Blair to curb human rights in war on terror

"All governments are lying cocksuckers, I hope you know that." - Bill Hicks

Ultimately, this is why the bombs went off and all those people died. More moves to turn this country into a police state. And people seem to welcome it with open arms. Westminster and the media whores have them all so scared that I've seen people getting off buses in Brighton when Muslim guys with rucksacks get on. It shows you how ill-informed certain sections of this country are, thanks largely to the efforts of Rupert Murdoch I might add. It's rather frightening when one thinks about it.

Tony Blair served notice yesterday that he was ready to renounce parts of the European convention on human rights if British and European judges continued to block the deportation of Islamic extremists in the wake of the London bombings.

In a significant shift away from the human rights policies championed by Labour since 1997, Mr Blair indicated that he was no longer prepared to allow Britain to be a haven for Muslim extremists whose presence in London has resulted in its being dubbed "Londonistan".

He said he was prepared for "a lot of battles" with the courts, which have repeatedly intervened to prevent the Home Secretary from deporting "preachers of hate" and other foreign nationals regarded as a threat to national security.

"Should legal obstacles arise, we will legislate further, including, if necessary, amending the Human Rights Act in respect of the interpretation of the European convention on human rights," the Prime Minister said.

At a Downing Street press conference before leaving for his summer holiday, he outlined 12 far-reaching curbs on civil liberties to tackle the growth of Islamic extremism.

The sweeping package of anti-terrorist laws included deporting Islamic extremists, closing mosques that fomented hatred, outlawing radical Muslim groups such as Hizb-ut-Tahrir, vetting foreign imams before they came to Britain and stronger powers to deal with home-grown fanatics.

Mr Blair said that because of the London bombings the public wanted new laws to deport and exclude religious fanatics and extremists who were abusing the country's traditional values of tolerance and fair play. The mood was now different and people no longer accused the Government of "scaremongering".

"Let no one be in any doubt," he said, "the rules of the games are changing."

At the heart of the security measures was Mr Blair's determination to regain the right of the elected government to deport foreigners it believed posed a threat to national security.

This was a recognition that the Human Rights Act, introduced by Labour in 1998, had made it virtually impossible to deport foreign militants and enabled the law lords to strike down anti-terrorism laws because they considered them incompatible with the European convention.

Mr Blair's wife, Cherie, a human rights lawyer, has said that the Government should not be provoked into interfering with the independence of the courts. Questioned about her views, the Prime Minister said the right to life and freedom from terrorism was a basic human right.

New grounds for deportation published by the Home Office included fostering hatred, advocating or justifying violence, or active engagement with extremist websites, bookshops and networks.

Mr Blair acknowledged that, since 1996, deportations had been blocked as a result of a European Court ruling that article 3 of the convention on human rights prevented people from being sent back to countries where they could face torture or ill-treatment. He said the circumstances of Britain's national security had changed and the Government was ready to test its new powers in the courts at home and in Europe.

The Government was seeking assurances from the countries where deportees would be returned that they would not be ill-treated. Agreement had been reached with Jordan and discussions were continuing with 10 other countries, including Algeria and Lebanon.

In what will be seen as a plea to British and European judges to reflect the public demand for action, Mr Blair said that France and Spain, both subject to the same human rights convention, were able to deport by administrative decision, with their courts ready to accept assurances that deportees would not be ill-treated on their return.

David Davis, the shadow home secretary, welcomed the Government's proposals. He said it was vital that the Home Secretary was able to use his powers to deport or exclude non-British citizens who threatened national security.

Mr Blair ran into opposition from civil rights campaigners and the Liberal Democrats, who said the Government risked inflaming tensions and alienating Muslims.

Eric Metcalfe, of the human rights group Justice, predicted that any attempt to amend the Human Rights Act to force the courts to deport foreigners was "doomed to failure".

Full story...

One-man force to be reckoned with

The sudden and to my mind suspicious death of a great man. I didn't always agree with him, but at the end of the day Robin Cook had more moral fibre in his left testicle than Phony Bliar has got in his whole body! He resigned from the government out of principle, how many other of those political wretches can say the same thing? If half of Westminster were half the man that Robin Cook was then there would be no need for this website!

Something about this whole thing does not make sense. You'll think "here we go again, Ewar on a paranoia trip" but think about it for a second. Robin Cook was a very healthy person, a regular hill-walker and no-one who knew him has said he had any medical complaints. And yet he drops dead in the highlands doing something he does regularly. His wife said, "he had just suddenly collapsed and stopped breathing ... He had not complained of any pain..." from the newspapers; "Cook was one of the MPs many would have regarded as least likely to have suffered a premature death." and yet everyone just accepts that this was natural causes. Oh no, our government couldn't possibly knock-off a potential opponent, they're much too nice for that! My arse!

Robin Cook was potentially one of Tony's biggest headaches, the only reason he wasn't a headache was because he never actively chose to oppose the government. But what if something made him change his mind? How much of a threat would Robin have been if he'd decided to go up against Phony?

The hillwalking which claimed Robin Cook's life yesterday was a pastime with many allegories to his political career.

He was a loner who wanted space for his own thoughts and saw much of life as a one-man game.

He never joined one of the Labour Party's political tribes, nor sought to start his own. But he was able to make an incredible impact through the sheer force of his intellect, which made him - even on the backbenches - a big political beast.

Even at 59, with a four-year stint at the Foreign Office behind him, he was far from a spent force. He had become Labour's most authoritative and eloquent sceptic in the war on terror. And he was struck down midway through a new political life.

