© 21st Century Wire
The idea of a government quietly assembling lists of people to be eliminated might sound like something from a John le Carré spy thriller, but in France, it's actually documented history. In 2017, the French media outlet Le Monde published an excerpt from an investigation conducted by a reputable investigative journalist, Vincent Nouzille, which shocked even seasoned observers of intelligence affairs. The French newspaper revealed some of the findings described in Nouzille's book, titled Erreurs fatales, where he explores the grey areas of the French intelligence services, and asserts that for years, France has compiled lists of individuals marked for assassination — people considered hostile not only because of acts of terrorism or kidnapping, but for operating "against France's interests."
According to the report, these names were submitted directly to the President of the Republic for approval. Former French President François Hollande, in interviews cited in the article, acknowledged that he himself had authorised such killings, giving his personal assent to operations conducted by the French Secret Services (DGSE) or military special forces — far from any courtroom or judicial oversight. Interestingly, French records indicate that Emmanuel Macron was an advisor to then President Hollande at Élysée Palace for two years before becoming Francois Hollande's Minister of the Economy, Industry and Digital Affairs in 2014. Whether he was aware of such a policy is still unclear. Nonetheless, the very existence of the policy should be beyond rebuttal at this point.
The revelations from the investigation describes a clandestine apparatus capable of operating across continents, while executing missions with minimal transparency, and with absolute political discretion. Judges in France were often outraged to discover that individuals they sought to investigate had been subsequently killed without any consultation. Intelligence officials, meanwhile, defended the practice as a necessary extension of state power in a dangerous world. Whatever one's interpretation, the reporting left little doubt: the French state has not only built the capacity for such extrajudicial action, it has actually used it.
In France, many people still vividly recall the tale of a "Freemason killer network", which included members of the "Athanor Lodge. Their sinister actions sparked a captivating, yet deeply unsettling investigation which would uncovered a criminal organization linked directly to DGSE enforcers. Some of the individuals implicated and arrested in 2020 were operatives of the French intelligence agencies, both foreign (DGSE) and domestic (DGSI), who faced prosecution in 2023 for their roles in the attempted murder of a business leader. Other allegations pointed towards evidence of a conspiracy to kill a trade unionist, as well as several other brutal attacks, as reported by the French media outlet RTL. None of the targeted individuals were known terrorists or declared enemies of the state. Rather, they were citizens that somehow ended up on a "kill list", treated by the state apparatus as High Value Targets (HVAs). Read more from this investigation at the French outlet Le Figaro here.
It is against this historical backdrop, one defined by secrecy, presidentially approved kill lists, and a long record of so-called "neutralisations", that high-profile American podcaster Candace Owens' recent allegations have landed. When she took to her X account to warn that she had been informed of an assassination plot ordered by the President of France, the claim did not land in a vacuum. It collided with the very real historical evidence that France possesses both the mechanisms and the precedent for covert lethal operations.
Owens did not deliver her warning tentatively. She has divulged how a highly placed operative within the French government had contacted her, someone she says has been verified and deemed credible. The message she claims to have received was stark: she is being targeted, the order had been approved, and an elite unit had been authorised to execute that order. From there, her posts unfolded with the urgency of someone convinced that her own life is currently in danger, asserting that she has evidence, documents, and names supporting what she has called a criminal conspiracy.
She claims that this whistleblower told her the Macrons had "executed upon and paid for" her assassination and that the operation had been assigned to a specialised GIGN team.
"Among its many capabilities, the GIGN is also an integral part of the Air Marshal community. As the only authorized French entity, the GIGN was one of the nine founding members of the International Flight Security Officer Committee (IIFSOC) network, along with the United States, Canada, Australia, and five other European countries. Today, this community continues to grow and now comprises nearly twenty members. In addition to helping standardize practices internationally, this network allows for building contacts with a significant number of partners in case of operational needs."In her last post, she intimates that "Macron allegedly moved $1.5 million for her assassination", which, according to an earlier post, transited through international accounts in France and Canada, allegedly via the infamous network of the exclusive "Club des Cent" in France, whose elite members include the likes of Eric de Rothschild.
(Source: GIGN National Gendarmerie Intervention Group)
I've recently shared on X some background information regarding the Club des Cent in France, which she has also reposted on her timeline.
