Lawrence Lessig indica que existe um i-Patriot equivalente ao Patriot Act

O professor Lawrence Lessig, da Universidade de Stanford, um dos fundadores da licença Creative Commons, membro da direcção da EFF e da Software Freedom Law Center e «um dos maiores defensores da Internet livre, do direito à distribuição de bens culturais, à produção de trabalhos derivados (criminalizadas pelas leis actuais), e do fair use.» [1], veio a terreiro afirmar que após uma conversa com o antigo czar do terrorismo, Richard Clarke, este lhe terá dito que iria haver um acontecimento parecido com os atentados de 11 de Setembro de 2001, mas desta vez a nível informático, e que após este, entraria em vigor o i-Patriot Act, a versão electrónica do Patriot Act.


USA PATRIOT Act – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The USA PATRIOT Act, commonly known as the Patriot Act, is a controversial Act of Congress that U.S. President George W. Bush signed into law on October 26, 2001. The acronym stands for “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001″ (Public Law Pub.L. 107-56).

The act expands the authority of U.S. law enforcement agencies for the stated purpose of fighting terrorism in the United States and abroad. Among its provisions, the Act increases the ability of law enforcement agencies to search telephone, e-mail communications, medical, financial and other records; eases restrictions on foreign intelligence gathering within the United States;

O mais estranho é ele ter afirmado que esta nova lei já se encontra preparada, estando só à espera que ocorra um atentado deste tipo.

Como é que já têm um projecto lei preparado para ser aprovado após algo que ainda não aconteceu?
As administrações norte-americanas agora adivinham quando se vão dar atentados? O tipo de atentado?

Na minha modesta opinião mais uma vez estes senhores preparam-se para repetir os atentados de 9/11, ou melhor, preparam-se para nova operação False Flag de forma a mais uma vez aprovarem leis que atentam contra as liberdades e garantias do povo norte-americano e que infelizmente têm a péssima tendência de se propagar pelo resto do planeta, especialmente para a UE.

Law Professor: Counter Terrorism Czar Told Me There Is Going To Be An i-9/11 And An i-Patriot Act : Information Clearing House – ICH

During a group panel segment titled “2018: Life on the Net”, Lessig stated:

There’s going to be an i-9/11 event. Which doesn’t necessarily mean an Al Qaeda attack, it means an event where the instability or the insecurity of the internet becomes manifest during a malicious event which then inspires the government into a response. You’ve got to remember that after 9/11 the government drew up the Patriot Act within 20 days and it was passed.

The Patriot Act is huge and I remember someone asking a Justice Department official how did they write such a large statute so quickly, and of course the answer was that it has been sitting in the drawers of the Justice Department for the last 20 years waiting for the event where they would pull it out.

Of course, the Patriot Act is filled with all sorts of insanity about changing the way civil rights are protected, or not protected in this instance. So I was having dinner with Richard Clarke and I asked him if there is an equivalent, is there an i-Patriot Act just sitting waiting for some substantial event as an excuse to radically change the way the internet works. He said “of course there is”.

Ausencia de registos que indiquem que os aviões dos atentados de 11Set2001 sejam mesmo os das companhias

A NTSB, entidade que investiga os acidentes de transportes nos EUA, não possui qualquer registo que indique como foram identificados os destroços dos aviões ou se estes foram mesmo identificados positivamente.

Ou seja, a entidade competente para investigar qualquer acidente de transportes nos EUA, não possui qualquer registo que comprove que os destroços encontrados nos escombros a quando dos atentados, sejam ou não dos aviões que supostamente a UAirlines e a AAirlines perderam.

Mas nesta história toda alguém anda a mentir uma vez que o mesmo pedido através da FOIA ao FBI teve como resposta, “The identity of the three hijacked aircraft has never been in question by the FBI, NTSB or FAA”.

