Censorship on the Internet from Latest Terrorist Attacks
- Censorship Lives In 2012
Censorship Lives In 2012 and is the only power the elite rich have left to keep the awakening public from their doorstep. Knowing full well the deceit and betrayal they have committed against humanity they continue to spread disinformation and confus
- Greed is a Decision of Sincerity
This article explores the concept of Greed and who is responsible for it. Why and how it has been conditioned into our society as a whole and how we can stop it from bringing the World crashing to its knees.
- 2012 Transit of Venus Is Proof That Planet X (Nibiru) Exists!
This article clearly shows how a misinformed and deceived public can miss obvious astronomical mistakes when they are not pointed out by the mainstream media or NASA. How the course predictions 2012 Transit of Venus across our Sun were wrong from the
The recently passed (House) Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, CISPA internet protection bill will essentially remove all legal liability from corporations that share YOUR personal information with our Government, Military, NSA, CIA and FBI. If the CISPA bill does indeed pass the Senate vote, no longer will your private internet information remain private. In this article Censorship on the Internet from Latest Terrorist Attacks I will explore how the recent bombings in Boston may affect the internet and any information about you that resides there.
According to a Huffington Post article the Senate will not even vote on the bill passed by the House instead they're currently writing their own bi-partisan information sharing bill.
While talking with a fellow employee the other day about the Boston Marathon Bombings, I mentioned that the FBI is now saying that the two brothers (Dzhokhar and Tamerian Tsarnaev) got all of their technical information on building bombs from the internet. I told my fellow employee that it seemed incredible to me that supposedly their only source for weapons, bomb materials and how to build them all came from the internet and that they didn't have any hands-on training or help.
The fellow employee said that the reason they're saying that is to create the need for online censorship, because it is so easy to get weapons and bomb information off the internet they want a reasonable excuse to censor the internet and that the whole Boston Marathon Bombing scenario may have been specifically designed to do just that.
He went on to say that by reporting that the bombs were made from gunpowder from extra bullets and ammunition they now have a reason to limit the sale of large magazines. I said I hadn't thought about that, but it does coincide with all the recent legislation on preventing the sale of large magazines.
I told him about the New York Times article I read recently in which it stated that "Of the 22 most frightening plans for attacks since 9/11 on American soil, 14 were developed in sting operations.", by the FBI. It certainly makes you wonder if the mother of the two suspects, that has been saying it was a setup all along, maybe true.
Upon further research I learned from a CBS News report that initially the FBI denied having any contact with the two Tsarnaev brothers but later changed their story after the mother of the two boys revealed on Russian Television ( RT ) that the entire family, including the brothers had been interviewed by the FBI multiple times in 2011.
“They used to come [to our] home, they used to talk to me…they were telling me that he [the older, 26-y/o Tamerlan] was really an extremist leader and that they were afraid of him. They told me whatever information he is getting, he gets from these extremist sites… they were controlling him, they were controlling his every step…and now they say that this is a terrorist act!Never ever is this true, my sons are innocent!”
Whatever the case maybe what needs to be understood is that essentially the FBI cleared the two brothers of any terrorist involvement as is evident by statements made on their own website.
The two individuals believed to be responsible for the Boston Marathon bombings on Monday have been positively identified as Tamerlan Tsarnaev, now deceased, and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, now in custody. These individuals are brothers and residents of Massachusetts.
Once the FBI learned the identities of the two brothers today, the FBI reviewed its records and determined that in early 2011, a foreign government asked the FBI for information about Tamerlan Tsarnaev. The request stated that it was based on information that he was a follower of radical Islam and a strong believer, and that he had changed drastically since 2010 as he prepared to leave the United States for travel to the country’s region to join unspecified underground groups.
In response to this 2011 request, the FBI checked U.S. government databases and other information to look for such things as derogatory telephone communications, possible use of online sites associated with the promotion of radical activity, associations with other persons of interest, travel history and plans, and education history. The FBI also interviewed Tamerlan Tsarnaev and family members. The FBI did not find any terrorism activity, domestic or foreign, and those results were provided to the foreign government in the summer of 2011.
So after clearing both suspects, how is it now that the FBI can still be trusted to be in charge of this investigation without using its power to cover up the mistakes it obviously made in the past?
By allowing the FBI to continue this investigation is an invitation to misuse its power to obstruct Justice, coverup evidence and mislead the public.
