70-years-chart-illustrates-the-dominance-by-the-cfr-trilaterals-bilderbergers
70-years-chart-illustrates-the-dominance-by-the-cfr-trilaterals-bilderbergers
70-years-chart-illustrates-the-dominance-by-the-cfr-trilaterals-bilderbergers
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
greatest fears of modern time are combined in <strong>the</strong> term ‘cyberterrorism.’ The fear of<br />
random, violent victimization blends well with <strong>the</strong> distrust and outright fear of computer<br />
technology.”<br />
“The sky is not falling, and cyber-weapons seem to be of limited value in attacking<br />
national power or intimidating citizens,” notes James Lewis of <strong>the</strong> Center for Strategic<br />
and International Studies. Such a threat is overblown, Lewis explains. He notes that “a<br />
brief review suggests that while many computer networks remain very vulnerable to<br />
attack, few critical infrastructures are equally vulnerable.” In o<strong>the</strong>r words, Rockefeller’s<br />
example of a kid in Latvia with a laptop posing a serious “hazard” to national security is<br />
little more than sensationalistic propaganda.<br />
So-called cyber terrorists are far less of a threat than government. China and Australia<br />
have recently imposed draconian censorship on internet freedom. Brazil, Denmark,<br />
Canada, Finland, Ireland , Italy, Israel, <strong>the</strong> United Kingdom, <strong>the</strong> United States, and many<br />
o<strong>the</strong>r countries also impose nominal censorship on internet freedom. Urgent calls to<br />
restrict <strong>the</strong> medium in various ways through legislation and government action have<br />
increased over <strong>the</strong> last few <strong>years</strong> (for more detail, see Internet Censorship: A<br />
Comparative Study).<br />
However, <strong>the</strong> real threat to internet freedom is currently posed <strong>by</strong> IT and ISP<br />
corporations, not <strong>the</strong> government.<br />
As Alex Jones explained last June, large corporate ISPs are now in <strong>the</strong> process of<br />
imposing bandwidth caps and routing traffic over <strong>the</strong>ir networks and blocking certain<br />
targeted websites. For instance, in 2005 AOL Time-Warner was caught blocking access<br />
to all of Jones’ flagship websites across <strong>the</strong> entire United States. O<strong>the</strong>r instances of<br />
outright censorship include <strong>the</strong> UK ISP Tiscali blocking subscribers from reaching<br />
material on <strong>the</strong> 7/7 London bombings and Google’s continued and habitual censorship of<br />
9/11 material and Alex Jones’ films on <strong>the</strong> ever-popular YouTube. There are many o<strong>the</strong>r<br />
instances as well. (See Censoring <strong>the</strong> Internet: A Collection of Essential Links on<br />
Infowars.)<br />
Jay Rockefeller’s warning about virtually non-existent and largely absurd cyberterrorism<br />
reveals increasing government nervousness and apprehension about <strong>the</strong> medium as a<br />
whole, especially as <strong>the</strong> internet grows <strong>by</strong> leaps and bounds as an alternative news and<br />
activism medium. On numerous occasions over <strong>the</strong> last few <strong>years</strong> alternative websites<br />
have posted articles exposing government crime, articles <strong>the</strong> corporate media has largely<br />
ignored. During <strong>the</strong> Bush <strong>years</strong>, <strong>the</strong> internet served as a vital resource for information on<br />
everything from torture and <strong>the</strong> destruction of civil liberties to <strong>the</strong> invasions and