Paris Terror Attacks: More Proof That Mass Surveillance Does NOT Work

12

 

 

In the wake of the recent Paris terror attacks, it would be tempting to give in to our instincts. To once again limit our own freedoms. To allow the government still greater control over our lives. To allow them to watch over us… or to just watch us. To give in to fear.

 

When bad guys rear their ugly heads, we assume that government mass surveillance will keep us warm, comfy and safe… but is this true? Let us look at their track-record before we leap into the fire.

 

Right after France’s 2014 Charlie Hebdo terror attack, Edward Snowden pointed out that mass-surveillance programs don’t work because they are “burying people under too much data”. Indeed, just a year before the attack, France had imposed one of the harshest and most intrusive surveillance laws in the entirety of Europe which would allow them to collect boatloads of data.

 

It did not “work”.

 

In fact, TWO of the terrorists were not only known to French and U.S. authorities… one of them even had a prior terrorism conviction, while the other was monitored for YEARS by French authorities… monitoring which stopped less than a year before the attack on the magazine. They had REAL dirt on these men, derived OUTSIDE of bulk surveillance. NOT your naked social media photos, and yet still they “failed” to act.

 

After Charlie Hebdo, the French government called for all-powerful “Big Brother” surveillance powers, allowing police to break into homes in order to plant bugs, cameras, microphones and key-loggers and force ISPs to install “black boxes” which record and analyse all internet metadata. When your freedom of speech is being threatened, why not let the government help the terrorists and take it away for them?

 

Despite their earlier failure, they wanted you to believe that even stronger surveillance was the solution.

 

It did not “work” AGAIN.

 

In fact, the French government KNEW of one of the terrorists. AGAIN, they garnered this info without using dragnet surveillance. To add insult to injury, the French govt had been warned of an impending attack one day prior by the Iraqi govt. They failed to act on real info. AGAIN. Indeed, they rush to action only after the attack.

 

You need to ask yourself, if this data about you is NOT for your safety... if they CANNOT use this data, if it “confuses” them into NOT even acting on specific information that they ALREADY HAVE… then why do they need our data?

 

 

The US is perhaps the best example of how useless mass surveillance is for thwarting terror attacks. In the Boston Bombing, both of the Tsarnaevs were outed by Russian intelligence to the US. The Russian pleas, however, would go ignored- perhaps there was too much background noise, too many leads, when everybody could be a terrorist.

 

Or perhaps government spy agencies don’t really care very much about our lives, and again we must ask why they need our data.

 

In 2009, the underwear bomber nearly brought down a plane. Counterterrorism Center (NCC) director Michael Leiter claimed that it was because the federal Intelligence Community (IC) had failed “to connect, integrate, and fully understand the intelligence” it had collected.

 

They had all the damned info from real investigations, clouded by bulk data…  even they themselves would admit that they just had no idea what to do with it as a result. Why do they need our data?

 

Let’s look at September 11th, the granddaddy of terror attacks that started it ALL. The Congressional Joint Inquiry (2002) and the 9/11 Commission found that the attacks were preventable- that the US government had ALL the information they needed to prevent the attack and DID NOT NEED MORE DATA. It was the lack of competence, and genuine care for we the people, that allowed this attack to happen, because the government did not care to share analyse or disseminate the info it had.

 

It was NOT a lack of data, as the Bush administration would claim, that led to its misstep, but Bush’s purposeful ignorance of  MULTIPLE warnings by his own advisers that sept 11th would occur.

 

If it was ” sharing, analysis, and dissemination” that was lacking, why do they not improve those areas, why do they need more of our data?

 

Can you GUESS how many terror programs the NSA has stopped? A report by the New America Foundation last year revealed that they had stopped… drum-roll please… a whopping ZERO attacks.

 

Indeed, every time the NSA (spy agencies and politicians are SO trustworthy!) claims to have stopped an attack, we find that they have been discredited (together with most of their other claims)- they LIE about their own successes, these men who use YOU as their own porn collection!

