Tag Archives: strong cities network

Derrick Broze/Activist Post: The Department of Justice Prepares to Step up War on Domestic Extremists

Re-posted, with many thanks to Derrick Broze for this timely pulling-together of information, from Activist Post. “Domestic Extremism” and “Domestic Terrorism” are labels that have long been touted by DHS and the Department of Justice as intrinsically meaningful. But are they really? As we see increasing signs of totalitarian control stepped up around us, one has to ask: Are all Americans engaging in and creating free speech, independent thinking, and independent media, as well as Americans speaking out and pursuing sovereignty, liberty, peace, harmonious co-existence, representative democracy, and justice–all of these hallmarks of once-free USA–now going to be labelled Domestic Extremists or Material/Media Supporters of Domestic Extremism? Who puts the brakes on such misled efforts at absolute control? Please note the Stong Cities Network references below, as well as excerpted Truth in Media‘s findings on current Govt. characterizings of interest in sovereignty, including the attitudes and acts of some of the earliest Americans, the Founding Fathers, who sought to break away from British colonial rule, as extremist.

In the convoluted world of language appropriation evident in Military and Homeland Security training manuals, as noted—and linked below–by Jay SyrmoPoulos’ Truth in Media article, criticism, enquiry, and dissent are being re-cast as Hate, and as we know, there is a huge movement underfoot currently, including on our University campuses, that seeks Political Correctness in decrying a vast multitude of expressions of Free Speech as Hate Speech.

How does awareness, clear thinking, critical thinking, or critiquing Government policy or actions become “anti-government extremism”?

Perhaps it is time for American Departments of English to speak out.

***

The Department of Justice Prepares to Step up War on Domestic Extremists

police_stateBy Derrick Broze

Senior officials with the U.S. Department of Justice recently announced possible legal changes which could allow the government greater room to combat so-called “anti-government extremists”.

On Thursday February 4, Reuters reported that John Carlin, the Justice Department’s chief of national security, and federal prosecutors are looking for new tools to deal with the rise of “domestic extremists.”

“Based on recent reports and the cases we are seeing, it seems like we’re in a heightened environment,” Carlin told Reuters. Reuters notes that the U.S. government is facing an increase in opposition from militia groups, “sovereign citizens,” and other “anti-government extremists.”

However, federal officials like Carlin claim they are impeded in their pursuit of violent domestic terrorists because, although there is currently a U.S. law that prohibits “material” support of internationally recognized terror groups, there is not such a law for domestic groups. Reuters reports:

Carlin and other Justice Department officials declined to say if they would ask Congress for a comparable domestic extremist statute, or comment on what other changes they might pursue to toughen the fight against anti-government extremists.

The U.S. State Department designates international terrorist organizations to which it is illegal to provide “material support.” No domestic groups have that designation, helping to create a disparity in charges faced by international extremist suspects compared to domestic ones.

Carlin told Reuters that his counter-terrorism team is taking a “thoughtful look at the nature and scope of the domestic terrorism threat” and looking for “potential legal improvements and enhancements to better combat those threats.” The Justice Department will identify cases being prosecuted at the state level that “could arguably meet the federal definition of domestic terrorism.”

Carlin and his team are not only remaining quiet about whether or not they are pursuing the legal changes but the entire team has not been revealed to the public. This means we have an unelected, secret team of people working on identifying which Americans should be deemed “domestic extremists.”

Will Freedom Activists be Targeted?

Carlin’s silence should alarm all activists who consider themselves opposed to the policies of the U.S. government. Not only are those who espouse anti-government or pro-freedom rhetoric likely to be targeted but the penalty for being a part of such a group, or supporting such a group could eventually mean years in prison. Current laws allow for a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison for Americans who support groups on the State Department list of designated terrorist organizations.