Does it make any sense that the FBI should be allowed to continue to run an investigation after so obviously botching it in the first place?
However to be clear they do continue to reiterate the propaganda that these two were controlled by the internet and that they were influenced by sites that promoted radical views. Let's not forget that the FBI had reported early on in their investigation that only they knew the truth and that the public should ignore such sites as Alex Jones' INFOWARS.com and BeforeItsNews.com and other conspiracy type sites.
US House of Representative Stella Tremblay (Republican) of New Hampshire had this to say about the Boston Bombings on April 19 that the Boston Marathon twin bombings and subsequent search for suspects was a plot by the US federal government.
“The Boston Marathon was a Black Ops terrorist attack,” said Tremblay, calling the official account of the incident suspicious. The US government has bombarded innocent people with “drones and now terrorist attacks. Sad day, but a wake up to all of us,” she added.
The wake up call should really be how our own government uses these events to over shadow pending legislation in the news and further their agenda to strip Americans of their constitutional rights!
Why Censor the Internet
The Mainstream Media is all for internet censorship as it would prevent the real journalist from breaking the real news to the real people. The Police, the Military and the Government wants to prevent the real investigative journalist from tearing the cover off the lies, disinformation and propaganda.
Because the internet offers so many alternative views in the form of videos from real people on the scene, unaltered and unedited by the MSM, there is growing concern by all the major networks that any video by them can easily be picked apart frame by frame. Nowhere is this more true than the enormous amount of videos on the recent Boston Marathon Bombings.
Even the Sandy Hook Elementary shootings showed suspects being caught and detained in the woods surrounding the school which the MSM refuse to touch or even comment on. As the Police and FBI tried to contain the information of the events in Boston numerous videos on YouTube and BeforeItsNews showed glaring discrepancies in the official story being told by the Major Television stations.
What I found particularly amazing about the Boston Bombings is that essentially every major News Station had the almost exact same story. You can't get four people in a room and pick any given subject and have them all agree, there is always dissenting opinions, and yet the MSM agreed on all aspects of the story almost word for word. That to me doesn't make any sense, unless they're truly owned and are fed the story by government officials.
An AP story on boston.com reports that the older brother began opposing the Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and that he turned to websites and literature that claimed the September 11, 2001 Twin Towers attacks as an inside job.
Oooops, I'm against War of any kind and especially war based on lies which is what the Iraq War would be . . . a clear cut example. I personally do not believe the government's version of 9/11 and have even written an article on this site saying so. Does, this make me a terrorist, hardly!
The internet is an information highway created for the people and used by the people, sure there are plenty of conspiracy type websites out there but this is not what turns our youth into terrorists, however that subject deserves a more in depth study and research and is off topic for this article.
Another Form of Censorship
Another form of censorship is to create headlines that dominate the news overshadowing other events or proceedings that are ignored and forgotten. This type of censorship has happened more often then coincidence provides.
For example in 1995 , months before the Oklahoma City Bombing (OCB), Joe Biden introduced a bill (February 10, 1995) that would effectively allow Security Agencies to eavesdrop on Americans in the name of protecting citizens from 'terrorism'. This bill known as the Omnibus Counterterrorism Act of 1995, was intended to allow electronic surveillance without warrants and would allow the Justice Department to prosecute citizens based on political beliefs and associations.
"I drafted a terrorism bill after the Oklahoma City Bombing. And the bill John Ashcroft sent up was my bill," this quote found all over the internet and even on government websites makes the claim that the bill was introduced after the OCB, which is clearly a lie.
This bill met stiff opposition in the US Congress, until of course the Oklahoma City Bombing on April 19th, 1995 and then it moved swiftly through Congress until it was signed into law by President Clinton April 24th, 1996 renamed The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. However what should be noted is that this renamed bill did not include the wide sweeping wiretapping laws that the Omnibus Act provided.
The point is that the Oklahoma City Bombing was in the news for months overshadowing this legislation intended to strip the American citizens of their rights. What needs to be pointed out, if not already known, is that this bill was really just a preview for enacting the even more stringent Patriot Act that became law after another terrorist act on US soil, that of the events of 9/11.
