Crisis (hint: it's not because of terrorists)

"Biometric testing is set to be introduced at European airports under plans for stringent new security measures revealed yesterday in the wake of last week's alleged terror plot. Passengers would have their fingerprint or iris scanned under the measures proposed by EU interior ministers, which would also use passenger profiling to try to identify potential terrorists" ^Scotsman

What plot indeed ? It hasn't been tested in court (if it ever will be), and no one has been convicted, and according to deputy prime minister John Prescott it is known already that some will not even face charges.

The plot is being widely regarded as little more than a story fed out by a wretched hated government to a press that has turned against them while deliberately inflicting a stupid pointless catastrophe on airports to ensure the fiasco is wrapped in sufficient gravitas to get the twin coup factions in both the US and UK out of serious political trouble.

Yet as a result of the 'plot' we are led to believe, more intolerable, dehumanizing, police-state biometric drivel is entitled to be just pronounced out of thin air. Except it's not out of thin air as the Guardian reports:

"It demonstrated that detailed work had been going on behind the scenes on the strategy that was proposed by Britain in the wake of last year's London bombings, when the UK held the EU presidency." And let's not forget that Brussels has recently been concocting secret plans to attack your children too: "Under laws being drawn up behind closed doors by the European Commission's 'Article Six' committee, which is composed of representatives of the European Union's 25 member states, all children will have to attend a finger-printing centre to obtain an EU passport by June 2009 at the latest" ^Observer

We will come back to this in a minute, but the Scotsman, along with some other publications are also promoting the concept of John Reid as a new Labour leader:

"Reid reaction to terror has seen his public profile soar as Blair's successor"

This is nonsense. Reid, who amazingly, foolishly started this so-called campaign off the back of this garbage the day before it went live and actually changed his speech entirely from immigration to terrorism , while essentially talking about an imminent threat as a pretext to declare traditional freedoms 'old fashioned' has about as much chance as a snowflake in hell.

To put it bluntly: Reid is too nuts, too communist, too violent, too bald, and let's face it, is giving Scottish people a bad name everywhere as being crazed militant Marxists. There is simply no chance of him being Prime Minister. Indeed, the Daily Mail says on Reid:

"Reid has, in fact, dramatically reduced [his chances as leader]. For the spectacle of this sinister old Marxist seizing control is enough to make most of us feel like taking to the hills" (If only they would apply the same reasoning to Gordon Brown who hides it better, while promising the same or worse)

The Scotsman continues:

"Yesterday, Mr Reid said Europe would not allow terrorists to undermine the "common European values that bind our societies together"

New Labour's and the European Commission's plans for 'binding society together' center are more along the lines of binding people to the state with chains and straps; making permanent slaves and victims of everyone including children.

Under this regime, society is no longer society, but a political dungeon, and as such these 'common European values' seem more akin to a re-emergence of old European values like fascism and communism dusted off and made palatable once again, which would explain why they are so coveted by a vile UK regime obsessed with enslaving it's population.

Reid said: 'The proponents of terror "would abuse our open societies, would misuse our freedoms and adapt the latest technology to their evil intent and have no regard for human life or for human rights".

The people we consistently observe who "abuse our open societies, misuse our freedoms and adapt the latest technology to their evil intent and have no regard for human life or for human rights" are people like Reid, Blair, Brown, Clarke and the eurocrats festering within the self-inflicted monstrous carbuncle of the European Commission.

And of course, the regime with Reid as it's Home Secretary, is trying to make society so open, that all your private affairs will be an open book in one public database for the government and corporations to paw over as they see fit.

"As we face the threat of mass murder, we have to accept that the rights of the individual that we enjoy must, and will be, balanced with the collective right of security and the protection of life and limb that our citizens demand," he added.

Uh uh. Not so fast. No we don't, and proclaiming it doesn't make such sweeping twaddle so. Firstly, I'm not so sure that there is such a thing as a 'collective right' outside of the padded cells of the Home for the Communistically Deranged, so it's not surprising such a deluded fantasy finds a home in John Reid's filthy communist imagination along with pornographic hallucinations of Stalin, Lenin, and a lap dancing Mao Zedong. And why does this 'collective right' self-delusion, time and time and time again, form a backdrop to a morbid obsession with biometrically branding everybody including children to chain them into a slave system that will document and evaluate their entire life ? This should be a clue.

Secondly, what has biometrics and humiliating passenger profiling really got to do with 'facing the threat of mass murder' ? It seems to me not a lot, and that correlation simply can't be seriously made. In the end you're advocating passenger profiling because you want passenger profiling for the sake of passenger profiling, not because it is seriously going to make anyone safer from the government's next terror plot performance.

Thirdly, how is rubber-stamping torturing people to death in Uzbekistan, waging disastrous wars off the back of sexed-up old student essays and other assorted hoaxes which has slain thousands upon thousands as well as at least 115 British troops while putting the country under an increased risk of reprisals, shooting innocent victims umpteen times in the head on the tube whilst making a career out of putting people back into slavery a "protection of life and limb that our citizens demand" ?

Oh we should mention that 'balanced' is New Labour's favourite term which really means inflicted against all common sense and reality by people trying to find a way to engrave their unwanted vile ideologies onto society itself.