NTSB: No Records Pertaining To Process Of Positive Identification Of 9/11 Aircraft Wreckage | 911blogger.com

Within a July 18, 2008 Freedom of Information Act response from the National Transportation Safety Board, the NTSB indicates that it possesses no records indicating how wreckage recovered from the 4 aircraft used during the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 was positively identified as belonging to the 4 planes reportedly hijacked that day or even if such wreckage was positively identified at all.

The History Commons, ou Cooperative Research – uma excelente ferramenta online para jornalistas de investigação

O site History Commons, antes denominado Cooperative Research, foi criado por Paul Thompson após os atentados nos EUA de 11 de Setembro de 2001, contém mais de 11269 artigos sobre diversos temas, e está divido por projectos, tais como:

O site foi criado com o objectivo de recriar através de notícias de diversas fontes e cruzando esses dados para obter informação o mais credível e isenta possível, os passos dados pelos diversos intervenientes nos acontecimentos, desde os supostos terroristas, passando pelos serviços secretos, politicas e politicos.

O History Commons define-se ele prórpio como “(…)an experiment in open-content civic journalism. It provides a space for people to conduct grassroots-level investigations on any issue, providing the public with a useful tool to conduct oversight of government and private sector entities. It is collaborative and thus allows individuals to build upon the work of others.”

Relativamente às suas origens o site deu origem ao livro The Terror Timeline: Year by Year, Day by Day, Minute by Minute: A Comprehensive Chronicle of the Road to 9/11 — and America’s Response.
Este é uma compilação de mais de 5000 artigos e relatórios que estão online no site acima referido, relativos aos atentados e que vão sendo actualizadas à medida que se obtém mais informação sobre os mesmos.

No dia 20 de Abril de 2008 o New York Times, publicou um artigo revelador, que depois disso foi largamente ignorado, detalhando a sitemática campanha de propaganda levada a cabo pelo Pentágono para promover a guerra no Iraque e manipular a opinião pública, usando para tal oficiais militares retirados e apresentando-os como analistas independentes e comentadores.

Após esse artigo revelador, o History Commons através dos jornalistas e investigadores que o compôem começaram desde logo a agregar todas as peças que eles encontrassem e que tivessem a ver com o tema, tendo-os reunido no projecto Domestic Propaganda, Military Analysts, and the US Media.

Deixo ainda aqui o artigo que me levou a escrever esta entrada e do qual “bebi” grande parte desta informação, embora já o conhecesse muito bem, uma vez que até adquiri o livro que menciono acima.

A Comprehensive Chronicle of the Road to 9/11--and America's Response

The Terror
Timeline: Year by Year, Day by Day, Minute by Minute: A Comprehensive
Chronicle of the Road to 9/11–and America’s Response (Paperback)

by Paul Thompson (Author)


“U.S. officials, especially those in the Bush administration, have
repeatedly insisted that they had no evidence that Osama bin Laden was
planning an attack inside…”

Nieman Watchdog > Showcase > The History Commons — an online tool for journalists

The Pentagon Military Analysts Program: What We Know

The profile of the Pentagon propaganda operation is incomplete. It has been reported that a former Pentagon public relations official, Torie Clarke, originated both the military analysts program and the “embedded journalists” program, and envisioned them as “bookends” for the same overall propaganda operation. We know that many of the media’s military analysts have ties to defense contractors, and that many of these contractors have financial interests in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. We have learned of connections between the propaganda campaign and White House political guru Karl Rove. We have been deeply disappointed (but not particularly surprised) to see the virtual shunning of the story by the broadcast media, and the backhanded attention paid it by the print and Internet media, but we continue to dig for information.

Como treinar esquadrões da morte e esmagar revoluções empregando terroristas e ainda fazendo com que a polulação aprecie

Foi colocado no site Wikileaks, dia 15 de Junho 2008, o manual “Foreign Internal Defense Tactics Techniques and Procedures for Special Forces (1994, 2004)”, que é o manual oficial da doctrina das forças especiais dos EUA, para a “Foreign Internal Defense”.

