Monthly Archives: March 2008

Video’s Exposing Freemasons

Click on Google Video Button on video for possible faster download time and to enlarge.

The Secret Architecture Of Washington D.C. Riddles In Stone – David Bay

http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docId=-5839084912030464561&hl=en

The Lightbringers – Juri Lina

http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docId=7652891847477492406&hl=en

Inside The Brotherhood (Part 1)

http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=408481933851926293&hl=en&fs=true

Inside The Brotherhood (Part 2)

http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=5067513302115954895&hl=en&fs=true

Inside The Brotherhood (Part 3)

http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=-6164675559025710672&hl=en&fs=true

The Atlantis Connection

<embed id="VideoPlayback" src="http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=-7065337908393908335&hl=en&fs=true&quot; style="width:400px;height:326px" allowFullScreen="true"

97 Percent Of US Death Toll Came After ‘Mission Accomplished’


Agence France-Presse
March 24, 2008

BAGHDAD (AFP) — The death toll of US soldiers in the five-year Iraq conflict has hit 4,000 in what the US military said Monday was a “tragic” loss of lives after four troops were killed in a Baghdad bombing.

The four soldiers died when their vehicle was hit by a roadside bomb while on patrol late Sunday in southern Baghdad, bringing the overall toll to 4,000, according to an AFP tally based on independent website.

Another soldier was wounded in the attack, a military statement said.

The chaotic and brutal conflict which is now in its sixth year has also wounded more than 29,000 American soldiers, according to icasualties.org.

At least 97 percent of the deaths occurred after US President George W. Bush announced the end of “major combat” in Iraq on May 1, 2003, as the military became caught between a raging anti-American insurgency and brutal sectarian strife unleashed since the toppling of Saddam.

140 American servicemembers died before May 1, 2003, out of a total 4,000.

Despite the losses, Bush on the eve of the war’s fifth anniversary defended his decision to invade Iraq, vowing no retreat as he promised American soldiers would triumph despite the “high cost in lives and treasure.”

US military spokesman in Baghdad, Rear Admiral Gregory Smith, said the loss of every soldier was “tragic”.

“No casualty is more or less significant than another; each soldier, marine, airman and sailor is equally precious and their loss equally tragic,” Smith told AFP.

“Being in the military means we are willingly in harm’s way to protect others in order to bring hope and a sustainable security to the Iraqi people.”

According to icasualties.org, 81.3 percent of the soldiers killed have died in attacks by Al-Qaeda in Iraq fighters, Sunni insurgent groups loyal to Saddam and radical Shiite militias.

The remainder died in non-combat related incidents.

Roadside bombs caused most of the casualties, with small arms fire the second biggest killer.

Around 40 percent of those killed were struck by roadside bombs, according to the website, making these weapons the main cause of fatalities.

Others died variously in car bombings, small arms fire, helicopter crashes, ambushes, rocket attacks and suicide bombings.

American soldiers interviewed by AFP in Iraq expressed sorrow over the casualties but insisted the conflict was justified.

“It’s sad that the number is that high. It makes you wonder if there is a different way of approaching things. Nobody likes to hear that number,” said senior Airman Preston Reeves, 26, from Birmingham, Alabama.

“Everyone of those people signed up voluntarily and its a shame that that happens, but tragedies do happen in war.”

Reeves said it was depressing that the support back home was receding.

“It’s a shame you don’t get support from your own country, when all they want you to do is leave Iraq and all these people will have died in vain,” he told AFP.

The military death toll is one of the key elements of the US 2008 presidential elections for Democrat candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, who are calling for the withdrawal of troops.

The deadliest war for the US military, aside from the two world wars, has been Vietnam, with 58,000 soldiers killed between 1964 and 1973, an average of 26 a day. On average, just over two US soldiers die every day in Iraq.

The icasualties.org statistics reveal that the deadliest year for the military in Iraq was 2007 when it lost 901 troops on the back of a controversial “surge”, which saw an extra 30,000 soldiers deployed in a bid to break the stranglehold of violence that has killed tens of thousands of Iraqis.

This figure compares with 486 deaths in 2003, the first year of the conflict, 849 in 2004, 846 in 2005 and 822 in 2006.

Since the start of 2008, 96 soldiers have died.

US military commanders in Iraq acknowledge that putting extra troops on the ground also exposed them to more attacks.