For a man who never sought gangs of friends in the Commons, he had admirers stretching to all political parties. From entering the House as an MP in 1974 - on his 28th birthday - he quickly became known as one of its best orators.

His forensic intelligence and savage debating skills were put to use regularly, allowing him to work his way to the top of Labour's hierarchy. A former CND activist, he had joined the right side of the New Labour movement and was one of its up-and-coming men.

The Commons was the scene of his greatest political moments - specifically his stunning response to the Scott Report into the arms-to-Iraq scandal.

Given only two hours to fillet the document, he delivered a withering attack on John Major's government, seen by all parties as a key moment in its downfall.

His time as Foreign Secretary was not without incident. His attempt to forge an "ethical foreign policy" had mixed success: the government sold Hawk jets to Indonesia and Cook found himself under fire over the 1998 bombing of Iraq.

Although he was furious when asked to stand down as Foreign Secretary in 2001, it was the making of his new career: as Leader of the Commons - an institution he loved. He found a new career on the fringes of government.

Few ministers cherished this post as much as Cook. He loved the Commons; saw it as the cockpit of British democracy and loved debating in it. Few had such a command of the House: he could draw laughs, sighs and even applause on demand.

And he found all three when giving his resignation speech two years ago. Its sharpness lay in the calm. "I had forgotten how much better the view is from here," he said from the backbenches.

Full story...

7/7 Bombings Final Word: Her Majesty's Terrorist Network

The chaps at propagandamatrix.com are to be commended for their dilligent following of this story. It's because of them that a lot of the story has emerged and we owe them a debt of gratitude. Make sure you visit their site and buy one of their t-shirts!

Only conspiracy theorists would believe the government wasn't involved

by Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones

The wealth of evidence that has emerged in the month following the 7/7 London bombings only leads us to one clear conclusion, that the attacks had to have been orchestrated by or with help from the very highest levels of British intelligence.

The latest piece of evidence to suggest that the official story is a fraud focuses again on the contention that the bombs were placed under the trains and were not detonated by suicide bombers wearing backpacks.

The first eyewitness to report this was Bruce Lait, a victim of the Aldgate Station bombing.

He told the Cambridge Evening News,

"The policeman said 'mind that hole, that's where the bomb was'. The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train. They seem to think the bomb was left in a bag, but I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag."

Now another credible source, Guardian journalist Mark Honigsbaum, talked to eyewitnesses at the Edgware Road bombing, who essentially described the same thing.

Eyewitnesses told Honigsbaum that "tiles, the covers on the floor of the train, suddenly flew up, raised up."

How could the floor of the train raise up from a bomb supposedly in the backpack of an individual seated in the carriage, above the floor?

The victims then heard "an almighty crash" as a train traveling in the opposite direction collided, clearly indicating that the train had derailed due to the bomb being placed under the carriage.

Click here to hear the audio.

For individuals to plant bombs underneath trains and secure them in place without being caught, they would need to secure access to the trains. In this scenario, London Underground could have been told that a dummy device was to be placed underneath the train as part of an exercise to test security an alertness. When the real attacks happened some LU officials would have been alarmed but their suspicions would have dampened when it was revealed that the bombs were carried in backpacks, meaning that the drill was just a strange 'coincidence'.

The fact that the bombs were actually planted underneath the trains could have easily been buried in an avalanche of official announcements to the contrary.

On the other hand the backpack bombs could have just been the diversionary blasts to enable patsies to be framed, just like the planes flying into the towers acted as the diversionary cover for the explosives planted inside the World Trade Center.

The fact that the ID's of all the so-called suicide bombers were found in pristine condition right next to where the bombs went off strongly suggests the planting of evidence to frame patsies. The ID's would have had a very good chance of surviving if the bomb was not in the backpack with them, but underneath the train.

The drill scenario would have provided culpability cover if investigators started asking questions about objects underneath the carriage.

As we have exhaustively documented, such a drill did take place on the morning of 7/7.

A consultancy agency with government and police connections was running an exercise for an unnamed company that revolved around the London Underground being bombed at the exact same times and locations as happened in real life on the morning of July 7th.

On a BBC Radio 5 interview that aired on the evening of the 7th, the host interviewed Peter Power, Managing Director of Visor Consultants, which bills itself as a 'crisis management' advice company, better known to you and I as a PR firm.

Peter Power was a former Scotland Yard official, working at one time with the Anti Terrorist Branch.

Power told the host that at the exact same time that the London bombings were taking place, his company was running a 1,000 person strong exercise which drilled the London Underground being bombed at the exact same locations, at the exact same times, as happened in real life.

How can anyone credibly claim that this was sheer coincidence when pieced together with the rest of the evidence?

Our original article on this matter is the top link on Google when you type in 'London bombing' - above BBC, CNN and ABC News, proof of how much attention this article received.

Our suspicions were aroused just hours after the bombing when it was reported by Associated Press that Israeli Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had received a warning from the Israeli Embassy not to leave his hotel for a speech he was to give that morning. The location of the speech was right next to the site of one of the bombings.

Despite debunking attempts from much of the establishment press, Associated Press never retracted the story and later Mossad admitted that it was true.

The so-called claim of responsibility for the attack was made by a group that is known to not physically exist and which at best is one guy sitting at a computer posting messages on a forum.

And yet the establishment media still report Al-Qaeda responsibility for the attack as if it were the gospel truth.

Exactly what evidence have we seen to even agree with the contention that four men with rucksack bombs carried out this attack? Four grainy CCTV pictures of dark skinned men with rucksacks? Should we not question this evidence especially when verified witnesses on two of the three trains that were bombed said that the bombs were underneath the train and that they saw no men with rucksacks even in the area?