 

Mass surveillance programs fail, and as they grow… they fail MORE. Yet instead of admitting their failure, the government uses failure as a reason to increase the scale of such programs. If using gasoline to put out a fire fails, we just need more of it! Let’s blame the lack of gasoline for our problems… and not the man holding the emptied canister.

 

If mass surveillance has literally saved nobody, if it clouds real judgement, if in most cases governments do not even care enough to “rise above parochial bureaucratic interests in the name of
protecting the American people” (according to the Congressional Joint Enquiry)…

 

Then why do they want our data? Because mas surveillance was never intended to combat terror, silly goose. It was meant to fill you with terror.

Sources: National Journal, Reason, New America, The Guardian, Global Research, RT


This Article (Paris Terror Attacks: More Proof That Mass Surveillance Does NOT Work) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to the author(CoNN) and AnonHQ.com.

 

Anonymous recommends: Click Here To Surf & Download Anonymously, Protect Yourself From Any Hackers Or Spy Agencies And Get Around Censorship Filters

 

Do you like our independent & investigative news? Then please check these two settings on Facebook to guarantee you don't miss our posts: anonymous news feed and notifications

 

12 COMMENTS

    • No, they dont need to BREAK THE LAW and take all of our information. When is the last time you let someone come into YOUR HOME and rummage through your MAIL, and EMAIL, and listen on your couch to your PHONE CALLS?

      Giving up your freedoms because your government says you should makes you a SHEEP, not a person who will help the advancement of our society.

  1. 7 attacks in 6 mths stopped in the UK. How many lives saved.
    They can have my data, but then I’m not the criminal biding behind a mask.

    • They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
      :Benjamin Franklin

    • “saying that mass monitoring does not bother me because i have nothing to reproach myself is like saying that freedom of expression is useless because I have nothing to say”

    • Stuart, you need to stop being one of the sheeple. I’m not a criminal either, but I don’t want the police just coming along anytime and searching me or my property, wasting my time AND their time for no reason other then just to search. Mass searching does NOT make us any safer, it only increases the police state!!!

  2. Looks like you’ve attracted the paid .gov comment trolls. You must be doing something right.

    Unconstitutional mass-surveillance is not about protecting us, it’s about predicting our behavior, and knowing how to modify it: it’s purely about control.

    Our welfare is not something they care about.

  3. This is all corporate greed, everything has to do with control, you are owned. The war machine, and the creator of the war machine, control us. This have no fcks to give, they are a huge group and we aren’t invited.

  4. Well.. when it’s a false flag, of course it doesn’t work. Some glaring anomalies. The ‘un-blurred’ photo of the Rock Concert venue shows no blood stains on any victims clothing, there are about 20 victims not 100+, no body parts of the 2 suicide bombers are visible, the ‘dead’ bodies lie in comfortable positions, there are no bodies at the entrance where gunmen allegedly opened fire and the bodies are unguarded. We have not been shown any hospital visits to the 300 injured by Govt. Ministers nor relatives.

    No false flag planning is perfect. (Building 7 on BBC)!

    http://bosniapress.info/index.php/news-in-english-articles/2459-paris-attack-reported-on-wikipedia-and-twitter-before-it-happened

    There is strong evidence that the French Government murdered victims while and then planted the bodies at the club. Mexican girl was confirmed alive after the ‘shooting’ when her family called her boyfriends phone. Nohemi Gonzalez who died was confirmed alive after the Club shooting, was then detained by the French authorities!

    Was this another false flag such as 9/11, 7/7 and Madrid? Many believe so. This could have been for several purposes. To stem the refugees flow into Europe and to be able to easily deport. Some suggest that to really bomb IS, which to date neither US and team have done.. except supply them with air-dropped ammo, food and meds. What then did the US team bomb to date? Infrastructure, oil wells, pumps refineries and the desert sand. Maybe as events unexpectedly unfolded and with IS on it’s last legs thanks to Bad Vlad, evidence of the massive nato infrastructure that’s been built up in Al-Raqqa needs to be destroyed before it’s liberation and thus exposure.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here