And it's also worth remembering that a lot of bad police state stuff like data retention has to be inflicted via the EU, which is now a backdoor clearing house for some New Labour's more ambitious totalitarian projets.

"Meanwhile, a YouGov poll out today reveals that more than half of people in the UK questioned wanted a "more aggressive" foreign policy.

Sure they do. Like they did in March this year, when a Yougov poll showed correctly a dismal 33% of people thought the war against Iraq was the 'right thing'.

Blair's green-lighting of the carnage in Lebanon is essentially another foreign policy decision, and consistent with all other foreign policy decisions, which funny enough, YouGov conducted another poll on last month, of which the Times concluded, "...that only 17 per cent of those surveyed believed that Israel had made an “appropriate and proportional” response to the kidnapping of its soldiers" ^Times

In March 2004, Yougov conducted (surprise surprise) another poll which showed:

"An obvious question concerns whether people think the Anglo-American invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq have made a terrorist attack on Britain more or less likely. Predictably, a large majority, 77 per cent, do believe that the two invasions have increased the chances that the terrorists will attack"

A position famously shared by even the UK's own highly stained intelligence services.

So they don't like Iraq, they don't like Lebanon, they see Afghanistan and Iraq as strongly contributing to terrorism but they want 'a more aggressive foreign policy' at a time when you have an extremely aggressive one that has contributed to the slaughter of thousands in Iraq alone and brought the United Kingdom into international disgrace.

Do the respondents actually understand what a foreign policy is, or do they think it means a 'domestic policy toward foreigners' ? It really makes you wonder about the integrity of these polls and the ability of those being polled to make anything even approaching an informed rational decision at all as they clearly are not in grasp of the essential issues.

Also, from this latest YouGov poll:

"Six out of ten believe government is not exaggerating the terrorism threat while 55 per cent supported passenger profiling at airports"

The far more significant statistic therefore is that 40% are not convinced at all. Although this is a completely pointless excercise, let's just pretend for a second this terrorist plot is what the goverment say it is and that we all want to run around in a stupid flapping panic worshipping the government after they have saved us. What, in reality, is forced biometric screening and profiling going to acheive ?

A huge expense poured down the drain into a humiliating crushing ritual that will quickly deteriorate into people with bad credit, embarrassing medical conditions and those who put out rubbish on the wrong days not being able to fly. Which, by the way is exactly the intention of people like Gordon Brown who, obsessed by neoconservative writings, literally regard the human ID slave grid as exactly that; a means to inflict unprecedented control on society by serving up his personal menu of political punishments based on your lifestyle data as stored and analysed on a centralised government database.

If 55% of the population actually want that, then that is 55% of the population who need serious urgent re-education (or deserve what they get depending on your point of view), but considering their views on everything else are completely contradictory nonsense I think this can be safely be ignored. Also neither the airlines nor airport businesses want it either.

Meanwhile any terrorist is free to attack any other target. So this is not so much about airports, but about introducing thumbscans and iris scans complete with your RFID'd ID card being automatically read to enter railway stations, the underground, buses, hospitals, schools, heck...cinemas, supermarkets, to get in your car (Which Gordon Brown is proposing) and in the end, to leave your house.

Yeah hold on, they told you were under attack from terrorists.

"Other measures agreed include a commitment to stamping out radicalism by stricter policing of the internet, replacing extremism with a "European" model of Islam, a 250 million research project into liquid explosives and a meeting of security services across Europe this month"

This has all the hallmarks of a grand mess in the making as it kind of implies that Islam, if left to it's own devices in Europe will inevitably collapse into extremism. It tends to suggest that Islamic identity is pretty much represented by US propaganda assets like Osama Bin Laden, and the many times killed Al-Zarqawi which, when you think about it, is much like saying European Jewry is tied into veneration of Richard Perle or William Kristol, or like saying George Bush is representative of Christian identity.

Nonetheless, one could only imagine the outrage if the state tried to impose a 'European permitted version' of Christianity, Judaism or any other religion. This should perhaps serve as a reminder to people who, in their desperation at the current global calamity, mistakenly turn to the idea that a tyrannical EU of half-baked federal social fascism should be some sort of 'good cop' counterbalance to the US.

I've said before: if you take the war on terror at face value, then the terrorists have won and you have lost. And your loss is a terrible one; an infinite and ongoing haemorrhage of your very humanity under grotesques like Blair, Brown and Reid, the collapse of society into an appalling political and technological police-state, the end of the rule of law, and inevitably, the total disintegration of the state itself into pockets of anarchy and civil war, that is, if the state can't maintain sufficient order with politically engineered 'terror busts' or if things get bad enough for it: it's very own Tiananmen Squares (hint: look out for this in Parliament Square soon perhaps in protest to a nuclear attack on Iran, hint2: "the rights of the massacred protesters had to be balanced with the rights of the tanks")

In a twisted way, people like Blair, Reid and Brown are right when they say the world has changed, as it is they themselves who are making the changes and it should be an enormous warning sign that this 'plot', before it has even been established, has been jumped on immediately to ram through radical politically unpalatable policies.

It is simply impossible to maintain that terrorists either homegrown or in a cave are making this nightmare happen and it is time to take a stand and say, enough is enough.

terror plot airlines John Reid biometrics