Questions about the attacks are never ending.

Why was it reported that the explosives used were military in origin but then the story changed to say they were homemade? Can explosive experts not tell the difference or was the story changed for a reason?

Why would a man with an 8-month old baby, another who was only interested in sports, and another who taught disabled children, want to kill themselves, other innocent people and cause so much carnage in the process?

Even the establishment media started speculating that the bombers were duped into killing themselves by someone else.

Why did the cameras on the targeted bus malfunction that day? Why was the bus diverted from its usual route? We personally visited the site of the bus bombing at Tavistock Place and verified that no number 30 bus travels down that road.

What are we to make of claims by Stagecoach bus employees who say that a different group of contractors inspected the CCTV cameras in the days before the bombings and that they took two entire days to carry out tasks which normally take just hours to complete.

What is the reason behind Alan Greenspan's decision to flush nearly $40 billion in liquidity into financial markets two days before the attack? Was this an attempt to preemptively head off a run on the markets? If Greenspan had information about a terror attack then why didn't the people on the trains and buses get the same warning?

Who were the individuals that profited from short-selling the British Pound in the ten days before the attack? The pound fell 6% for no particular reason. Fortunes were made after the pound dropped even further in the aftermath of the attacks. This directly mirrors short selling of United and American Airline stocks in the days before 9/11. These suspicious transactions led directly to the CIA.

Why was an innocent man, Jean Charles de Menezes, shot in the head eight times at Stockwell tube station? Why did the police change their story, from saying Menezes was wearing a heavy jacket to admitting it was a lightweight denim jacket? Why did the media initially report that Menezes was shot in the stomach but then change the story when it was pointed out that it would be stupid to shoot suspected suicide bombers in the very place that the bomb would be.

Was Menezes shot because he knew something about the drills? Menezes was an electrician by trade. Did he have damaging knowledge of why the bombings were reported as an electrical surge for over an hour?

Why did Tony Blair immediately reject a public inquiry into how and why the bombings took place? In Britain, there is a public inquiry for every event, no matter how insignificant, and yet after Britain's biggest tragedy since the blitz, Blair shuts the door. What is he frightened of?

The final nail in the coffin regarding inside involvement emerged when it was admitted that the so-called mastermind of both the 7/7 and 7/21 attacks, Haroon Rashid Aswat, is a British Intelligence Asset.

Terror expert John Loftus told Fox News,

"Back in 1999 he came to America. The Justice Department wanted to indict him in Seattle because him and his buddy were trying to set up a terrorist training school in Oregon... we've just learned that the headquarters of the US Justice Department ordered the Seattle prosecutors not to touch Aswat... , apparently Aswat was working for British intelligence."

The mastermind of the London bombings was under the direction and protection of MI6. How much more obvious does it need to be that criminal elements of the intelligence agencies were involved in this attack?

Related: London Bombings Data Page

Dupes and dupers in London, America, and the world

How does it feel to be lied to, manipulated and generally treated like you're the dot above the "i" in the word "shit"? The bombs have given our Dear Leader the license to do whatever he wants. He and his friends, George and Arik, now continue their rampage across the civil liberties and lives of thousands. They inhabit the earth like a cancerous growth, out of control and destroying the very environment in which they exist. Working at the behest of their capitalist paymasters they know no remorse or guilt, nor do they grieve for the thousands that die in their meaningless wars. They just do what they're told, they hold us in contempt so why would they not easily sacrifice our lives in the name of power? They hold up their flags and banners as symbols for us to follow but I say that those banners are written in blood and any who follow them follow the way of blood and death, and ultimate disgrace. To be with them is to be on the side of darkness, to follow them is to damn yourself. Mark my words, this darkness must be stopped or humanity's days are numbered. If we allow it to cloak the world in night then nothing in our history will have prepared us for the consequences of the living hell which we will surely all inhabit thereafter. It may seem like you are one voice of sanity in a symphony of idiocy but you're wrong. The only idiocy is that which forms the systems of control in this world, they are drunk on their power and have lost the capacity for reason. They see only their goal and care not how it is achieved, the cost in human souls is irrelevant, they must prevail. But in the greater scheme of things they won't because even the smallest match can illuminate the darkest room. You are that match.

by Jerry Mazza

Now that the British police and intelligence are having second doubts about the four bombers being suicide bombers, the notion has surfaced that maybe they were duped into dying. The question is who are the dupers?

After all, each of the four young men who died (or vanished) on July 7 had purchased round trip railway tickets from Luton to London. I guess you wouldn't do that if you weren't planning to come back. Germaine Lindsay's rented car was left in Luton with a seven-day parking sticker on the dashboard. Also, a large quantity of explosive was left in the trunk of that car, maybe for a second round of bombings.

One of the other alleged bombers also had his car fixed, probably to insure a getaway. What's more, all the men carried driver's licenses and other ID cards with them to their deaths, unusual for suicide bombers, unless you were Mohammed Atta, and your ID somehow managed to pop up clean and clear as day in the wreckage of 9/11. That is, after the plane you flew into the tower exploded in flames and came down in a heap with the building. But that could be someone else's way of saying, hint, hint, it was him, he did it, which might indicate someone was trying to dupe us. Who could that have been?

Well let's think. Maybe the London guys carrying the bombs onto the trains were 'mules," who planned to just leave them to make a few bucks. Maybe they were angry young men making a political statement, maybe both. Their handler might have promised it was an in and out job and they could get out before the blast. The blasts might have surprised them as much as the horrified onlookers and victims. Bottom line, dead men tell no tales, which perhaps they never considered. But 57 minutes later, the fourth bomber, who I guess never bothered to check on his first three cohorts, went up in smoke the same way. Witnesses, it is said, actually saw him put his hand in the backpack—to ignite the bomb or look for his shades and split? We'll never know.