In recent months the military has begun withdrawing the surge troops as violence levels fall across the country, with US and Iraqi officials reporting a 60-percent drop in attacks since June.

Most of the attacks in the past five years have been staged in four of Iraq’s 18 provinces.

The western Sunni province of Anbar witnessed most overall casualties, with 1,282 losses since the US-led invasion, according to icasualties.org, followed by Baghdad with 1,255, Salaheddin with 376, and Diyala with 238.

In Anbar and Salaheddin the military faced a strong anti-American insurgency, while in Baghdad and Diyala it has been caught in a three-way fight involving Al-Qaeda, Sunni groups loyal to Saddam and Shiite militias.

But for the past year attacks against US troops have fallen sharply in Anbar after local Sunni Arab groups joined forces with the US military to fight Al-Qaeda in Iraq.

According to the website, November 2004 remains the deadliest month for the US military in Iraq.

It lost 137 troops that month when it launched a massive assault to take back the Anbar city of Fallujah, then a Sunni insurgent bastion.

The US state of California has borne the brunt of American losses, with at least 426 soldiers killed in the conflict.

The US military is also searching for four of its soldiers missing in Iraq.

Two of them were captured in May last year after insurgents ambushed their patrol south of Baghdad in an attack which killed four other soldiers and their interpreter.

Al-Qaeda in Iraq in a later Internet message said it had kidnapped and killed the soldiers. The military says it is still searching for them.

Apart from deaths due to hostile fire, 145 soldiers have died due to “self-inflicted wounds,” the website said, indicating a large number of suicides.

The death toll also includes 102 female service members.

The TSA Continues Delivery Of Total Enslavement, Tells Woman To Remove Nipple Rings


Lee Rogers
Rogue Government
March 28, 2008

The terrorists in the Transportation Security Administration otherwise known as the TSA responded to news of a woman saying that security screeners humiliated her by forcing her to remove body piercings because they set off the metal detector alarm. The woman was forced to remove the piercings with pliers while low class TSA goons laughed at her. The TSA claims that there are numerous incidents of female terrorists hiding explosives in sensitive areas of the human body so that’s why the actions by the security screeners were warranted. It is funny how the TSA declines to list all of these different incidents involving female terrorists hiding explosives around their private areas. The bottom line is that the TSA’s main purpose is not to provide safety but instead to ensure that the American people are acclimated into the 21st century technological enslavement system. How does forcing people to remove body piercings keep the American people safe from terrorism? The whole thing is a joke and the TSA should be abolished and their $10 an hour employees should find their way to an unemployment line.

Here is a blurb from an Associated Press report detailing this particular incident.

A Texas woman who said she was forced to remove a nipple ring with pliers in order to board an airplane called Thursday for an apology by federal security agents and a civil rights investigation.

“I wouldn’t wish this experience upon anyone,” Mandi Hamlin said at a news conference. “My experience with TSA was a nightmare I had to endure. No one deserves to be treated this way.”

Hamlin, 37, said she was trying to board a flight from Lubbock to Dallas on Feb. 24 when she was scanned by a Transportation Security Administration agent after passing through a larger metal detector without problems.

The female TSA agent used a handheld detector that beeped when it passed in front of Hamlin’s chest, the Dallas-area resident said. Hamlin said she told the woman she was wearing nipple piercings. The agent then called over her male colleagues, one of whom said she would have to remove the jewelry, Hamlin said.

Hamlin said she could not remove them and asked whether she could instead display her pierced breasts in private to the female agent. But several other male officers told her she could not board her flight until the jewelry was out, she said.

She was taken behind a curtain and managed to remove one bar-shaped piercing but had trouble with the second, a ring.

“Still crying, she informed the TSA officer that she could not remove it without the help of pliers, and the officer gave a pair to her,” said Hamlin’s attorney, Gloria Allred, reading from a letter she sent Thursday to the director of the TSA’s Office of Civil Rights and Liberties. Allred is a well-known Los Angeles lawyer who often represents high-profile claims.

Applying pliers to the torso of a mannequin that had a peach-colored bra with the rings on it, Hamlin showed reporters at the news conference how she took off the second ring.

She said she heard male TSA agents snickering as she took out the ring. She was scanned again and was allowed to board even though she still was wearing a belly button ring.

