As terrorists struck New York on September 11th, the United States vowed to fight back and protect their country, their people and their freedom. But 10 years on, it seems that freedom is just an illusion, and the US is becoming an Orwellian state.
The land of the no longer free — RT.

Biased? No more than any US outlet and in many cases far less.

“The sheer bafflement of America’s air traffic control network during the two hours when America was under attack on 11 September 2001 was put on vivid display yesterday with the release of complete audio-tape recordings of increasingly frantic communications as the crisis accelerated.”

“the tapes have never been available in their entirety before.”

Tapes reveal terror in air traffic control as 9/11 attacks unfolded – Americas, World – The Independent.

How coincidental that the US Govt released these in the last few days. A cynic would say they did this for their own reasons… next they’ll be saying there is a a new threat and they’ll have to put even more restrictions on people. For their own safety of course. Oh .. look .. they did already …

An overwhelming majority of Afghans have no idea about the September 2001 terror attacks against the US, even though it resulted in an American-led invasion of their country and a decade of occupation.

via What’s this ‘nineleven’ you conquered us for? — RT.

Ben Goldacre wrote me an email, “Apparently the govt have leaned on the bbc to use the word “savings” instead of “cuts”. be nice if someone made something that resubstituted “cuts” back in. “thehonestificator”. whatever.”

Want to see BBC News reported properly? Try this | Liberal Conspiracy.

By contrast, average households with net incomes of less than £30,000 have been winners under Labour – with the poorest, on £10,000 a year or less, now 12.6 per cent better off than they would have been. Daily Mail

What precisely is the problem here? It is part of the budget to help society as whole isn’t it? It is part of the budget to address inequalities be that in the tax on cider compared to beer just as it is that living costs have risen and those with less need more just to be able to stand still. And yet the Daily Mail cries because it’s readers – it aspires to the middle class I suppose even though it is definitely embedded in red-top land – will be worse off by a fraction of that 12.6%. So who the hell does it want to pay?

I believe we should tax more to redistribute wealth, that the 12.6 percent is far too low (12.6% of a small number is an even smaller number. Junk like the Daily Mail always use the dramatic over-inflated figures) and that unless we do more for those targeted here that the whole country will pay. And yes, that means I believe I should give more of what I earn to the taxman.

For the Labour haters go read Every Child Matters. Then find even one credible source that says it is a waste of money, find one credible source that says it does not benefit the whole of society and then email the Conservative leader and ask him why he will be killing that dead. Why? because he’ll probably use the money to make changes that crap like the Daily Mail will trumpet as a victory for common sense. Nasty paper is that.

Why did he have to give exact answers when no other politician in the history of the BBC (save the Paxman interview) has had that requirement?

Why did the BBC and why do they still keep up the self-promotion. If ITV had done this it would have been a nothing?

Why does one man still dominate the entire news schedule despite the rest of crap going on? Why? Because the BBC are controlled by either the big banks or politicians and they both want people to look the other way.

I’m ashamed that I am forced by law to prop up this bigoted organisation.

BBC : Fraudsters’ website shut in swoop
A website used by criminals to buy and sell credit card details and bank log-ins has been shut down after a police operation, the BBC has learned.

The Register : DarkMarket carder forum revealed as FBI sting
Leaked documents have confirmed that carder forum DarkMarket was actually an FBI sting operation.

The BBC just gets worse and worse. Police PR now – this to distract attention from something else maybe?

I’m sure the US Govt have all the facts (or will say they have) about who shot JFK, how Marilyn Monroe died, Area 51, Diebold, the Florida elections and others. I’m sure the UK and French Govt’s will claim all is revealed about Diana’s crash. And I’m totally sure that whatever the Soviet Govt told it’s people about the West was true. And wikipedia is the sum of all human knowledge so that really must be the truth. Just because you say you have the facts means nothing.

So it’s pretty amazing that the father of the internet is saying that websites should be vetted for their content. Can’t he see that this is impossible? That it will fuel even more conspiracy theories? The “I know this is a fact and it is a fact because I say so” just doesn’t work. It becomes a Big Brother situation. And as soon as you start to say FACT you not only set people directly against that you may also stifle thought. If a site says that something is a fact but they don’t know about some element of what they cover then how can you trust them with the fact? And the person who is checking will agree with their version, their viewpoint.
And once this happens with so-called ‘fact based’ sites how long before politics and commerce really do move in and because they have this apparently good platform which is trusted by some it has a good start.

The Foundation will also look at concerns that the web has become less democratic, and its use influenced too much by large corporations and vested interests.

What are they going to do? Ban Google? And look at ‘less democratic’ – by branding sites they will actually be making it even more less democratic. They will be concentrating what they see as expertise to stifle the alternative view.

They can’t put the cat back in the bag – why do they keep trying?

Teachers have voted to oppose military recruitment activities in schools if they employ “misleading propaganda”.
Young people must be given a true picture of Army life, not a “marketised version”, the National Union of Teachers conference heard. BBC

By that same criteria, they also have to stop teaching religion, give the harsh reality of certain careers (nursing and teaching spring to mind), tell the truth about what their exam results will actually get them (very little), that the law has no teeth and misbehaving isn’t such a big deal, that drinking can be great fun and isn’t all bad and many other things about life. The Careers Office should have a notice on the door advising kids that shocks are in store. They should also quit with the Political Correctness because that in itself is propaganda.

Educators use fear to get what they want as much as politicians use lies to further their aims, so if the NUT want the Armed Forces to tell the truth then maybe they should start looking at the propaganda they pour daily into impressionable minds.

Edit: Paul McGarr of the NUT. You are just a leftist namby-pamby pathetic piece of scrap whose school should be ashamed you are employed there. If you were my daughter’s teacher I would be complaining about you already. IDIOT.