Then we have the July 21 bombers, exactly two weeks later, for whom practice obviously didn't make perfect. The bombs failed to explode. The bomber on the bus took off as the detonator fizzled. Did he and the others instantly assume they might be on their way to heaven? If so, maybe they weren't ready to meet the virgins waiting there. Maybe they were lightweights. And calling them suicide bombers, calling on the full flagon of fear from the English and Europe, was bloody unnecessary, and not a signal for a new level of threat. After all, it is easier to recruit "mules" than die-hard patsies, a la the 9/11 guys (if indeed they were) or Lee Harvey Oswalds (one or two of them), the genuine article(s) or even Jack Rubys, dying of cancer in jail, lips sealed in Omerta. So what are we dealing with here, and whom? In addition, the explosives went from being high level military material to home-brewed boom for the blooming home boys.

Supposedly there's some lively debate going on about the level of commitment and fear ratings in intelligence circles. Or maybe the intelligence agencies, MI-5, MI-6 or CIA, are purposely going round in circles to obfuscate. Because we all know, or should, this is an inside job, a booster shot for Tony Bliar's, excuse me, Tony Blair's War on Terror. Some people even think that saying, as the New York Times did, "that the initial hypothesis that the July 7 attacks were carried out by determined fanatics willing to die in the name of a radical interpretation of Islam may have been too simplistic." Well, it's good to see the investigative principal of questioning government press releases is still alive in the uptown press.

The Times went on to say that maybe these weren't "dedicated but stupid guys run by a smart group of people pulling the strings." Now there's a memorable line, a kind of one-size fits all terrorists' line. And maybe even Hanni Hanjor (the purported idiot, according to his flying instructor) who supposedly flew Flight 77, didn't know he was going down with the plane, if he and his buddies were on the four flights at all. They weren't listed on the manifests, nor did anyone actually prove they were on the planes.

But subsequently the so-called 19, 9/11 terrorists, their names and pictures were produced only 19 hours after the tragedies out of a hat by the same dysfunctional FBI that couldn't stop them in the first place. Is there a pattern here of disinformation along with dysfunction? And may it all be for the purpose of obfuscation, part of a process Webster Tarpley calls 'synthetic terror' in his new book, 911 Synthetic Terror- Made in USA, and in the London case, made in Great Britain.

Full story...

Why There Is No Inquiry into the London Bombings

by Trowbridge H. Ford

Whenever something dramatic happens in a country - whether it be an assassination of an important figure, an unexpected war with another nation, or a devastating attack on some treasured symbol - the public expects not only the perpetrators to be punished but also an official explanation of why it happened. It is all very necessary for the public to maintain trust in the officials it has chosen to lead it, and in the very government it has given its allegiance to, and supports with its taxes.

When the Japanese attack on Hawaii on December 7, 1941, for example, occurred, the American people did not expect FDR's government to claim that it was all some terrible mistake which could be resolved by negotiations, or something not worth fighting for. The public anticipated a no-nonsense reply from Washington, and the President did not disappoint it, calling upon a joint session of Congress to declare war on Japan because of its infamy, and appointing Secretary of State Frank Knox to investigate the causes of the terrible tragedy rather than just dismiss it as a ludicrous diversion.

While the Japanese militarists thought that America would throw in the towel when its jewel, the Pacific Fleet, was struck a "mortal blow" while at anchor in Pearl Harbor, Washington behaved in just the manner Japanese fleet commander, Admiral Isoruku Yamamoto, predicted - waking from its slumbers, and initiating a war of revenge no matter what while punishing the commanders on the scene, Vice Admiral Husband Kimmel, and General Walter Short, for their alleged dereliction of duty in allowing it to happen. Roosevelt's government had not taken seriously the possibility of the Japanese, a nation of "little yellow men", starting a war with Washington, but now there would be Hell to pay for their foolishness.

Still, Washingon had time and interest in investigations into the tragedy. While the Knox one was followed by another finely-balanced military one during the war, headed by Supreme Court Justice Owen Roberts, and another one right after its end, headed by FDR loyalist and Vice President Alben Barkley, they all come up with the expected whitewash which exonerated the policy-makers in the nation's capital, and tarnished the reputations of the commanders on the scene. Roberts was the judge who changed sides on the constitutionality of FDR's New Deal legislation, especially social security and the National Labor Relations Board, preventing the President from having to pack the Supreme Court with judges of a more liberal stripe.

Kimmel and Short were repeatedly held accountable for the disaster though they had never been clearly informed about its possibility, and their responsibility in preventing it, especially steps which might have minimized its impact. About the intelligence failure, Christopher Andrew wrote in For the President's Eyes Only: "Not a single Japanese decrypt available in Washington pointed to an attack on Pearl Harbor." (p. 120) It took nearly another half-century for the officers to receive some kind of rehabilitation, though they were never granted the court-martials they demanded in order to clear their names.

When President Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas on November 22, 1963, and Jack Ruby conveniently silenced his alleged killer, Lee Harvey Oswald, there was no talk of just moving on since the whole matter had now been resolved. Actually, there were already too many investigations under way with Dallas District Attorney Henry Wade initiating a murder prosecution of the sleazy night club operator, and Texas Attorney General Waggoner Carr opening an inquiry, headed by later Watergate prosecutor Leon Jaworski, into the failure of law-enforcement agencies, especially Hoover's FBI, in preventing it. LBJ appointed the now infamous Warren Commission to clear up the mess - what threatened an international confrontation because of alleged complicity of Moscow and Havana in the murder.