Here is the original response from the TSA regarding this incident that has since been removed from their web site.

TSA is actively investigating Ms. Hamlin’s allegations to ensure procedures were followed appropriately. Our security officers are well-trained to screen individuals with body piercings in sensitive areas with dignity and respect while ensuring a high level of security.

TSA is well aware of terrorists’ interest in hiding dangerous items in sensitive areas of the body, therefore we have a duty to the American public to resolve any alarm that we discover. Incidents of female terrorists hiding explosives in sensitive areas are on the rise all over the world. This scenario must be addressed at our nation’s airports.

This message has been replaced with another statement saying that they are now going to change procedures as a result of the incident. Considering that this is the same institution that has made people remove their shoes going through metal detectors, banned liquids and adopted all sorts of ridiculous procedures, one can’t help but be pessimistic about these changes.

Apparently the TSA thinks that people wearing body piercings in private areas of their body could be hiding something and are terrorists. This is insane. There is no need for these intrusive and humiliating searches. Not to mention, there is no evidence indicating that there are all of these female terrorists hiding explosives around the areas of their private parts. If there actually is, perhaps the TSA would like to share us specific information. It seems fairly obvious that the TSA is just making this up so they can try and save face in light of another embarrassing public relations snafu. Pretty soon the TSA will force all of us to walk through metal detectors naked followed by full cavity searches. They will claim that this is designed to protect you from Al-Qaeda a so called terrorist group that doesn’t even exist as a true organization. It was founded by the U.S. government in the late 1970s as a list of Islamic freedom fighters that could be counted on to fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. Al-Qaeda doesn’t even exist as a real organization. It is all a big fraud, and it would take pages upon pages of text to detail all of the different lies that the government and the media use to convince the American people that the war on terror is real. You are more likely to die in a car accident or in a swimming pool than you are from international terrorists. The war on terror is actually the war of terror and it has no basis in reality. It is just an excuse for the U.S. government to go around the world invading countries and to implement a totalitarian technological enslavement system for the American people.

We are living in a police state and this incident as well as the TSA’s ridiculous response to the incident shows us that we are living in tyranny. Protest this tyranny by limiting airline travel as much as possible so that the airlines go bankrupt. Maybe then, the airline companies will lobby to get rid of the TSA and their Gestapo police state tactics.

Jerome Corsi Denied Permission To Hear Defense Of Mexican Truck Program By Department Of Transportation


Posted: March 10, 2008
12:16 pm Eastern
WorldNetDaily

The Department of Transportation today barred WND from attending a news conference in which Secretary Mary Peters defended the controversial Bush administration program allowing Mexican trucks to travel freely on U.S. roads.

Agency spokesman Duane DeBruyne, who was screening reporters at the security entrance of the federal building at the Navy Yard in Washington, D.C., said he did not have the authority to allow entry to WND senior staff writer Jerome Corsi, who has reported extensively on the program and attended other news conferences on the subject.

DeBruyne telephoned his supervisor, DOT spokeswoman Melissa DeLaney, who declined permission without explanation, requiring WND to leave the premises.

In a phone call to the DOT public affairs office, the agency explained it was requiring “press credentials” for admittance, and no one without them was allowed to participate.

The news conference was only for “credentialed members of the media,” spokesman Bill Moseley told WND. “There’s a specific credential. He did not have a media credential.”

And how can a reporter obtain such a credential providing permission to attend?

“I don’t know,” Moseley responded.

But Corsi said he was never asked to produce media credentials of any kind, noting he had a press ID card issued by WND. DeBruyne, Corsi said, immediately recognized him and apologetically explained the department would “not accept your press credentials.”

Corsi paraphrased DeBruyne saying, “We know who you are, we know you’re from WND, we read your stories.”

“They never asked for what credentials I had,” Corsi said. “They didn’t want to see anything from me. That was never in question.”

“It’s outrageous you were turned away at the door,” Teamster President James P. Hoffa told WND. “I thought we had free press in the United States. What’s Secretary Peters afraid of?”

The press conference by Peters came in advance of what is expected to be a rancorous oversight hearing tomorrow scheduled by the Senate Commerce Committee on the issue.

“WND sent a New York-based reporter to Washington to cover an area within his specialization, only to be turned away by bureaucrats for not being ‘credentialed,'” said Joseph Farah, WND’s founder and editor.