Under a 1994 law federal prosecutors could attempt to bring “material support” terrorism charges against people who are linked to groups not on the State Department’s list but this has only happened twice since the law was enacted. If the Justice Department creates a list of groups that are deemed extremist or terrorist this could lead to stifling of free speech and expression.

Part of the problem is the broad definition of “extremism” itself. As far as the pursuit and defense against “extremism” is concerned, the United States government has failed to adequately define the term, and by doing so, is allowing for perfectly legal behavior to become taboo or even criminalized. In June 2014, TruthInMedia’s Jay Syrmopoulos wrote about this trend:

First there was the MIAC report, which claimed that potential terrorists include people who own gold, Ron Paul supporters, libertarians, and even people who fly the U.S. flag.

Then in 2012, there was a leaked Homeland Security study that claimed Americans who are ‘reverent of individual liberty,’ and ‘suspicious of centralized federal authority’ are possible ‘extreme right-wing’ terrorists.

More recently, there is a Department of Defense training manual, obtained by Judicial Watch via a FOIA request, that lists people who embrace “individual liberties” and honor “states’ rights,” among other characteristics, as potential “extremists” who are likely to be members of “hate groups.”

This document goes on to call the Founding Fathers extremists, stating, “In U.S. history, there are many examples of extremist ideologies and movements,“ including “[t]he colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule.”

If the United States government cannot clearly define who it is targeting in its war on extremism how are the people supposed to trust that these programs will not simply be used to target outspoken activists and critics of the government?

A Domestic War on “Extremism”

These possible legal changes are only the latest effort to combat “extremism” by the Justice Department. In October 2015 Anti Media reported that the United Nations and the Department of Justice announced the creation of a new program designed to help local communities combat “violent extremism.” Called the Strong Cities Network (SCN), the plan calls for “systematic efforts” to “share experiences, pool resources and build a community of cities to inspire local action on a global scale.”

U.S. Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch said, “The Strong Cities Network will serve as a vital tool to strengthen capacity-building and improve collaboration,”and will “enable cities to learn from one another, to develop best practices and to build social cohesion and community resilience here at home and around the world.”

“To counter violent extremism we need determined action at all levels of governance,” said Governing Mayor Stian Berger Røsland of Oslo. “To succeed, we must coordinate our efforts and cooperate across borders.”

The creation of the Smart Cities Network comes after the Justice Department announced it would revive a task force on domestic terrorism in an attempt to stop violence within the United States. In June 2014, former Attorney General Eric Holder stated the Domestic Terrorism Executive Committee would work to eliminate dangers from violent individuals who may be motivated by anti-government or racist views. The Federal Bureau of Investigation, the National Security Division of the Justice Department, and the Attorney General’s Advisory Committee are in charge of the efforts. The committee was originally launched to focus on right-wing extremism in the aftermath of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.

As Americans slowly awaken to the truth of the American Empire, the powers that wish they were are scrambling to tighten their control grid. If the American public will not be subdued and distracted by elections or deadstream media bread and circuses, the Ruling Class will have to resort to more direct methods of stifling freedom. This presents the perfect opportunity for those living amongst the zombies to organize and strategize for solutions that do not rely on government or their corporate partners.

Derrick Broze is an investigative journalist and liberty activist. He is a news editor for ActivistPost.com and the founder of the TheConsciousResistance.com. Follow him on Twitter.

This article may be freely reposted in part or in full with author attribution and source link.

Source: Activist Post

Please visit Activist Post for other significant news articles and analysis on an ongoing basis.

Global Policing, Global Governance, Unlimited AUMF, Setting the Stage for International Martial Law/One World Disorder/Global Domination…?