While we all know now that its investigation was a complete fiasco - another whitewash of what had happened - because of the even greater risk of the public learning the truth, the Commission went through the motions of establishing LHO's guilt, while ruling out of hand any other explanations of the assassination for fear that it would lead to the conspiracy in the heart of America's secret government which had assassinated the President. The Commission had to tailor all the evidence to fit the premise the Oswald alone had done it, and, of course, this led to many distortions and omissions which subsequent inquiries, especially the House Select Committee on Assassinations in the late 1970s, have been unable to deal with.

Even when British WMD expert Dr. David Kelly was killed in July 2002, apparently by his own hand, Prime Minister Tony Blair could not treat it merely as a personal matter which could be best resolved by a coroner's inquest, given what the public already knew. It was Kelly's insights into Iraq's WMD - what had become the centerpiece of books that Judith Miller and Thomas Mangold had written on the subject - which had become the hooks that Washington and London had hung their pre-emptive war against Saddam Hussein on. Kelly was certain when they wrote their books that the Iraqi dictator had the missiles and the biological agents, particularly anthrax, to hit Israel within 45 minutes of the opening of any hostilities against his regime.

Thanks to UN Resolution 1441 which forced Iraq to make an accounting of what had happened to its WMD, and to allow its weapons inspectors back into the country to search for any secret stores, Washington and London learned that Iraq no longer had the capability that Kelly was so sure of. Consequently, they had to fix the evidence to justify Saddam's ouster (aka the Downing Street Memo), and fight the war under the pretext that Saddam would launch an WMD attack against Israel. The only trouble with the strategy was that Kelly soon learned of his errors, and started talking to BBC reporters, especially Andrew Gillian, about how he had been fooled.

As soon as the MOD, MI6, and Downing Street learned of Kelly's liberties, thanks to feedback from Judy Miller about his future plans on the matter - they outed him to the public in the hope of at least discrediting him, if not destroying him. Miller was deeply involved in covering up the fixing of intelligence to justify the war, contending in her NYT's columns that Saddam had
destroyed some of his WMD right before the war, shipped the rest to Syria, and had joined Al-Qaeda.

Once the Mossad fourn-man kidon helping MI5 fight Britain's terrorisim, it seems, learned of Kelly's outing, it mounted a boat mission on The Thames near Harrowdown Hill to assassinate Kelly - what was made to look like a suicide while he was taking a walk. The plan was to bushwack him, once he was alone in a secluded area, and stuff him with enough of his wife's pain-killers to render him unconscious, leaving him then to die an apparent natural death.

The only trouble with the plot was that Kelly, most suspicious of threats against him, was not surprised by the kidon. He broke away from it when confronted, and ran through a most wooded area, causing significant bruising and leisons to his legs. When he was finally caught, he still put up a struggle, causing bruises to his chest, scratches on his head, and a welt on his lower lip while the kidon was trying to stuff the pain-killer down his throat - which he continually vomitted back up.

In desperation, and in the dark, the squad finally held the left arm down long enough under a torch to open up the less important artery in his wrist. By this time, Kelly was barely conscious. He was then moved from the scene to where the body was found - and there was no evidence of a struggle - and left to die, after being stuffed with more pain-killer which he still managed to vomit back up.

Of course, the Prime Minister could not allow any coroner's inquest in the case - as it was most likely to come up with a verdict of foul play, or at least an open one - so he had the Lord Chancellor appoint a judicial inquiry, under Lord Hutton, into the death. Hutton was the British equivalent of Justice Roberts - FDR's judge who was just itching for a fight with the Japs when the attacks on Hawaii occurred. Hutton, as Northern Ireland's Attorney General, had made a similar career for himself by bringing its war on terror into line with what policy makers in Whitehall wanted through the establishment of Diplock courts - jury-less trials in which convictions were largely based upon the testimony of informer witnesses and coerced confessions.

Hutton delegated his primary responsibility - determining the cause of Kelly's death - to Professor Keith Hawton, the noted expert on suicide. Hawton had prescribed in writing that 30 tablets of a similar pain-killer would be sufficient to kill a person - advice the kidon had followed to a tee when it stole them from Mrs.Kelly's supply, and stuffed them down Kelly's gullet. In sum, the inquiry's verdict was a foregone conclusion.

It was completely out of character when the 7/7 bombings occurred in London that the Prime Minister dismissed calls for special inquiries into them as a "ludicrous diversion" unless officialdom cannot be helped by any biased investigation of them - what seems to be the case. With the four suicide bombers having pulled off a perfect conspiracy while dying in the process (For more on this, see my articles about Lord Stevens and the actual conspiracy in my archive.), there is little that can be gained by having even a most biased inquiry as there are no easy scapegoats to blame, as what happens with more traditional surprises.

Actually, any investigation would just air all kinds of evidence of official incompetence and
malfeasance in the matter. Ever since MI5 was given primary responsibility in stopping terrorism in October 1992, it has increasingly been expanding its relationships with other agencies, particularly Scotland Yard's Anti-Terrorist Unit aka SO13, the Secret Intelligence Service (SIS), and Israel's Mossad, in the hope of taking their measure, particularly the Provisional IRA and Osama bin Laden's Al-Qaeda network. The Security Service - being primarily interested in catching the masterminds of terrorism rather than just its foot soldiers - became increasingly involved in developing double agents within various suspected groups in the hope of achieving results which would satisfy all its associates.