“WorldNetDaily is credentialed by the Senate Press Gallery to cover the Capitol. WorldNetDaily is credentialed to cover the White House. WorldNetDaily is a member in good standing of the Washington Press Club. Our reporter on the scene is a Harvard Ph.D and best-selling author. WorldNetDaily is one of the largest news sources in the world, larger than any newspaper websites except the New York Times, Washington Post and USA Today. If those credentials aren’t good enough, I’d sure like to know which journalists were permitted in the Department of Transportation hearing.”

Hoffa told WND he planned to call Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J, who is expected to chair the hearing, to protest WND being turned away.

Leslie Miller, the Teamsters communications coordinator, also was dismayed WND had been prevented from hearing the DOT press conference.

“It’s an absolute outrage when the executive branch of the government tries to stifle free speech by selecting who it shares information with,” Miller wrote WND in an e-mail.

“What are they afraid of? Are their arguments so weak they can only allow people they consider ‘friendly’ into their news conferences?” she asked.

As WND previously reported, a constitutional crisis is developing over DOT’s decision to continue the Mexican demonstration project in defiance of a vote by the House and Senate that removed funding for the effort. That vote was in the Consolidated Appropriations Act signed by President Bush Dec. 26.

At the press conference today, Peters announced plans to forward to Congress a letter signed by 69 companies and associations urging Congress to allow the project to continue, under the argument that Mexico could retaliate if it is discontinued.

The letter argued Mexican retaliation could jeopardize up to 49,909 U.S. jobs in 17 states.

In a statement posted on the agency’s website, Peters “cautioned Congress” not to stop the program.

“Whatever their reason, this is not time to let the politics of pessimism dim the promise of prosperity for hundreds of thousands of American drivers, growers and manufacturers,” she said. “We should be looking for every chance to open new markets for our drivers, to find new buyers for our products and encourage new consumers for our produce.

“Our drivers and our workers don’t deserve a timeout from success and prosperity. So my message to Congress is clear. If you want to help American businesses thrive, support American agricultural success, and champion American highway safety, then keep on trucking with cross border shipping,” the statement said.

Rod Nofziger, director of government affairs at the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, was not impressed with Peters’ statement.

“The Bush administration seems to appreciate Vladimir Putin’s approach to executive branch activism,” he said.

“Today’s press conference was a weak attempt to shift the focus away from the safety and security deficiencies of their pilot program,” Nofziger said in a e-mail. “It’s sad they are turning to economic fear mongering to cover their tails.”

Hoffa agreed, arguing Peters is on the losing side of the argument, both legally and in the court of public opinion.

“How many times does the Department of Transportation have to be told ‘No’? The Senate has said ‘No’ and the House has said ‘No.’ President Bush signed the bill removing funding for the Mexican truck demonstration project to continue. What more does DOT need?” he said.

As WND reported, the Teamsters argued Feb. 12 in front of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that Peters broke federal laws aimed at ensuring American voters are not endangered by allowing Mexican trucks on U.S. roads.

In a press teleconference today, Hoffa cited as evidence of the safety hazards represented by Mexican trucks a Jan. 11 accident at the Pharr-Reynosa International Bridge in Texas caused by a Mexican driver who made a U-turn at the border, triggering a collision and fire that killed four and left six with minor injuries.

Mexican truck drivers routinely make U-turns back into Mexico when they realize they will be stopped at the border and denied entry because they lack proper documentation to bring their cargo into the U.S.

“George Bush is a lame duck,” Hoffa said. “The administration has a limited time frame to get Mexican trucks into the United States on an unlimited basis, and they don’t care what they need to do to get this done.”

Asked about Peter’s argument that U.S. trucking companies want access to Mexico, Hoffa scoffed.

“It’s ridiculous when the State Department issues regular warnings to alert U.S. citizens to the dangers of kidnappings and murder if they travel Mexico’s roads,” he said. “No trucker wants to drive a load of automobiles into Mexico to park them somewhere.”

The arguments presented to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals came in cases brought by the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association and a coalition of the Sierra Club, International Brotherhood of Teamsters and Public Citizen.

“It makes no sense that while safety and security laws are continually being ratcheted up on U.S.-based drivers and companies, the DOT wants to allow their Mexico-based counterparts to get by with lower standards,” said Todd Spencer, executive vice president of OOIDA.