Para quem continua a achar que elementos da administração dos EUA seriam incapazes de levar a cabo ataques terroristas no seu próprio país, como a história mal contada dos atentados de 11 Setembro de 2001, tem pois aqui, mais um excelente motivo para começar a duvidar do que os media lhe impingem a toda a hora.

É só mais uma achega aos já conhecidos ataques e às operações “false flag” usadas ou planeadas por elementos de anteriores administrações, ou ainda pelos atentados terroristas que varreram a Europa, através da Operação Gladio da NATO.

Foreign internal defense – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Foreign internal defense (FID) is used by a number of Western militaries, explicitly by the United States but sharing ideas with countries including France and the United Kingdom, to describe an approach to combating actual or threatened insurgency in a foreign state called the Host Nation (HN). The term counter-insurgency is more commonly used worldwide than FID. The United States, and even NATO, cannot control all insurgencies. Fortunately, regional powers such as Nigeria and Brazil, as well as organizations such as the African Union (AU) and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), have shown an increased willingness to take some responsibility for containing turmoil in their regions. Consider, for example, the deployment of AU troops in the Darfur region of Sudan and ECOMOG in Sierra Leone. But as Darfur has also demonstrated, regional troops can mobilize only if they have adequate logistical and transport capabilities”, provided by US airlift to Darfur[1] and UK in Sierra Leone (i.e., Operation Barras).

How to train death squads and quash revolutions from San Salvador to Iraq – Wikileaks

The manual directly advocates training paramilitaries, pervasive surveillance, censorship, press control and restrictions on labor unions & political parties. It directly advocates warrantless searches, detainment without charge and (under varying circumstances) the suspension of habeas corpus. It directly advocates employing terrorists or prosecuting individuals for terrorism who are not terrorists, running false flag operations and concealing human rights abuses from journalists. And it repeatedly advocates the use of subterfuge and “psychological operations” (propaganda) to make these and other “population & resource control” measures more palatable.

The content has been particularly informed by the long United States involvement in El Salvador

Reino Unido com mais uma lei castradora dos direitos, liberdades e garantias

Como já vem sendo habitual, quer o Reino Unido, quer os EUA, estão numa corrida a ver quem consegue criar leis mais idiotas e castradoras dos direitos humanos, sim porque a liberdade é um direito alienável do ser humano.

Hoje surge a notícia que o Reino Unido aprova lei que aumenta de 28 dias para 42 sem que a pessoa detida seja acusada de crime, supostamente será aplicada só em casos de “suspeita” de terrorismo.

BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | David Davis resigns from Commons

Mr Davis said he would fight the by-election campaigning against the
government’s plans to extend pre-charge detentions for terror suspects
to a maximum of 42 days.

BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | David Davis resigns from Commons

He has led the opposition to Labour’s plans to extend the maximum limit
terror suspects can be held beyond the current 28-day maximum.

É só mais uma lei que se vem somar a muitas outras, especialmente o Terrorism Act.

O problema está mesmo na palavra, SUSPEITA, é que aqui dá para colocar qualquer situação, afinal de contas foi no Reino Unido que um cidadão brasileiro foi morto com mais de um tiro, quando estava a correr no metro e apenas por SUSPEITA de ser terrorista porque levava uma mochila às costas e um casaco mais grosso.

Mesmo tendo sido provado que o cidadão brasileiro não era terrorista, nada aconteceu aos policias que o assassinaram.
O mais grave é que testemunhas no local indicam que o cidadão terá sido executado, uma vez que já o tinham detido quando o balearam na cabeça.

BBC NEWS | UK | ‘No charges’ for Menezes police

But the Guardian says no individual police officers involved will face
prosecution and the CPS has ruled out murder or manslaughter charges
after a review of the circumstances surrounding the shooting on 22
July.