On a day when it seems, looking at Mainstream Media, it’s just “business as usual” in the downplaying way the Malheur Refuge/Harney County actions of aggression by the Federal Government are being reported, I’m just connecting a few dots here; the whole focus on Global Policing and Global Systems Surveillance and Intelligence is too close not to be remarked on; and while I’m not a fan of fear-mongering and fixating on martial law doom scenarios, it’s hard not to notice what is going on. Just in case you missed the recent Senate move to pass a revamped version of the AUMF giving the US President unlimited powers to start a war anytime, anywhere, minus Congressional input, here is more on this subject, from Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut:

Many articles online about this, including this post at Activist Post by Joshua Krause/The Daily Sheeple:

Excerpt: Make no mistake, this doesn’t grant Obama the authority to strike ISIS. This gives him unlimited war powers in the broadest sense. ISIS has popped up all over the world. Countless insurgencies and terrorist groups have aligned themselves to the group. They encourage Muslims in every country to conduct terror attacks in their name, even if they’ve never met that person. ISIS isn’t just a group of zealots in Syria and Iraq; they are a banner which people can rally around, which means that ISIS can technically be anywhere.

In other words, this AUMF wouldn’t just give Obama permission strike ISIS anywhere in the world. It gives him the ability to deploy our military anywhere in the world, foreign or domestic, for an undetermined period of time, at the mere suggestion that ISIS is there. And it won’t be hard for them to prove ISIS is there, since anyone can wave their flag and carry out attacks in their name.

By now this should all sound very familiar to you. 9/11 invoked the same response from our government. They declared a War on Terrorism, which is nothing more than a tactic that anyone could use, thus allowing our government to take its war machine into any country on the planet.

But after the Bush administration fell out of favor with the American public, so too did the War on Terror. The war never stopped of course, but the term has lost its emotional charge, and isn’t used very often anymore. This bill aims to bring back the same sentiment with different words. It’s the War on Terror 2.0, which will henceforth be dubbed “The War on ISIS,” coming to a town near you. Full article here/Activist Post

Then there’s that Global Police Force we heard about earlier, to solve “Domestic Extremism” –codeword for American Dissent/American Freedom Movement/American Independent Thinking/American Activism?–launching “Strong Cities Networks” all across the United States, which Kris Anne Hall deconstructed for us, here, and Global Co-operation and Global Systems in Intelligence and Surveillance being set up–by Globalists/Internationalists/Central Bankers?–to address, surprise, once more Domestic Extremism/Homeland Security, which was publicly discussed last fall by certain international Intelligence Agency heads at George Washington University, reported here earlier.

It’s hard not to see where this is leading, or where the folks doing this would like it to lead.  Many steps are being taken in many different arenas, it seems, to tighten the noose around us and lead us inexorably to a One World Government based fully in totalitarian control, full-spectrum-dominance, all-systems control, weather control, human control, land control, neuro/thought control, mind control.

Today’s actions in Oregon underline the ruthlessness of the actors.

Judge Anna von Reitz has addressed these actions as well as the concept of martial law in a Notice to the Supreme Court, to be posted here separately–but you can see it online right now at Paulstramer.net or Scanned Retina.

Also, see her letter there on the issue of the commercial lien recently placed on various parties, including the International Bar Association, American Bar Association, and the Department of Justice. Many revealing bits of information there, including on the current insolvency of US Inc., the private government services corporation posing as Government, and offers by the World Bank and others to buy out this corporation…to be posted here shortly.

Excerpt here from the recent 1/26 State of the Nation article, with a personal disclaimer re. Pamela Geller’s words excerpted below: I don’t in any way condone or support equating Islam with terrorism or violent extremism; in my understanding, Islam is being propagandaistically used in this way, and has been, for years and decades, by the US Govt and CIA:  Obama Administration and UN Announce Global Police Force to Fight ‘Extremism’ In U.S.

by Pamela Geller
Breitbart.com

On Wednesday, Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced at the United Nations that her office would be working in several American cities to form what she called the Strong Cities Network (SCN), a law enforcement initiative that would encompass the globe.

This amounts to nothing less than the overriding of American laws, up to and including the United States Constitution, in favor of United Nations laws that would henceforth be implemented in the United States itself – without any consultation of Congress at all.