© Freddie Ponton/X
Throughout her posts, she claims to have concrete evidence; documents, communications, names, and financial trails, and reiterates that she has already notified figures within the U.S. government of her situation. She also has suggested she had been advised to remain silent, but that she has refused to do so. Her message to the public seems to indicate that she sees visibility as protection.
These claims, carried by the momentum of her own certainty, merge uncomfortably with France's known history of such clandestine operations. What France once carried out quietly in the Sahel, Libya, Afghanistan, Somalia, and other "grey zones", as well as in Europe itself — has now been pulled into a vastly different narrative, one involving a leading American commentator who says she holds the receipts.
Telegram CEO, Pavel Durov, who went through his own turbulent episode in France involving an unexpected airport arrest, to his uneasy dealings with French intelligence, and the political circles around President Macron, recently posted a message on X, where he considers Candace Owens' claims about French involvement in Charlie Kirk's death to be "plausible" — a reaction shaped as much by personal experience as by principle of historic precedent. By engaging in her narrative, Durov lends some additional weight to the story.
Whether Candace's evidence will be released, and what it might show us — remains a question only she can answer for now. However, her warnings join a long and complicated traceable lineage of covert state actions initiated by the French state — a reality which is already well-documented in the pages of France's own newspapers of record.
Over the weekend, most mainstream French media reacted in concert, predictably calling Candace Owens a "conspiracy theorist" and a "cyberbully", characterising her allegations as "lunar". But, is it wise to disregard her claim just because her allegations are deemed to be too "fringe" by mainstream media standards? Perhaps it would be more prudent for us to take a moment and pause, and take into consideration that precedents which exist, and afford her the time and the appropriate setting to disclose her evidence.
.
Le Monde reports...
François Hollande and "the license to kill"
In a book titled Fatal Errors, published today, independent journalist Vincent Nouzille recounts how France compiles lists of terrorists to be eliminated, which are then submitted to the President of the Republic for approval, even at the expense of justice.
Independent journalist Vincent Nouzille has spent years exploring the gray areas of the intelligence services. In Fatal Errors (Fayard/Les Liens qui libèrent, €20, 384 pages), he delves into the heart of the French counterterrorism effort and recounts, after a lengthy investigation, how, since the early 1980s, the authorities have failed to prevent the most serious attacks. Le Monde is publishing excerpts.
Extrajudicial killings ordered by the president
"Since his election in May 2012, François Hollande has sought to embody a more militaristic policy than his predecessors, even at the cost of overstepping the bounds of legality. Thus, he has decided to systematically retaliate against hostage-takings and attacks affecting French citizens worldwide. In an interview with journalists Gérard Davet and Fabrice Lhomme, he admitted to having ordered such acts of revenge: 'The army and the DGSE (General Directorate for External Security) have a list of people suspected of being responsible for hostage-takings or acts against our interests. I was questioned. I said:"If you apprehend them, of course..."' These remarks confirm what we wrote at the beginning of 2015, namely that France is compiling lists of names of people to be eliminated, which are subject to the president's approval."Surrounded by action-oriented military advisors, including his chief of staff, General Benoît Puga, and members of Jean-Yves Le Drian's cabinet, François Hollande gave clear instructions to the military high command and the DGSE (General Directorate for External Security) on this matter: they have his green light to kill "terrorist leaders" and other suspected enemies of France abroad, including clandestinely. The military refers to them as High Value Targets (HVTs) or High Value Individuals (HVIs) - in short, high-value targets. (...)
The president confided to Gérard Davet and Fabrice Lhomme that he had ordered at least four targeted assassinations during his term. A minimal figure, in truth. According to our sources, at least forty targeted killings were carried out abroad between 2013 and 2016, either by the armed forces, the DGSE (France's external intelligence agency), or, more indirectly, by allied countries based on intelligence provided by France. This represents roughly one operation per month — a rate unseen since the late 1950s, during the Algerian War. From this perspective, François Hollande marks a real break with the use of force, whereas Nicolas Sarkozy and especially Jacques Chirac were more cautious on these matters of national sovereignty.