Nos EUA, leis como o Patriot Act ou o fim do Habeas Corpus, estão a tornar o país num autêntico estado policial, havendo já a conversão de enormes espaços em campos de detenção, onde antes havia arame farpado que apontava para o exterior, agora existe arame farpado virado para o interior, ou seja para não deixar sair.


Enforcement on Steroids: Homeland Security’s Emerging Immigration Police State

Forced drugging. Abuse. Death. That’s what workplace-based mmigration enforcement without deeper reform looks like.Last week, hundreds of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents, flanked by helicopters, a trail of SUVs and a convoy of buses, descended on the tiny town of Postville, Iowa. They set up a perimeter around the 60-acre kosher meat-processing plant operated by the global giant Agriprocessors, Inc. and conducted the largest workplace raid in
U.S. history. Around 400 people were arrested — most from Mexico,
Eastern Europe and Guatemala — representing 40 percent of the plant’s
workers and 17 percent of the town’s population. Warrants for another
300 were issued.

Elaine Cassel: Bush’s Police State and Independence Day

Pre-emptive War; Pre-emptive Arrests Bush’s Police State and Independence DayBy ELAINE CASSELAs a criminal defense attorney, I am often in the unenviable position of telling a first-time offender that the rights they thought they had under the Constitution don’t mean what they think they do. Recently, a well-educated, professional woman engaged me to defend her in charges of obstruction of justice. Her crime? She had tried to talk to a police officer (big mistake, there) about the circumstances that led to her friend, about to be arrested, walking on highway (absolutely nothing wrong with that, but that is beside the point).

She was arrested for obstruction of justice, but not until backup officers and dogs had been called. Her companion, who had exited her car over an argument they were having, was “arrested” for jaywalking. He was not “jaywalking,” and, if he were, he would have been issued a “summons,” not arrested and cuffed and taken to jail.

Se é verdade que estas leis poderão não nos afectar directamente, a realidade é que quer a Alemanha, quer a Suécia e Rússia também andam a implementar leis completamente idiotas, tudo por causa da mentira criada a partir do 11 Setembro 2001, a famosa “guerra ao terror”, não tardará muito que a própria UE comece a legislar de forma absurda e atentatória dos direitos dos seus cidadãos.

Ainda por cima a tal autêntica mentira da “guerra ao terror”, foi criada a partir de um acontecimento que ainda hoje está muito mal explicado e onde quer Tony Blair quer a Administração Bush mentiu com quantos dentes tem, quer nos atentados quer depois nas razões pelas quais invadiram ilegalmente quer o Afeganistão quer o Iraque.

New light on the putative value of intelligence dossiers issued by Tony Blair’s office in Number 10 Downing Street was not long in coming. In September 2002, Blair published amid great fanfare his dossier purporting to demonstrate that Saddam Hussein’s Iraq currently possessed weapons of mass destruction. This was entitled “Iraq: Its Infrastructure of Concealment, Deception, and Intimidation,” and it was clearly crafted to provide a pretext for waging unprovoked and aggressive war against Iraq. This dossier was exposed as a fraud in two distinct waves of demystification. The first exposure took
place in February 2003, when it emerged that entire sections of this report, which had been billed as the most up-to-date evaluation that could be offered by the very formidable capabilities of MI-6 and the rest of the British intelligence machine, had simply been
lifted, plagiarized without attribution, from older documents in the public domain. The Iraq dossier had been concocted by Blair and his media guru Alistair Campbell, a figure
who combined the worst of image-mongers like Michael Deaver and Karl Rove, using materials provided by British intelligence. Parts of Blair’s dossier had been stolen from articles written by Sean Boyne of Jane’s Intelligence Review, who was horrified by the
nefarious use to which his work had been put. “I don’t like to think that anything I wrote has been used as an argument for war. I am concerned because I am against the war,” complained Boyne. Another source from which Blair had lifted material verbatim was a thesis entitled “Iraq’s Security and Intelligence Network,” published in September 2002 by a graduate student, Ibrahim al-Marashi, a California resident. Al-Marashi was equally
indignant, commenting that “this is wholesale deception. How can the British public trust the government if it is up to this sort of tricks? People will treat any other information they publish now with a lot of skepticism from now on.” And not just from now on; it is our contention here that this disbelief in regard to Tony Blair’s work product should also be applied retrospectively.
in 9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA, Fourth Edition by Webster Griffin Tarpley

Relativamente aos atentados, ainda hoje o FBI não reconhce que tenha sido Bin Laden e a Al-Qaeda a ter levado a cabo os atentados.