His organization alleges the Mexican-based carriers are not meeting U.S. rules and regulations regarding safety. Specifically, OOIDA has challenged Department of Transportation claims that drug and alcohol testing programs, medical qualifications standards and commercial driver’s license demands for truck drivers in Mexico are “equivalent” to those for U.S. drivers.

Catherine O’Mara, a paralegal from the Cullen Law Firm of Washington, D.C., previously compiled the safety inspection reports on the Mexico-based motor carriers and a summary of selected SafeStat Data.

Her work showed that in the span of one year, Sept. 21, 2006, to Sept. 21, 2007, four of the Mexican companies participating in the Bush administration’s test trucking program collected more than 1,700 safety violations.

The Teamsters, who argued a separate legal challenge to the program on related issues, have taken the issue one step further, launching a campaign to encourage the firing of Peters, on whose watch the program has been developed.

Minnesota Cops, School District: OK to Use Tasers On Students


Superior Daily Telegram
February 08, 2008

(I guess calling the parents first was out of the question for police state Minnesota. They get enjoyment out of hurting children.)

Superior High School scored a dubious first last week when law enforcement officers subdued a student with a Taser stun gun.

The electronic devices have been part of the Superior Police Department’s arsenal for the past two years. Last week, Officer Jeff Darst was the first to deploy one in a school. The target was a 15-year-old boy.

Assistant Police Chief Chuck LaGesse called the Taser’s use reasonable as officers and school administrators struggled to gain control of a violent situation.

“I’m not uncomfortable with it,” school district Superintendent Jay Mitchell said. He said officers used necessary means to defuse a difficult situation.

“In this particular case, the young man involved was out of control,” Mitchell said.

The Taser, a brand name for a stun gun that can propel electrodes toward its intended subject, wasn’t fired.

“They used it as more of a stun gun to get his attention,” Mitchell said.

The teen, who stands 6 feet tall and weighs more than 300 pounds, was not injured by the incident, according to police reports.

“He appeared fine, and there was very little, if any, sign of Taser use on his right back area,” Darst wrote in his report.

An electronic control device like a Taser transmits electrical pulses that lock up skeletal muscles during the few seconds it is applied. Barbs are either shot out of the gun to hook into the suspect’s clothing or skin, or the gun is placed close to the skin causing a stun effect. The Superior Police Department’s X26 and older M26 Tasers pack 50,000 volts but only a fraction of an amp.

“Amperage is what makes electricity deadly,” LaGesse said.

The department deploys its Tasers about 20 times a year, on average, and every officer is trained to use them.

LaGesse said use of the device at a school is uncommon and generally unnecessary, but not prohibited.

According to Superior police reports, the incident started when the student began swearing at staff members and refusing to follow directions. When School Liaison Officer Tom Johnson was called to Assistant Principal Steve Olson’s office to issue the 15-year-old a citation, problems escalated. The boy tried to leave and swung at Johnson when the officer stopped him, according to reports. Johnson placed the boy up against the wall with the help of Olson and Assistant Principal Bill Punyko. By that point, Johnson wrote in his report, the boy “was totally out of control … flailing his arms and trying to either hit us and/or get away.”

The three adults brought him to the floor, but the boy continued to fight. He repeatedly kicked Johnson in the lower back and tried to bite both school officials, reports stated.

Johnson called in more officers to help prevent the boy from hurting himself or the adults. Three officers responded and Darst deployed the Taser as they struggled to apply handcuffs. The boy complied after the stun was applied.

At the point when officers entered the room, LaGesse said, they had other options to gain control — using pressure points, pepper spray or a baton.

“All of these are more likely to create injury than a Taser,” LaGesse said.

Electronic control devices are not governed by the state of Wisconsin.

“We don’t have any mandate at the moment,” said Ken Hammond, law enforcement education director for the Wisconsin Department of Justice Training and Standards Bureau.

While the bureau does offer sample policies on its Web site, he said, “Policies are a matter of home rule and local control.”

Superior’s policy on the use of nonlethal force places Tasers on the same level as pepper spray. They may be deployed to control a dangerous or violent person when other tactics have been ineffective or the officer believes other options would be either unsafe or ineffective.

“Our guidelines take into consideration: ‘What do you need to do to establish control?’ Age is really secondary,” LaGesse said.