Officially, military headquarters reject the term "targeted killings." The military prefers to speak more generally of "neutralizing" "enemy targets" and " strategic objectives ." They deny any prior identification of the individuals targeted. These denials reflect a certain unease, linked to ethical reservations and the legal ambiguity surrounding this type of counterterrorism operation. Indeed, in the event of a declared military conflict, endorsed by Parliament and international bodies such as the UN, special operations can be considered acts of war and the targets enemy combatants, which does not, in principle, pose too many legal problems.
Conversely, when special forces or agents of the DGSE's Action Service (SA) intervene in "grey zones" or on the fringes of a conventional military operation, the legal framework is more uncertain: they could face prosecution in the countries concerned. The risk remains theoretical, but it must be taken into account, as missions of this type have proliferated in recent years. Between 2008 and 2013, French special forces and the DGSE, for example, captured or killed nearly a hundred jihadists in certain Sahel countries (Mauritania, Mali, Niger) without any legally launched military operation. Not to mention the raids carried out in Libya in 2011 with the utmost discretion, or the DGSE's operation in Somalia in January 2013, deep within a "grey zone."
In reality, France applies the law of retaliation and goes even further. This "license to kill" sometimes resembles cold-blooded reprisals and extrajudicial killings, including preemptive ones. Military strikes have little to do with judicial procedures. The legitimacy of these actions can be accepted when it comes to responding to aggression. But their legality is often questioned, as is their actual effectiveness in the fight against terrorism, since they do not prevent rebel groups from regrouping and they increase the risk of escalation. "France is at war, it kills enemy leaders, nothing could be more normal ," argues a veteran of the DGSE (France's external intelligence agency), a supporter of these "Homo" (for homicide) operations.
According to intelligence officials, the hunt for human targets is meticulously planned. In September 2015, speaking about these operations in an exceptional manner, General Christophe Gomart, head of the Directorate of Military Intelligence (DRM), detailed the process to an audience of experts at the Defense Summer School:"Targets of interest, the leaders of armed terrorist groups, are very difficult to intercept due to their mobility and the discretion they employ. The process aims to progressively narrow down the net in order to identify and then locate the target before launching the operation. This work is conducted in partnership with other services within the national intelligence community, according to the principle we call 'Find, Fix , Finish, Exploit' ."Targeting is refined using electronic intelligence, prisoner interrogations and imagery studies, which then allow for the formal identification of the target and its tracking "until the most favorable time to trigger the operation" (...).
Bernard Bajolet, the head of the DGSE (France's external intelligence agency), provided further details on the subject. Questioned behind closed doors in May 2016 by the parliamentary inquiry commission investigating the 2015 attacks, he indicated that his agency had conducted sixty-nine operations to "thwart the terrorist threat" since the beginning of 2013. Fifty-one of these involved arrests, foiled plots, or the neutralization of terrorists in the following areas, listed in order of importance: sub-Saharan Africa, the Afghan-Pakistani region, the Horn of Africa, Syria, Europe, Libya, and Egypt. The DGSE reportedly contributed directly to forty such operations during this period, some of which were executions — the exact number of which was not specified.
Angry judges
Naturally, on instructions from the Élysée Palace, the military commands generally conduct these special operations with the utmost discretion. They are classified as "Defense Confidential" and only exceptionally result in military communiqués. The President of the Republic, the Minister of Defense, and the Chief of the Defence Staff, however, regularly wish to demonstrate that France now retaliates against any attack against its interests and relentlessly pursues those responsible in order to eliminate them. This comes at the risk of clashing with magistrates tasked with investigating terrorist acts and eager to one day bring the perpetrators to justice, as is the case, notably, in the Arlit hostage crisis, the death of Philippe Verdon, and the murders of the two RFI journalists.
Because the judges, as well as the civil parties, are deeply unhappy with the extrajudicial executions decided at the highest levels, which, according to some of them, amount to the reinstatement of the death penalty without any form of trial. In the eyes of the Élysée Palace and the military high command, on the other hand, the war against distant and fanatical enemies justifies the primacy of military operations over the uncertain recourse to the French justice system.
