites. The mere fact that the ADL labels people who they deem against Jews as anti-Semitic is in itself anti-Semitic because it is insinuating that Arabs, who are clearly Semitic, are not real people and are undeserving to be included in their Semitic rhetoric. The article, Jewish Israelis are the worst Anti-Semites On The Planet explains this argument in depth.

Of this photo, the US ambassador wrote, “Scenes like this were common all over the Armenian provinces, in the spring and summer months of 1915. Death in its several forms –massacre, starvation, exhaustion– destroyed the larger part of the refugees. The Turkish policy was that of extermination under the guise of deportation.”

In 2007, The director of the ADL, Abe Foxman, claimed the Armenian genocide was a mere massacre and not a real genocide. He publicly lobbied the American government not to recognize the event as a genocide. The racist ADL leader wanted Jewish people to be the only ones who have suffered from a genocide and therefore, able to monopolize the sympathy that comes with that status. As Peter Beinart, a former zionist, wrote in The Crisis of Zionism, “in the 1970s, American Jewish organizations began hoarding the Holocaust.” After receiving significant national pressure, Foxman recanted his racist comments and changed his mind.

In 2010, the ADL joined hate groups such as the Ku Klux Klan in its opposition to the building of a Muslim community center several blocks away from the September 11, 2001 Ground Zero site. The Muslims had every right to build there, but the ADL opposed the move because of its bigoted attitude towards Muslims.

One has to remember that it was non-gentile organizations like the mainstream media and the ADL that laid sole responsibility of the September 11, 2001 attacks on “Muslim extremists.”  The only ones arrested on 9-11 however were Israeli Mossad agents who were caught filming the attacks and celebrating afterwards (Also, see this article.) It was later concluded by the FBI that Israel had to have known about the attacks beforehand and purposefully did not warn the US, or had a direct role in the attacks. (Please see here, this is a larger problem than Israel alone.) In addition, the person who profited most from the attacks was Larry Silverstein, a Jewish American with close ties to the current and former Israeli Prime Ministers. Silverstein landed a 99-year lease for the world trade center shortly before the attacks and immediately doubled the insurance specifically for a terrorist attack. The Anti-Defamation League has tried mightily to keep this information out of the mainstream media and has also attempted to censor this information by calling people who state these facts, anti-Semitic.

On a side note, the ADL is a strong supporter of destroying the second amendment right for Americans to own guns. The ADL supported the District of Columbia in the District of Columbia vs Heller, in which the government was arguing that the Second Amendment does not prevent a city from banning firearms even when they are being used in the defense of one’s home. The ADL’s actions to deprive fellow Americans of their constitutional rights has been so egregious that other Jewish groups like Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership has claimed that the ADL promotes “Nazi based laws.”

The Five Worst CIA Operations Ever: the Precursor to Homeland Security is MKUltra and the Phoenix Program

In the video located below, you will see some of what I am describing in this article. Much of the alternative media on the internet is set up to be like flypaper to attract the people they are looking for in the new Phoenix Program. See also this article here. The internet is about a wider agenda in itself. The internet (at least the publicly available internet, including VPN's,) right from its very inception, has always been connected to DARPA, Intelligence, military intelligence etc. Don't let them fool you.  Understand that among other things, one of the goals of the internet is to find people that criticize those with political and economic power. (See this document and this video to see for yourself what official government documents are saying, that we will see an increase between the "haves" and the "have-nots,"and that that the "haves" are going to start seeing the "have-nots" as a potential problem.) Also, see here, here and here for what they do when they identify you as a threat.

It is part of a bigger plan. One of creating a global surveillance brain. It's a eugenics and Transhumanist project. (See here, here, here, here, here, here and here for more about this.)

Now, as for the video below ---- the first major problem with it is that it understates how evil MKUltra really was and is, (for example, they only talk about mind control with drugs.)

Even the Wikipedia write-up acknowledges the use of electronics. (Update: it used to, someone went into Wikipedia and edited the MKULTRA article, I wonder why? I have now put up the old link that refers to it that they took down.) 

The reality is, they quickly learned that using brain chips, nanotechnology, electromagnetic stimulation, and electromagnetic weapons are the most effective way to influence, discredit, and destroy targets. They can now perform no-touch torture, this way it is done in a plausibly deniable way. See here and here for information about this. Add along with this active slander campaigns, organized stalking, and other Stasi techniques.

The next major problem with the video is it says that MKUltra and the Phoenix Program ended... they didn't. Both of them are precursors to Homeland Security and the Stasi system that has been put into place since September 11, 2001. You have to understand that people who criticize Zionist power, the policies of NATO, Israel or those who sympathize with the supposed enemy, (i.e. the Palestinians,) are the new Viet Cong that have to be discredited or neutralized before their "memes" can influence others.

