The seizure in 2004 of another IndyMedia server in London by the FBI acting as was reported under the operational status of the so called "Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty" should raise far more disturbing tremors in a nation that professes to hold at its core the respect of individual freedoms, and more importantly press freedoms.

That the 'legal justification', as reported on this web site, was carried out with a gagging order already in place that authorised the withholding of details relating to the seizure shows the breadth of backstage activity already going on by those who are operating under the cover of their own rules infrastructure.

Given the willingness of the establishment to mount such tactics, it is encumbent upon those who hold to a stricter morality to stand firm and to stan together in their beliefs.

The surface explanation of combating terrorism given as part of the reason for the seizure of the London server, and as similarly used in the case of Omar Bakri Mohammed although the wording in the latter was one of not 'conducive to the public good', perhaps reveals the existence of a deeper strata of thinking at high law enforcement level in the UK.

Defining what is or is 'conducive not to the public good' is as broad as defining what constitutes obscenity, given thet the book Lady Chatterly's Lover was once banned from sale in the UK.

Those who would wish to see the continuation of free speech and press and public freedoms are encouraged to log onto www.newsmedianews.com/NewPub/ and join IndyMedia in promoting those very issues.