The In Amenas affair clearly illustrates this tension. On January 16, 2013, some thirty terrorists from the El-Mouaguiine Biddam katiba (Those Who Sign in Blood), dissidents of Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) led by Mokhtar Belmokhtar, attacked a massive gas complex located in Tigantourine, about sixty kilometers from In Amenas, in southern Algeria. Hundreds of employees and expatriates were taken hostage. The Algerian army launched a raid that resulted in a terrible toll: in addition to the thirty or so attackers killed, thirty-eight civilians died during the fighting, including a Frenchman, Yann Desjeux. This former special forces soldier, who had become the site's deputy head of security, managed to save several hostages before being executed.
Several countries of origin of the victims, including the United Kingdom, the United States, Norway, and France, have launched legal proceedings. In Paris, the preliminary investigation is being conducted by the DCRI (Directorate General of Internal Security). A formal judicial inquiry, opened in January 2014, was then entrusted to Judge Laurence Le Vert, a key figure in the Saint-Eloi gallery, which houses anti-terrorism judges at the Palais de Justice (Paris courthouse). The family of Yann Desjeux, along with a French nurse, Murielle Ravey, a survivor of the attack, and three other French employees who were held hostage, have joined the proceedings as civil parties. They suspect, in particular, that the Algerian authorities are withholding information about what really happened in In Amenas, where there were numerous security lapses.
Identifying the perpetrators of the attack is relatively easy, since Mokhtar Belmokhtar's group claimed responsibility in a video, presenting it as a reprisal against the French military operation "Serval," launched in Mali a few days earlier and supported by the Algerians. Belmokhtar is one of the most wanted terrorist leaders in the Sahel — in the eyes of the French, one of the main high-value terrorists to eliminate. He has been terrorizing the region for years, carrying out a series of hostage-takings and attacks, often linked to smuggling. Once affiliated with AQIM, he has already escaped several French and American raids. (...)
But a judge cannot rely solely on these fragments of information to advance the investigation. Laurence Le Vert must reconstruct the precise sequence of events, authenticate the true causes of Yann Desjeux's death, assess any potential Algerian responsibility, identify all members of the commando, and prosecute the surviving attackers and their leaders. Several terrorists have been taken prisoner. Interrogated by the Algerians and the FBI, three of them provided valuable information about the organization of the attack and its participants, which was passed on to the French justice system as well as other relevant countries. This information notably concerns the preparations carried out in Libya and the various leaders who oversaw the operation, including the Algerian Mohamed Lamine Bencheneb, a mathematics graduate killed during the raid, and Mokhtar Belmokhtar, who remains at large.
For his part, General Pierre de Villiers, Chief of the Defence Staff, interviewed [on Europe 1] in October 2014, mentioned eight identified and already effectively hunted individuals: "(...) We have neutralized seven of them. There is only one left and we will get him." This is obviously Mokhtar Belmokhtar, who is blamed for other attacks - the suicide bombings in Arlit and Agadez in Niger, in May 2013, and the one committed against a French army unit near Gao, in Mali, on July 14, 2014, which killed a legionnaire and wounded six soldiers.
General de Villiers is not speaking lightly. For months, several of the "One-Eyed's" (Belmokhtar's) close associates have indeed been eliminated on orders from the Élysée Palace: Abou Moghren Al-Tounsi, at the end of September 2013; Fayçal Boussemane and the Mauritanian Al-Hassan Ould Al-Khalil, alias Jouleibib, Belmokhtar's son-in-law and spokesman, in November 2013; Omar Ould Hamaha, known as Red Beard, Belmokhtar's right-hand man, in March 2014; Abou Bakr Al-Nasr, known as the Egyptian, a weapons specialist, very active in Benghazi, Libya, killed in April 2014. Another of the One-Eyed's lieutenants, Ahmed Al-Tilemsi, would be killed in December 2014; He was suspected of being one of the main perpetrators of the kidnapping of Vincent Delory and Antoine de Léocour in Niamey in January 2011.
General de Villiers' statements provoked strong reactions at the Paris courthouse. "We learned, somewhat furiously, through the media, that individuals suspected of involvement in terrorism cases had been captured and neutralized by the French army ," lamented Juliette Le Borgne, former prosecutor at the anti-terrorism unit. " Our legal objective is to keep these people alive to bring them to justice. But that is not the objective of the French army. We simply want to know the truth, for the families."