But not just these issues. This is a political agenda run by fascist psychopathic control freaks that hate your freedom. They are rolling out the list of people they are keeping tabs on. See here and here for more. Once you understand this, you begin to see the very sinister nature behind some of the classified technology that I have been talking about on this blog. See here, here and here.

Now, watch the video:

How Covert Agents Infiltrate The Internet To Manipulate, Deceive, And Destroy Reputations

Introductory note: Below is an article by Glenn Greenwald that pretty much describes what the intelligence agencies are doing to discredit people. Though, because he's a phony cover for the controlled media, (see here and here,) he leaves out how they have technology to influence human behavior, (see here,) or what they call "influencing the human domain." So, the worst of our problems are not internet and phone data collection etc. They also have the capability to kill or maim you from a remote location. (See here for more on this.)

A couple other points to make, Edward Snowden is not a real person. It is interesting and noteworthy that Glenn Greenwald has played an instrumental role in releasing the supposed "classified" Snowden documents. Don't be fooled. No real spy is going to be invited on NBC, by TedTalk or by a comedian named John Oliver. Unfortunately, it is even worse than what Snowden says because they have access to your brain and body. This is why Snowden is a phony, he is a liar by omission as I say here. He is also, if you can believe it, a character from a book and a movie! It is almost like these lying Zionist intelligence psychopaths are throwing it in your face and laughing at you. They want to see if you are awake to their lies. 

Also, the supposed "Hacktivist" group Anonymous isn't real either. Real in the sense of being a true threat to the people in power. Why? Because only hackers that work for intelligence cannot be caught... especially ones that release videos then put them on the internet and are interviewed by supposed "journalists." You have to understand that it is very challenging to go onto the internet and not be found. Once they find you, they would have your brain and body under constant surveillance. The internet (at least the publicly available internet, including VPN's,) right from its very inception, has always been connected to DARPA, Intelligence, military intelligence etc.

In this sense, nothing has changed. Don't let them fool you. But that's not the worst of it... they also have the ability to mine brains with their surveillance technology. They can set up "thought" alerts from brains the same way they can do with internet comments, emails, or phone calls. Understand that one of the goals of the internet is to find people that criticize those with political and economic power. It is part of a bigger plan. One of creating a global surveillance brain. It's a eugenics and Transhumanist project. (See here, here, here, here, here and here for more about this.) I also recommend reading the article below in light of this extremely important post.

============================================================================

by Glenn Greenwald

One of the many pressing stories that remain to be told from the archive is how western intelligence agencies are attempting to manipulate and control online discourse with extreme tactics of deception and reputation-destruction. It’s time to tell a chunk of that story, complete with the relevant documents.

Over the last several weeks, I worked to publish a series of articles about “dirty trick” tactics used by GCHQ’s (GCHQ is the U.K. version of the NSA,) previously secret unit, JTRIG (Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group). These were based on four classified GCHQ documents presented to the NSA and the other three partners in the English-speaking “Five Eyes” alliance. Today, we at the Intercept are publishing another new JTRIG document, in full, entitled “The Art of Deception: Training for Online Covert Operations.”

By publishing these stories one by one, our NBC reporting highlighted some of the key, discrete revelations: the monitoring of YouTube and Blogger, the targeting of Anonymous with the very same DDoS attacks they accuse “hacktivists” of using, the use of “honey traps” (luring people into compromising situations using sex) and destructive viruses. But, here, I want to focus and elaborate on the overarching point revealed by all of these documents: namely, that these agencies are attempting to control, infiltrate, manipulate, and warp online discourse, and in doing so, are compromising the integrity of the internet itself.

Among the core self-identified purposes of JTRIG are two tactics: (1) to inject all sorts of false material onto the internet in order to destroy the reputation of its targets; and (2) to use social sciences and other techniques to manipulate online discourse and activism to generate outcomes it considers desirable. To see how extremist these programs are, just consider the tactics they boast of using to achieve those ends: “false flag operations” (posting material to the internet and falsely attributing it to someone else), fake victim blog posts (pretending to be a victim of the individual whose reputation they want to destroy), and posting “negative information” on various forums. Here is one illustrative list of tactics from the latest GCHQ document we’re publishing today:

Other tactics aimed at individuals are listed here, under the revealing title “discredit a target”:

Then there are the tactics used to destroy companies the agency targets:

GCHQ describes the purpose of JTRIG in starkly clear terms: “using online techniques to make something happen in the real or cyber world,” including “information ops (influence or disruption).”

Critically, the “targets” for this deceit and reputation-destruction extend far beyond the customary roster of normal spycraft: hostile nations and their leaders, military agencies, and intelligence services. In fact, the discussion of many of these techniques occurs in the context of using them in lieu of “traditional law enforcement” against people suspected (but not charged or convicted) of ordinary crimes or, more broadly still, “hacktivism”, meaning those who use online protest activity for political ends.