Of course, Britain has long been a sanctuary for terrorists, emigrants, and asylum seekers. During the 19th and 20th centuries, many freedom-fighters - especially of nations under the yoke of the Austrian, Russian, and German empires in Eastern Europe, most notably Hungary's Louis Kossuth and Italy's Guiseppe Mazzini - sought refuge in London. While this process slowly wound down with the collapse of the Cold War and the formation of the European Union, people in the Middle East, Africa, and Asia increasingly joined the ranks of those seeking refuge in Britain, thanks to the collapse of its own empire, Israel's wars of expansion, and Western efforts to control the flow of oil - a process which diluted Britain's social cohesion.

All the politically-involved emigrant groups - except for Irish Republicans, though even they were giving up their strategy of an armed struggle to gain independence of Northern Ireland from Britain - were committed to the so-called "covenant of security" which meant that they would never attack their fellow Britons, though there was little cause for them to do so. Consequently, Muslim groups became ideal recruits for special operations Britain had planned with America and Israel. MI5's T Branch, responsible for combatting domestic terrorism, saw this as an good way of keeping up with G Branch, whose mandate was international terrorism, when it came to funds, personnel, and missions, especially now that PIRA terrorism was drying up.

Little wonder that when Washington was looking for freedom-fighters and moles in the fight against Greater Serbia in Bosnia-Hertzegovina, shoring up Kosovo and Albania, and defeating the Taliban in Afghanistan, MI6 was most eager to oblige, and T Branch did what it could to help out. The center of Britain's recruitment efforts was the Finsbury mosque where the fiery Abu Qatada aka Captain Hook and Omar Uthman Abu Omar held forth on the need of jihadists to combat Western evils, and his assistant Haroon Rashid Awat signed up anyone willing to go. Huge sums were desposited in London banks and elsewhere to help fund the covert activities of his Al-Muhajiroun ('The Emigrants' in arabic) in laying the groundwork for rolling back Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan (Operation Gateway).

All this planning and good work went down the drain, though, when the 9/11 attacks occurred. Instead of Al-Qaeda's hijackers being harmlessly exposed to the world as the CIA and NORAD shut down the hijacked planes without loss - what would constitute an act of war, justifying the end of the Taliban for harboring such terrorists - the hijackers turned out to be suicide bombers, making all-out war with Osama and his supporters inevitable and immediate. Those who were not killed outright in the lightening strike on Afghanistan were killed by the hundreds, or perhaps thousands, in its aftermath. Those who were not killed were then imprisoned indefinitely wherever they could and forced to tell all they knew about the others. Al-Qaeda was like a plague, or a rogue state which had to be eradicated completely.

At first, this meant massive roundups in individual countries, and renditions of more likely middleman to countries like Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Uzbekistan for the full treatment when it came to interrogation. The Coalition, as T Branch had done in Northern Ireland, was looking for supergrasses, coerced informants, who would tell all about the movement. "Christopher Black, the first IRA supergrass," Caroline Kennedy-Pipe wrote in The Origins of the Present Troubles in Northern Ireland, "implicated thirty-eight people in his testimony." (p. 144) With Saddam Hussein's regime already marked out for destruction, it was just a question of time before Osama and his supporters would follow.

When these assumptions started proving unlikely if not impossible despite the roundups and renditions of likely suspects, the Coalition started outing its supergrasses, and implicating their associates in all kinds of terrorism. Abu Omar, the Intelligence and Democratic Security Service's (SISD) supergrass in Italy, became such an attractive source that the CIA kidnapped him in February 2003, and rendered him to Egypt for interrogation because the Agency did not think that SISD was getting everything out of him it could. Anzar's Higher Defense Intelligence Center ((CESID) in Spain locked up Syrian-born Edin Barakat Yarkas aka Abu Dahdah indefinitely on suspicion of his involvement in the 9/11 attacks. And in December 2001 Abu Qatada disappeared from his house in Acton, apparently having become a supergrass for the British security services.

In Britain, Abu Qatada's supergrass efforts turned out worse than those of Black and the Irish National Liberation Army's Henry Kirkpatrick back in Ulster in the 1980s. While convictions, based upon their informer testimony, were increasingly thrown out by the courts, Qatada's efforts resulted in little more than the sending to jail the "Portland Seven" - guys who had been led to Afghanistan by his assistant Aswat after their effort to establish a terrorist training ground in Bly, Oregon had failed. After that, Aswat himself went underground. Then Qatada's testimony that asylum-seeker and psychopath Kamel Bourgoss was establishing a ricin ring in Manchester, despite the roundup of 200 suspect associates, only resulted in the murder of Special Branch detective Stephen Oake when they failed to restrain him after making an arrest.

Still, Qatada was so effective in persuading T Branch that he knew all about what the terrorists at his mosque were planning that it agreed to conduct Operation Crevis in November 2003 to catch them. (For more on this, see my articles about Lord Stevens and the 7/7 bombings in the Trowbridge Archive.) Suicide bombers Asif Hanif and Omar Khan Sharif, member of Qatada's mosque, has just blown up Mike's Bar outside Tel Aviv, and security officials believed that similar terrorists would flock to his calls. MI5, with the help of Canadian counterterrorists, supplied the mastermind and bomb expert Mohammad Monim Khawaja to the false flag operation, and Qatada himself was expected to supply the necessary recruits through his cellphone calls, and what they generated among Britain's increasingly disaffected Muslims.