Equally outraged to see the military carrying out their own summary justice, Judge Laurence Le Vert immediately summoned General Pierre de Villiers for questioning. The two logics, military and judicial, clash, and it seems impossible to reconcile them. At the Élysée Palace, François Hollande clearly approves of military operations classified as "Defense Confidential" aimed at eradicating the leaders of terrorist groups, without being hampered by the cumbersome legal processes. Whether in the Sahel or, now, in Syria and Libya, he has become entangled in the machinery of war. Justice has taken a back seat.
Reader Comments
In my view, the "war on terror" was a major part of the engineered false flag 9/11. It enabled the elimination of ANYONE identified as a "terrorist". It enabled the attacks on Iraq, Libya, and other Middle Eastern countries. In the USA, the globalist Dem puppets have called MAGA "domestic terrorists".
This is an example of neuro linguistic programming. They Frame the context, "terrorist" and "terrorism", to manipulate the perception of reality of the people, which enables them to commit crimes against their opponents.
In my view, Trump has used the "war on terror" to dismantle the globalist power structure. "The Trump administration has designated multiple groups as terrorist organizations, including Latin American cartels, European antifa-affiliated groups, and Middle Eastern affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood."
In my view, AI will not be going away, so the better we understand it and its "Framing" the less likely we will be deceived by it. I still use it as providing context, and will now ask it to report its referenc es.
In my view, the Trump admin is using that framework against the globalist power structure - antifa, cartels, etc. This is the context.
To me the "war on terror" narrative is still a BIG lie, and certainly Trump is not fighting against it(or denouncing that it is state sponsored). When you mention the globalist power structure, do you not include the CIA? How about Mossad or MI6? When you say Trump opposes "the globalist power structure" what do you mean? If Antifa is considered in the power structure, and Al-Qaeda is considered not part of it, how does that "context" make any rational sense?
SHALL WE TALK ABOUT THE KENNEDYS AGAIN ? (Just one of the most famous examples)
I always suspected her relentless blaming of Israel for Kirk's assassination is a smokescreen for something else : [Link]
"Trump signed the Epstein Files Transparency Act into law on November 19, 2025, after it was passed by Congress."
Leaving out Trump's auto-pen predecessor, I think it is dangerously naive to believe an US president is "stupid", "unstable" or "demented". He got into this position with millions (if not billions) of $$$, and his powerful backers expect something from him. And as long as he lives and remains president, he delivers .
We might extrapolate from his actions what this is - not from his words. Especially with Trump ...
He is an excellent front man because of his blunt and caustic rebuttal of the mockingbird media and political shills via social media. His use of the social media was not calculated by the globalist power structure. This led them to pressure Zukerbug and Dorsey to censor even the President on facebook and twitter during the last 10 years.
These current three poles are the greatest threat to the empire - Russia, China, and the US. They want to break up each of them, to remain in control. (By the way, MTG utterly disgraced herself by propagandizing for this empirial strategy).
unlimited hangout). It makes a lot of sense to me that the US is changing from unipolar empire to being a Technate region of a multipolar world. Of course though, that means that Trump isn't opposing (the globalist power structure) but instead enabling it (but doing it so over the top that he is exposing it). Or discussion earlier remember??As for Agenda 2030, that is "lipstick" under the "pig" of technocracy/multipolar. Trump can oppose Agenda 2030 all he wants(and he does), but the pig continues to do as it does.
Quote: "One of the most radical and refreshing shifts in this strategy is its open departure from globalism and imperial overstretch . Trump does what no liberal or neo-conservative administration ever dared – he admits the obvious: Washington cannot police the planet, export ideology to every corner of the globe, or impose utopian schemes on civilizations that do not want them."
Here is another Atlantic Council website which should bring some pause I would think? [Link]
It is about how behavioral science has worked to flip the consciousness on climate and other things, but has failed.
So yes the money isn't for producing A.I retail consumer products like chat bot customer service etc. (that is the cover) but instead, to erect a control scheme of AI surveillance centers world wide...So there is no "losing money" though they could use a boom bust in A.I. to justify a planned recession.