The title page of one of these documents reflects the agency’s own awareness that it is “pushing the boundaries” by using “cyber offensive” techniques against people who have nothing to do with terrorism or national security threats, and indeed, centrally involves law enforcement agents who investigate ordinary crimes:

No matter your views on Anonymous, “hacktivists” or garden-variety criminals, it is not difficult to see how dangerous it is to have secret government agencies being able to target any individuals they want – who have never been charged with, let alone convicted of, any crimes – with these sorts of online, deception-based tactics of reputation destruction and disruption. There is a strong argument to make, as Jay Leiderman demonstrated in the Guardian in the context of the Paypal 14 hacktivist persecution, that the “denial of service” tactics used by hacktivists result in (at most) trivial damage (far less than the cyber-warfare tactics favored by the US and UK) and are far more akin to the type of political protest protected by the First Amendment.

The broader point is that, far beyond hacktivists, these surveillance agencies have vested themselves with the power to deliberately ruin people’s reputations and disrupt their online political activity even though they’ve been charged with no crimes, and even though their actions have no conceivable connection to terrorism or even national security threats. As Anonymous expert Gabriella Coleman of McGill University told me, “targeting Anonymous and hacktivists amounts to targeting citizens for expressing their political beliefs, resulting in the stifling of legitimate dissent.” Pointing to this study she published, Professor Coleman vehemently contested the assertion that “there is anything terrorist/violent in their actions.”

Government plans to monitor and influence internet communications, and covertly infiltrate online communities in order to sow dissension and disseminate false information, have long been the source of speculation. Harvard Law Professor Cass Sunstein, a close Obama adviser and the White House’s former head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, wrote a controversial paper in 2008 proposing that the US government employ teams of covert agents and pseudo-”independent” advocates to “cognitively infiltrate” online groups and websites, as well as other activist groups.

Sunstein also proposed sending covert agents into “chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups” which spread what he views as false and damaging “conspiracy theories” about the government. Ironically, the very same Sunstein was recently named by Obama to serve as a member of the NSA review panel created by the White House, one that – while disputing key NSA claims – proceeded to propose many cosmetic reforms to the agency’s powers (most of which were ignored by the President who appointed them).

But these GCHQ documents are the first to prove that a major western government is using some of the most controversial techniques to disseminate deception online and harm the reputations of targets. Under the tactics they use, the state is deliberately spreading lies on the internet about whichever individuals it targets, including the use of what GCHQ itself calls “false flag operations” and emails to people’s families and friends. Who would possibly trust a government to exercise these powers at all, let alone do so in secret, with virtually no oversight, and outside of any cognizable legal framework?

Then there is the use of psychology and other social sciences to not only understand, but shape and control, how online activism and discourse unfolds. Today’s newly published document touts the work of GCHQ’s “Human Science Operations Cell,” devoted to “online human intelligence” and “strategic influence and disruption”:

Under the title “Online Covert Action”, the document details a variety of means to engage in “influence and info ops” as well as “disruption and computer net attack,” while dissecting how human beings can be manipulated using “leaders,” “trust,” “obedience” and “compliance”:

The documents lay out theories of how humans interact with one another, particularly online, and then attempt to identify ways to influence the outcomes – or “game” it:

We submitted numerous questions to GCHQ, including: (1) Does GCHQ in fact engage in “false flag operations” where material is posted to the Internet and falsely attributed to someone else?; (2) Does GCHQ engage in efforts to influence or manipulate political discourse online?; and (3) Does GCHQ’s mandate include targeting common criminals (such as boiler room operators), or only foreign threats?

As usual, they ignored those questions and opted instead to send their vague and nonresponsive boilerplate: “It is a longstanding policy that we do not comment on intelligence matters. Furthermore, all of GCHQ’s work is carried out in accordance with a strict legal and policy framework which ensures that our activities are authorized, necessary and proportionate, and that there is rigorous oversight, including from the Secretary of State, the Interception and Intelligence Services Commissioners and the Parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee. All our operational processes rigorously support this position.”

These agencies’ refusal to “comment on intelligence matters” – meaning: talk at all about anything and everything they do – is precisely why whistleblowing is so urgent, the journalism that supports it so clearly in the public interest, and the increasingly unhinged attacks by these agencies so easy to understand. Claims that government agencies are infiltrating online communities and engaging in “false flag operations” to discredit targets are often dismissed as conspiracy theories, but these documents leave no doubt they are doing precisely that.

Whatever else is true, no government should be able to engage in these tactics: what justification is there for having government agencies target people – who have been charged with no crime – for reputation-destruction, infiltrate online political communities, and develop techniques for manipulating online discourse? But to allow those actions with no public knowledge or accountability is particularly unjustifiable.

Documents referenced in this article:

The Art of Deception: Training for a New Generation of Online Covert Operations