The United Nations is a sharia-compliant world body, and Obama, speaking there just days ago, insisted that “violent extremism” is not exclusive to Islam (which it is). Obama is redefining jihad terror to include everyone but the jihadists. So will the UN, driven largely by the sharia-enforcing Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and the pro-Islamic post-American President Obama, use a “global police force” to crush counter-jihad forces?

After all, with Obama knowingly aiding al-Qaeda forces in Syria, how likely is it that he will use his “global police force” against actual Islamic jihadists? I suspect that instead, this global police force will be used to impose the blasphemy laws under the sharia (Islamic law), and to silence all criticism of Islam for the President who proclaimed that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”

What is a global police force doing in our cities? This is exactly the abdication of American sovereignty that I warned about in my book, The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America. The Obama Department of Justice made it clear that it was exactly that when it distributed a press release last week announcing the “Launch of Strong Cities Network to Strengthen Community Resilience Against Violent Extremism.” In that press release, the DoJ complained that “while many cities and local authorities are developing innovative responses to address this challenge, no systematic efforts are in place to share experiences, pool resources and build a community of cities to inspire local action on a global scale.”

So if the local and municipal effort to counter the euphemistic and disingenuous “violent extremism” is inadequate and hasn’t developed “systematic efforts are in place to share experiences, pool resources and build a community of cities to inspire local action on a global scale,” the feds – and the UN – have to step in. Thus the groundwork is being laid for federal and international interference down to the local level. Please continue reading at State of the Nation.

 

Bernie Suarez/Truth and Art TV: Post Paris Attacks Mass Media Rolls Out New Phrase- ‘International Manhunt’!

The co-opting of language in the militarizing of mass consciousness covered in this thought-provoking article by Bernie Suarez at Truth and Art TV.  Please visit Truth and Art TV for the full article.

imExcerpt: “The supposed manhunt for the so-called eighth suspect is not just a manhunt. The special phrase recently rolled out is “International manhunt“. I believe in light of all the stated goals for a “global” police force, this may very well have been the primary purpose for the Paris attacks. Agenda 2030 talks about the goals for global “peace” and “prosperity” and you can’t have global peace without insinuating that we’ll need some kind of global police force. The “Strong Cities Network” is another new world order agenda already in play where cities around the world are being asked to volunteer into this cooperative project where cities will focus on “global” security in light of what they claim is global extremism and terrorism.

All the writing is on the wall. And with the new concept of “International manhunt” being rolled out, that only means one thing. They are conditioning everyone into accepting this unified global police effort. We can expect to hear this phrase a lot more often.

As I mentioned in my article previous to this one, I believe portraying ISIS as a supposedly “super-mobile” terror group was the plan all along to justify the call for a Strong Cities Network and a global police force. I believe this push for a global police is taking place partially because the West is realizing they could lose their ISIS fighters in Syria so they might as well use ISIS to establish the global police. ”

Source: Post Paris Attacks Mass Media Rolls Out New Phrase- ‘International Manhunt’!

Related:

Strong Cities, Smart Growth, Mega Regions: Agenda 21’s Frenzied Planning for Global Policing and Stacked Housing Rolls Out in the USA

Rosa Koire Spells it Out: Agenda 21/Agenda 2030 is the Blueprint for High-Tech Concentration Camps of the Future

One World Government/Global Governance/Agenda 21/Agenda 2030/Sheathed Totalitarianism

Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh, Canada Free Press: The Terrifying Tentacles of One World Governance

Michael Snyder/The Economic Collapse Blog: The 2030 Agenda: This Month The UN Launches A Blueprint For A New World Order With The Help Of The Pope

Co-Creating Our Future On Planet Earth: UPDATED: Hollywood Mind Control & The California Drought Atrocity

Patriot News II: Vatican Creates New Project: Blue Beam Fake Alien “Discovery” as Serge Monast Predicted 21 Years Ago