Legalise Freedom

 

Terrorism

Government sponsored terrorism

Thursday, April 22nd, 2010

Comment on this Article

David Icke returns to Alex Jones TV: The State of Our Planet

Sunday, February 21st, 2010

Comment on this Article

The Terror Card: fear is the key to obedience

Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010

Americans have been living in fear since 9/11. However, the reality behind our fears has been set out by our own corporate media who has been the main culprit in spreading it like a disease. Our media has terrorized our hearts and minds for years through their subliminal violent programming, and sensational coverage of their own version of the distorted truth.

Sensationalism and misinformation are the essence of the modern media! Angry talk shows are the dish of the day, where the host abuses, yells, belittles, terrorizes his guests to ensure that their opinions are not heard, and only the host’s scripted ideas emerge as the winners, so his or her master’s agenda is served.

The media has been spreading terror for years in the hearts of the American public, in order to force them to watch their trivial programming. Just as in Orwell’s Oceania, the airwaves are bombarded with 24 hours news channels that would resort to any twisted strategy to keep their distorted coverage going. “If it bleeds it leads. The airwaves are also inundated with shows and stories that promote fear, exaggeration of situations, twisting of the truth, psychological propaganda, bloody and gory stories, and buzz words (i.e. flesh eating bacteria, shark attacks on our shores, weapons of mass destruction, SARS, West Nile virus, carjacking, hijacking, war of the sexes, violence, epidemics, pandemics, child abductions, gay marriages, bird flu, H1N1, and so forth and so on). All designed to frighten, brainwash, manipulate, create conflict, confuse, liberalize, and mesmerize their audiences into watching their programs where anything is acceptable. “Instil fear in them and they shall watch and follow”. This is a policy of terror not of democracy.

Read article: http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17299

Comment on this Article

Airline passengers have ‘no right’ to refuse naked body scanners

Thursday, January 28th, 2010

Airline passengers will have no right to refuse to go through a full-body search scanner when the devices are introduced at Heathrow airport next week, ministers have confirmed.

The option of having a full-body pat-down search instead, offered to passengers at US airports, will not be available despite warnings from the government’s Equality and Human Rights Commission that the scanners, which reveal naked bodies, breach privacy rules under the Human Rights Act.

The transport minister Paul Clark told MPs a random selection of passengers would go through the new scanners at UK airports. The machines’ introduction would be followed later this year by extra “trace” scanners, which can detect liquid explosives. A draft code of practice covering privacy and health issues is being discussed in Whitehall.

Clark dealt with concerns raised by the Commons home affairs select committee about the ability of airports abroad to upgrade their security to similar levels by indicating that extra support and help was under discussion.

Lord West, the counter-terrorism minister, told the MPs the government had firmly ruled out the introduction of “religious or ethnic profiling” into transport security. Instead, he said, airport security staff were being trained in “behavioural profiling”, which meant spotting passengers who had paid cash, were travelling with only a book for luggage on a long-haul flight or were behaving erratically at the airport.

He said the decision to raise the terror threat level to “severe” – meaning an attack was highly likely but not imminent – had been taken by security service officials at the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre last Friday.

The decision, thought to be based on an increase in intelligence traffic on threats from Yemen, was confirmed by the home secretary, Alan Johnson.

West refused to discuss the intelligence behind the decision, saying he was not going to jeopardise “getting the bastards”.

The body scanner trials, which are due to start at Heathrow next week, will involve a machine that has spotted the type of concealed device used in the Detroit airline bombing attempt.

Read article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/jan/26/new-body-scanners-heathrow

Comment on this Article

Airport body scanners: a line in the sand?

Sunday, January 3rd, 2010

Upon the recent announcement by the British government that full body scanners are to be introduced at UK airports, I find myself facing something of a conundrum. When trials of these scanners recently commenced at selected American airports and their across-the-board introduction was mooted, I was adamant that such humiliation and intrusion into privacy was a bridge too far. I decided that I simply had to draw a line in the sand and refuse to submit any further to the gathering Big Brother state. In the wake of yet another botched, half-baked and highly suspicious ‘terrorist attack’, I’m now facing this day of reckoning sooner than I might have expected.

The question, then, is do I simply go along to get along as I have thus far with each new outrageous intrusion inflicted upon us in the name of fighting the so-called ‘war on terrorism’? After all, I made myself a promise: I will not be marched like a criminal or prisoner through one of those machines. I don’t do much flying these days, but when I do fly, I appreciate the time it saves over alternative methods of travel. However, in an attempt to figure out how I can keep my promise to myself, today I began to revisit some ways of getting around that I used to employ. The train, for example, and cross channel ferries. No one knows what future security measures may be implemented in railway stations and shipping terminals, but for now, they’re being spared the close scrutiny and draconian police state regimes which are rapidly turning catching a plane into one of life’s most unpleasant experiences.