Well, Operation Crevis was completely upstaged by what Abu Dahdah's followers pulled off in Madrid on 3/11 - what was such a devastating blow to Aznar's government that it not only lost at the polls three days later, but also destroyed all the government's deliberations leading up to and after the attacks, as Socialist Prime Minister José Rodrigues Zapatero recently testified before the parliamentary commission investigating the tragedy. The evidence would show that GCHQ, Britain's signal intelligence system, was so intrigued by the "chatter" that Operation Crevis was creating that it persuaded Spanish counterterrorists that the real threat was in Britain, and that Madrid would only have to worry about a demonstration bombing by ETA, the Basque separatist group - what Aznar persisted in claiming his own counterterrorist people maintained.

MI5 did what it could to cover up the scandal by having its agent 'Gould' flush the young Muslim pasties in Crawley and West London to Pakistan, but they refused to flee. While Scotland Yard, thanks to continuing scare-mongering by its Chief Commissioner, Sir John Stevens, went through the motions of taking 'the plot' seriously, claiming that it had prevented a serious terrorist attack, the whole thing was simply dropped.

As in Northern Ireland, Operation Crevis's use of supergrasses had most unexpected consequences, especially since the wars in Iraq and on terror were simlpy getting worse. While security officials were giving the widest berth possible to all those connected in the slightest way to it, some of them, especially Mohammad Kayoun Khan, became increasingly radicalized by what they had been through, and were now experiencing. He even went to Pakistan and Israel to see what it was all about - what opened his eyes to what the West was really engaged in with its secret operations and lies. He had little trouble recruiting three like-minded Muslims to become martyrs - like what Northern Ireland's hunger strikers within the Maze Prison became, and what Prime Minister Thatcher had approved the use of supergrasses to stop.

While I have little to add to what I have already written about this conspiracy, one should note that the Security Service and Scotland Yard's Anti-Terrorist-Unit turned a completely blind eye on the whole process - vetting Khan apparently and deciding that he was not a threat. Thanks to Lord Stevens again, the security services were absolutely obsessed with the idea that only a "white convert" - reminiscent of what Washington thought about the Japanese before Pearl Harbor - could supply the needed planning, and bomb-making expertise for a coordinated urban attack. Actually, the bombs were made from readily-available peroxide compounds which anyone reading the internet could put together, and set to explode by synchronized mobile phones, provided they were kept cool until shortly before detonation.

This misconception by the British counterterrorists resulted in the reimprisonment of Shankill Road bomber Sean Kelly back in Northern Ireland in October 1993 four weeks before the July attacks in London in the expectation that this prevented all possibilities of a repeat of what happened in Madrid. In fact, the security services were so confident that they had everything under control that they reduced the threat level from "severe" to "substantial" after Kelly re-entered prison.

When the 7/7 attacks still occurred, the Blair government could not simply do what Aznar's did after 3/11. Instead of scrubbing the record clean - what was bound to leak out, and would certainly end in Blair's political humiliation and ouster - it had to create a new legend which would cover up the first attacks while apparently reassuring the public that everything was essentially okay. Its answer was a replay two weeks later, perhaps put together by "Gould" in order to make amends, in which a "copy-cat" operation had all the desired effects without any casualties. The mission was planned so that the coordinatesd bombs did not explode either because the explosive had become inert or was simply flour.

Then the Brits went hog-wild with their new Security Regiment, built from remnants of the 14 Intelligence Company from Northern Ireland, while one of the pseuo-bombers, Hussain Osman aka Hamdi Isaac, was allowed to escape to Italy. The special team following Jean Charles de Menezes had complete discretion in how to handle his surveillance, and when it became confused, as it had in at least seven or eight other occasions, it shot him dead - not to cover up anything but to establish that the counterterrorists had finally accomplished something. Osman, in Italy, was allowed to sing to the press about the operation not wanting to kill anyone - what so reassured the British public about the possibilities of future 7/7s that Scotland Yard was obliged to deny his claims.

MI5 had even tried to bring Aswat into the picture by having him come to Britain, and call one of the pseudo-bombers the night before the attacks before departing, hoping that this would fit him out as the mastermind of both attacks. Unfortunately, the South African Secret Service had spotted him there on 7/7, and counterterrorist expert John Loftus disclosed to Fox News that Aswat had been an MI6 asset for years.

As this is all slowly played out by Scotland Yard, and in the courts, the public will soon lose interest, and the Prime Minister can rest assured that Aznar's fate does not await him.

London Bombings: Electrical Surge Connected to Menezes Shooting?

This one is VERY interesting, when de Menezes was shot my first thought was that it had all the hall-marks of an execution, I still think so. There is no evidence whatsoever to support this idea but we need to find out. Despite the seemingly incredulous nature of the article below the fact that they were trying to killing de Menezes makes more sense given the evidence than the idea that they shot him by accident thinking he was a suicide bomber.

by F Napoli and Prison Planet

1. The 21/7 attempt was an inside job too. In order to connect "home-made" bombs, which surprise surprise did not explode (all 4 of them), to the ones used on 7/7, which were actually of military origin.

2. We need to find out in which locations Jean Charles worked at recently. He was not shot seven or eight or nine times in the head as a "mistake". Understand? He was allowed to get onto a BUS, before being herded and THROWN inside a tube carriage PACKED with passengers so they would have an excuse TO kill him. I have made various attempts to inquire from journalists where he worked at recently and all I've been told is - "no information regarding that at the moment".

He was killed because of what he saw or learned.

Some tips - the contradiction between the Transport Police, Metronet and the National Grid. The former two declared there WAS a power surge which "caused the explosions". The latter - the National Grid, DENIED there was ever a power surge.

Menezes was a contract electrician. See my point?

Where did Menezes work at prior to his murder?

THAT is what we have to find out. And since I live overseas in Gibraltar, I cannot do that. Even though I've been doing my best to get in touch with his cousin, in vain.