USAMA BIN LADEN IS WANTED IN CONNECTION WITH THE AUGUST 7, 1998, BOMBINGS OF THE UNITED STATES EMBASSIES IN DAR ES SALAAM, TANZANIA, AND NAIROBI, KENYA. THESE ATTACKS KILLED OVER 200 PEOPLE.
IN ADDITION, BIN LADEN IS A SUSPECT IN OTHER TERRORIST ATTACKS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD.

Bem como no relatório apresentado por Tony Blair e o MI6, o que é afirmado relativamente aos ataques logo no início do relatório, faz-nos pensar, ainda para mais quando o relatório seguinte como mostro acima, é uma teia de mentiras.

With the US regime struggling, into the breach rushed Tony Blair, a glib and slippery apologist for war. On October 2, Blair’s office in Number 10 Downing Street released the first of his celebrated dossiers. It was entitled “Responsibility for the Terrorist Atrocities in the United States.” Unfortunately, Blair’s dossier was obliged to begin on an uncertain note: “This document does not purport to provide a prosecutable case against Osama Bin Laden in a court of law.” Why not, given what is at stake? Answer: “Intelligence often
cannot be used evidentially, due both to the strict rules of admissibility and to the need to protect the safety of sources. But on the basis of all the information available HMG [Her Majesty’s Government] is confident of its conclusions as expressed in this document.” Of course, this means that since the proof may be insufficient, we are expected to believe
Blair & Co. on the basis of their general integrity and credibility. This is a controversial point, to which we will soon return.

Some indication of the problems being encountered by the US bureaucracy in trying to pin 9/11 on Bin Laden were reflected in a Wall Street Journal article entitled “Faint Trail: It’s Surprisingly Tough To Pin Terror Attacks on the ‘Prime Suspect.’” Here the paucity
of evidence was the dominant note. Such evidence as did exist was largely circumstantial, the Journal noted, such as ties of suspected hijacker Mohammed Atta to Egyptian Islamic
Jihad, which allegedly was part of bin Laden’s Al Qaeda; the presence of one hijacker in Malaysia in January 2000, meeting with someone linked to the bombing of the USS Cole,
which was in turn allegedly linked to bin Laden; communications intercepts showing Al-Qaeda operatives had some advanced knowledge of the strikes; or that two of the suspected hijackers were perhaps linked to a suspected bin Laden operative in Boston.
The Journal conceded that the issue of proof was a key component of the U.S.’s ability to enlist support of Islamic countries such as Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and
perhaps Syria. “The issue of proof is no small matter,” one Administration official was cited as observing. But the US case was plainly a lame one, with an unidentified intelligence official concluding weakly that “no information has come up that suggests that bin Laden wasn’t involved.” in
9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA, Fourth Edition by Webster Griffin Tarpley

Com tanta mentida vinculada por pessoas que se encontram nos mais altos cargos das nações, como pode alguém esperar ou acreditar na bondade de semelhantes medidas?
Como pode alguém acreditar que estas medidas serão para nos proteger e não para nos destruir, nos retirar as liberdades e garantias que todo o ser humano tem pelo simples facto de ter nascido.

P.S. Também penso duas vezes agora quando uso o GOOGLE, é que o senhor “USA Schmidt, Eric Chairman of the Executive Committee and CEO, Google”, também esteve na reunião do grupinho fascista, Bilderberg.

Seguir

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Junte-se a 67 outros seguidores