The bigger question, however, is when we are going to stop giving in to all this. What will it take for us, collectively, to say enough is enough? I would imagine that all of you would draw the line at compulsory cavity searches on all flights? You’d like to think so, wouldn’t you? Based on the evidence so far, though, that’s not quite a foregone conclusion. When the next ‘terrorist’ bogeyman sets fire to his genitals or shoes or hat or whatever it may be, will we yet again go along to get along with the ramping up of harassment and humiliation in the name of ‘safety’? (Continues below)

scan

As a cautionary thought, consider how far we’ve already come. For those of you who still see reasonable limits on Big Brother’s control over our lives and on the burgeoning police state, you need only look at history. I grew up in the 1980s, a decade – like all others – which witnessed its fair share of tyranny. And yet if you’d suggested to me back then that we would one day line up like cattle to be searched and questioned, to be ordered around and treated like dirt, to be prevented from carrying even a bottle of water, and all in the name of ‘safety’ and just to catch a bloody airplane? I’d have said ‘No way! People will never, ever go along with that.’ And yet here we are.

Personally, I believe that the ‘threat’ posed by terrorism is relatively remote at best and at worst, often manipulated into being to further an agenda of societal control. But whatever you believe, massive, invasive and dehumanizing ill-treatment of human beings by other human beings has no place in our common future. Whether you believe that Al-Qaeda is entirely as presented to us by the mainstream media or instead a deadly fiction concocted by shadowy secret service groups is in some respects neither here nor there. Unless we address the cause of this disease of violence and cease merely reacting to its symptoms, the path down which we are currently headed will grow much, much darker.

The good news is that we hold incredible power in our own hands if we will only choose to use it. This means saying ‘enough is enough’. It means drawing a line in the sand. It means saying ‘no’. Up to this point, we’ve not been good at doing that. Most of us have said nothing at all. Most of us have gone along to get along. We need to ask ourselves when that’s going to stop.

Comment on this Article

Detroit jet terrorist attack was staged

Sunday, January 3rd, 2010

Comment on this Article

Welcome to Orwell’s World 2010

Sunday, January 3rd, 2010

In Nineteen Eighty-Four, George Orwell described a superstate called Oceania, whose language of war inverted lies that “passed into history and became truth. ‘Who controls the past’, ran the Party slogan, ‘controls the future: who controls the present controls the past’.”

Barack Obama is the leader of a contemporary Oceania. In two speeches at the close of the decade, the Nobel Peace Prize winner affirmed that peace was no longer peace, but rather a permanent war that “extends well beyond Afghanistan and Pakistan” to “disorderly regions and diffuse enemies”. He called this “global security” and invited our gratitude. To the people of Afghanistan, which America has invaded and occupied, he said wittily: “We have no interest in occupying your country.” (Continues below)

nsa_1984

In Oceania, truth and lies are indivisible. According to Obama, the American attack on Afghanistan in 2001 was authorised by the United Nations Security Council. There was no UN authority. He said the “the world” supported the invasion in the wake of 9/11 when, in truth, all but three of 37 countries surveyed by Gallup expressed overwhelming opposition. He said that America invaded Afghanistan “only after the Taliban refused to turn over [Osama] bin Laden”. In 2001, the Taliban tried three times to hand over bin Laden for trial, reported Pakistan’s military regime, and were ignored. Even Obama’s mystification of 9/11 as justification for his war is false. More than two months before the Twin Towers were attacked, the Pakistani foreign minister, Niaz Naik, was told by the Bush administration that an American military assault would take place by mid-October. The Taliban regime in Kabul, which the Clinton administration had secretly supported, was no longer regarded as “stable” enough to ensure America’s control over oil and gas pipelines to the Caspian Sea. It had to go.

Obama’s most audacious lie is that Afghanistan today is a “safe haven” for al-Qaeda’s attacks on the West. His own national security adviser, General James Jones, said in October that there were “fewer than 100” al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. According to US intelligence, 90 per cent of the Taliban are hardly Taliban at all, but “a tribal localised insurgency [who] see themselves as opposing the US because it is an occupying power”. The war is a fraud. Only the terminally gormless remain true to the Obama brand of “world peace”.

Read article: http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16701

Comment on this Article

NO2ID - Stop ID cards and the database state