At this link is discussed how bureaucracy, supply chain issues, water, poor infrastructure, lack of skilled labor have delayed and cost TSMC billions. [Link]
As the video explains(see link above), job growth is over seas (for US based companies) and for manufacturing in the US (that does come home) it continues to be automated reducing the number of workers.
This to me is planned by technocracy(lipstick is Agenda 2030 and WEF).
The gist of it, is, that Trump and team needs to address US based companies hiring foreign work forces. This includes both migrants (H1Bs) and the hiring of workers abroad . The hiring of workers abroad gets no attention in the media that I could find?
Catherine Austin Fitts - "Future Science Series: The Targeted Collective" [Link]
"The Human Antenna" - [Link] Quote: "I am offering you this film free of charge. I started making it after filming the testing of Covid vaccinated people who were emitting a Bluetooth signal . I was so impressed with what I saw that I wanted to share this with the world. If you have decided to buy MasterPeace based on what you have seen and the research you have done and you are using the above code, I will receive a commission. This commission will help fund the making of this film as currently it is self-funded. Thank you for watching!"
"Died Suddenly 2 - Nano Sapiens" - not released - this is a video about it
Emerald gives broad context on Venezuela.
Another link. [Link]
Title "How Mass Migration Will De-Christianize America"
"How Language was weaponized to Divert awakening from God"
Here is the KJV Matt 17:20-21
"And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you. Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting. "
There is a difference there I think. "Unbelief" is signaling to me you are in the club or not(a binary you accept Jesus or not). "Meager faith" (in my interpretation) is that faith isn't a binary (you believe in Jesus or not). Instead, it is on a gradient scale and not absolute...
'But this kind does not go out except by prayer and fasting'.
Amplified Bible:
"But this kind of demon does not go out except by prayer and fasting".
Just goes to show that the Bible has been messed with a lot and different interpretations follow from that.
"Likewise, once ACIP’s completely sane recommendation to stop vaccinating newborns of Hepatitis B negative mothers was enacted, it was treated as an existential catastrophe by both the medical profession and the media and a series of appallingly inaccurate expert interviews were aired to condemn this decision".
"One point Scott Adams helped bring general public recognition to is that we all hold filters (often arising from subconscious biases). Much of the reality we believe to be true is not representative of the objective reality. Instead, our notion of reality appears because our RAS makes us aware of things in our environment that affirm the reality we filter for. As a result, people come to believe their filtered world is reality because it’s what they see around them all day long. "
" Furthermore, this broader spectrum of what’s contained within communication holds for every one of its mediums. For that reason, the primary thing I aim for here is to address those other areas of communication (e.g., I try to write in a heart-centered manner ), as I feel all of that is ultimately much more important than the specific information of the subject at hand."
"One of the subjects I’ve tried to bring attention to with this newsletter is medical gaslighting , the phenomenon where the medical system injures someone and then is told the injury is all in their head and had nothing to do with what the medical system did to them."
"When I was younger, I was a competitive debater, which often required arguing a point I believed was utterly incorrect. From doing this, I came to appreciate how it was possible to effectively argue almost anything if you correctly framed the debate and rearranged the available information to support your narrative .
This gave me a deep appreciation for how illusory "certainty" or "truth" was and how often things we were sure were true were simply the result of a selective presentation of reality. "
"One of the subjects I’ve tried to bring attention to with this newsletter is medical gaslighting , the phenomenon where the medical system injures someone and then is told the injury is all in their head and had nothing to do with what the medical system did to them."
In the same vein, I've noticed the more senior the doctor the more potent the poisons they will administer, more than once I've heard the phrase "If only they could have hung on a little longer, with all the 'new symptoms' [side effects] emerging we felt we were finally getting somewhere"
Never learn never improve just keep banking the winnings.
Most of the others were simply, "select a diagnosis, apply a drug" that was not effective and had unwanted side effects.
I wrote to a Navajo elder to give an interpretation, but never heard back.
Quote: " Unfortunately, extricating oneself from this trap is quite challenging, in part because our society has been designed around the dopamine model, and in part because, when your nervous system has been depleted, it becomes much harder to appreciate the subtler (but far more nourishing) experiences of life . This creates a vicious cycle where nervous system depletion drives one toward dopamine-spiking behaviors, which in turn further deplete and dysregulate the nervous system."
[Link]