Another interesting twist of using tragic events to over shadow news events is the admission from Donald Rumsfeld, then US Secretary of Defense, on September 10, 2001 of a missing $2.3 TRILLION DOLLARS misplaced by the Pentagon. Interestingly enough the section of the Pentagon that was 'supposedly' struck by an aircraft held the civilian accounting offices called the Resource Services Washington hired to track Pentagon spending.
"One Army office in the Pentagon lost 34 of its 65 employees in the attack. Most of those killed in the office, called Resource Services Washington, were civilian accountants, bookkeepers and budget analysts. They were at their desks when American Airlines Flight 77 struck." It seems to be the only department which re-entered the building after renovation.
However to be fair most of the irregular accounting practices of military spending had been revealed during the Clinton Administration, just not publicly recognized. This still does not explain the timing of Rumsfeld's announcement, which seems odd in retrospect.
To return to current events, it does seem suspicious to this author that the CISPA bill would pass in the House just days after another supposed 'terrorist act' committed on US soil. What should be made clear is that in the United States all citizens are presumed innocent 'Until Proven Guilty' and until a trial takes place and this suspect is proven guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt, I for one presume he is innocent.
What I find even more suspicious is that in the Sandy Hook Shootings, since the supposed gunman was killed no trial or the release of evidence, besides what has been shown in the Main Stream Media, will be forthcoming.
Read Between the Lies
Before the internet came along, censorship was used in the form of banning books from the American public. The list of the top 100 banned or challenged books by the American Library Association will quite literally (no pun intended) stun you.
Among the top ten are The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain, Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck and Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger. However to be sure you understand the implications of someone else determining what is inappropriate for you to read consider that the popular Harry Potter series by J.K. Rowling came in at 48 on their top 100 list.
What should be considered is that over 90% of the books on their top 100 list are what are considered fiction or 'make believe'. This list only includes books that have been published and doesn't make any distinction on the thousands of books that are banned from being printed and can only be found online. For instance a book that many would consider complete fantasy but has the 'ring of truth' to it can be found online at Scrbd.com called the Terra Papers by Robert Morning Sky. This book describes the hidden history of the planet Earth as narrated by an alien that crash landed on our planet.
Another form of censorship which is all too obvious but should be mentioned due to the lack of awareness is how the Main Stream Media refuses to report laws or stories that can only then be found on the internet. A prime example of this is the law enacted by the Florida Supreme Court in 2003 that essentially says that US Television News Stations ARE NOT required to tell the public the truth.
No Main Stream Media news station reported this story in 2003 but what it essentially says is that, through America's First Amendment Rights, TV News Stations are allowed to distort the facts, mislead the public and blur the line between entertainment and news. This gives TV News Stations the right to make up the 'News' anyway they see fit and it remains up to the viewer to make the distinction between fact and fiction.
This law stems from a court case that reporters learned implicated, the TV News Station's Advertisers that hired them, in a pollution story. The News station in Florida censored the story after learning that the company behind the pollution was in fact a main advertiser on the station. The reporters Jane Akre and her husband Steve Wilson took the Fox News station to court after being fired when refusing to distort the facts.
This leads me to mention how many countries throughout the world have enacted laws that prevent internet users from receiving content deemed inappropriate by their governments. To be fair these laws are written and enforced to protect their citizens from topics ranging from child pornography to promoting suicide however they are usually broadly written to include anything that a government could interpret as harmful, including but not limited to, articles written about Internet Censorship, Nibiru Planet X or Conspiracy Theories.
This type of censorship in fact prevents many stories from reaching a world audience and creates and environment in which the term World Wide Web (www) is no longer prevalent. The fact that Google is terminating their Google Reader application prevents many readers from accessing Hub articles and is a good indication why my articles went from 1,500 readers a day to less than 200 a day almost overnight.
So while you may not think these types of bills such as CISPA will directly impact you, do you really want our Government access to what you read, watch and spend your money on over the internet?
Do you really want some else deciding what you can watch, research, read or write on the internet?
Can you envision not being able to access information, simply because someone else deems it inappropriate content?
I wrote this article Censorship on the Internet from Latest Terrorist Attacks, not to spread fear, but to inform my readers of how censorship works and why it is so important to recognize.
If the American 'sheeple' do not wake up to the widespread corruption, lies and disinformation being distributed not only through the Main Stream Media and Government Officials (FBI) but the internet itself, the type of censorship mentioned above will become a reality!