Use of Tasers by law enforcement officers is not prohibited by Superior school district policies.

“When police take over, they do whatever they think is necessary,” Mitchell said. Crafting a policy to prevent Taser use, he said, would be like tying the hands of police officers.

“Having a person out of control, trying to deal with him and not hurt him is a difficult situation to be in,” Mitchell said.

The Duluth school district would frown on the use of Tasers in its schools, Superintendent Keith Dixon said Thursday.

“We don’t necessarily have a policy at this time,” Dixon said, “but [Duluth Police Chief] Gordon Ramsey and I have talked about it, and in our judgment Tasers are not an appropriate use in our schools. I don’t know what happened in Superior, but in our discussions we just see too many downsides and we don’t want them in our buildings. … I know he has informed his officers of that, so that is where we are at on the issue right now.”

The 15-year-old was arrested on charges of battery to a law enforcement officer, attempted battery to school officials, resisting an officer and disorderly conduct. He was then released to his mother.

Zbigniew Brzezinski Mocks Questions Concerned With Bilderberg Group Secrecy

Infowars.com

Part 1

Part 2

About a dozen members of We Are Change confronted Zbigniew Brzezinksi, former National Security Advisor under Carter, with questions about the secretive Bilderberg group, the consequences of setting up the Mujahideen and other questions which were largely ridiculed and rejected by Brzezinski as the queries of ‘conspiracy theorists.’

Luke Rudkowski previously confronted Brzezinski in an encounter that ended with him being ejected from the building for asking a pointed question.

Brzezinksi even commented sarcastically that the Bilderberg group indulges in “drinking the blood of the poor”– a comment which may illustrate the underlying disconnect between elites who wield extremely concentrated power and the effect of their policies on the remainder of the world, who largely have no power to control factors that affect them.

Brzezinski ignored the issues raised, including the pattern of false-flag provocation to start conflicts– instead taking the opportunity to belittle those who dared to ask such questions. He was obviously irritated that the sycophants did not turn out in droves for his talk at Columbia University in the same numbers that concerned members of We Are Change did.

The University ejected at least one member and deflected several other questions.

Nightmare Biometric Control Grid Not Fascist Enough For U.S. Airports


Karen De Coster
LRC Blog
March 23, 2008

Homeland Security the Militarized Police State Shock You Into Submission?”> Will Homeland Security the Militarized Police State Shock You Into Submission?

This is perhaps one of the most kooky and creepy Security State tactics that I have come across: the EMD safety bracelet, which is being billed as the “last line of defence.” A company called Lamperd Firearm Training Systems (scroll down) is trying to commercialize this item as an “airline security product.” The company’s video that hawks this device talks about the current facial recognition system called biometrics, where cameras capture photos of people and compare those images to the images of “terrorists” in its “terrorist” database. No matter how sophisticated this technology, it can all too often allow a terrorist on board a plane, and, this technology can also have the effect of creating airport bottlenecks. Ahem. The solution? The “viable, workable answer” is an electronic ID bracelet. This bracelet will replace the need for a ticket and contain all necessary information about the person, and as a bonus, it can allow the passenger to be tracked through the terminal. Crew members would be empowered with radio frequency transmitters to subdue “hijackers.” The technology will override a person’s central nervous system and zap them down quicker than you can say “Homeland Security.” The company assures us that being dragged through the bracelet process is a “small inconvenience in order to assure your safe arrival.” In fact, its studies show that most people would “happily opt” for wearing the bracelet to “insure their own security.”

Here’s the Lamperd video on YouTube – you must watch it. Here’s the patent for this device. The patent actually reads this:

Upon activation of the electric shock device, through receipt of an activating signal from the selectively operable remote control means, the passenger wearing that particular bracelet receives the disabling electrical shock from the electric shock device. Accordingly, the passenger becomes incapacitated for a few seconds or perhaps a few minutes, during which time the passenger can be fully subdued and handcuffed, if necessary. Depending on the type of transmission medium used to send the activating signal, other passengers may also become temporarily incapacitated, which is undesirable and unfortunate, but may be unavoidable.

Lamperd even posts a series of letters on its website showing interest in the product for use “outside of airport security,” which, of course, is the real reason for the product. Why it can be used for border control to subdue illegal aliens or by local law enforcement agencies to control the “criminal element!”

« Older Entries