This is my hypothesis - the bombs UNDER the trains or ON the rails, were detonated by a calculated & engineered power surge. That is WHY reports of a power surge along with survivors' reports of an "electrical like discharge" BEFORE the explosions themselves, originated early on. Remember - the truth usually comes out in the first half an hour of an event like this one.

Why would they do it like this? For the simple reason that in this manner, they could have utmost control over the exact time AND location of the blasts, something which could not be achieved with timers, since something might go wrong, a train could be delayed for whatever reason and blow up in the wrong place, for example.

Moreso, because in this manner, no timers tracing back to the real culprits would ever be found. i.e. There were none. The perfect plan & execution (of the train explosions anyway).

Another related matter is Richard Jones, the lying witness who claims he saw the "suicide-bomber" on the bus. If you need more info about his lies, please let me know, I'd be happy to send you material on the subject.

So we need to find out who this Richard Jones really is and where Menezes worked at recently. He did not have a fixed employment but worked contract jobs, remember.

Finding out even the slightest bit of information regarding these two questions, will open up a whole can of whoop ass. Have NO doubt.

All the best.

Full story...

Britain - Facing The Abyss

by Ian Buckley

On the day of the London bombings, 7th July 2005, apparently a date of deep mystical significance - 777 - I was here ; exploring the ruins of Sawley Abbey, once the home of holy men and scholars, such as the Oxford Chancellor of seven centuries ago, William of Rymyngton.

But given the events on the day the picture was taken, this historic site seems to have acquired a different resonance, an echo maybe of Dresden, Hiroshima and Falluja. The London bombings were, as police chiefs and politicians assured us some months before the event, 'inevitable'. 'Inevitable' is an interesting word, don't you think?

Inevitable demolitions of monasteries, inevitable wars, inevitable factory closures and inevitable globalisation. So history slouches onwards, until we come to the allegedly inevitable conflict with the Islamic world. We tremble on the edge of the abyss, but do we really want to fall down into its depths, all just because of 'inevitability'?

Our friend Gilad Atzmon has written of 'Zionised Britain', and I for one wouldn't disagree. Nevertheless, this may not be the entire story. In the heartfelt and passionate words of an old Yorkshire miner, interviewed some years after he'd been through the gruelling and prolonged strike of 1984-1985 :' We have the most evil ruling class on Earth.'

For quite a long time now the British secret state has been involved in dubious and obnoxious activities. Thirty-one years ago came the bombings in Dublin and Monaghan, initially attributed to some unknown Northern Irish loyalist group. But the best analysis suggests that no such loyalist group had the technical and logistical capability to mount such a devastating attack on civilians, which could only have been perpetrated by some state agency.When you have people who are prepared to do this, what else might they be capable of?

Then again, there was the infamous Kincora Boys' Home scandal, also in Northern Ireland, when elements of British intelligence (an oxymoron in this context, as in most others!) apparently ran this children's home as a homosexual brothel, in order to have leverage over local and national politicians who patronised the place. The 'ordinary Joes' who unknowingly provided the taxation revenue necessary to support such malign activities were also, by and large, the victims of 7/7, poor harassed commuters rushing from place to place. Very odd that these alleged 'Muslim bombers' don't ever target anyone of real importance!

But possibly no more strange than the warning phone calls to that nice Mr. Netanyahu and the unexplained drop in the pound the day before the bombings. Yes, these 'fanatical jihadists' have very bizarre behaviour patterns!

It was a British officer, General Frank Kitson, who first thought up the concept that was later used in the formation of Al Qaeda. He called it the 'pseudo gang' - a state sponsored group used to advance an agenda, while discrediting the real opposition. The strategy was used in both Kenya and Northern Ireland. In the case of Northern Ireland, most of the violence that was attributed to 'Loyalists' was in actuality not their handiwork, but the result of the activities of the death squads affiliated to the British secret state.

But it isn't really necessary to delve very intently into the anomalies of 7/7 to understand the situation. Better to go along with the simple old Roman maxim - cui bono? Who gains?

In the wake of death and destruction in London, the man in the orange make-up, Phoney Blair, improved his popularity ratings, while the smart city investors made money on the market1. A pity you had to bomb those make-up girls in the Belgrade TV studios, Tony, they might have done a better and cheaper job of 'putting your face on', thus saving us thousands of pounds in Prime Ministerial cosmetics.

Of course, a very major opportunity was provided to further demonise Islam. In particular, the headlines in the papers of porn baron Richard Desmond - the Star and Express - seemed to breathe out hatred.

It is all rather reminiscent of the writings of George Orwell, whose real name was Blair - unlike the horrid mountebank in No 10 Downing Street whose ancestral moniker is in fact Parsons. Surprisingly enough, his 1984 is still a set work in the English educational system. Too revealing by half, I would have thought - for what do we have in that book?

We have the 'five minutes hate', so very similar to what the Express, the Mirror and the Sun have being doing over the past three weeks. Plus Ingsoc, a doctrine that has nothing to do with real socialism as understood by George Lansbury or Keir Hardie, but which has plenty in common with 'New Labour'.

Then there this very apt and topical quote from Orwell :

In some ways she was far more acute than Winston, and far less susceptible to the Party propaganda. Once when he happened to mention the war against Eurasia, she startled him by saying casually that in her opinion the war was not happening. The rocket bombs that fell daily on London were probably fired by the Government of Oceania itself, just to keep people frightened'. This was an idea that literally had not occurred to him.

'Just to keep people frightened' - what better description could there be for all the alarms, evacuations and other incidents over the length and breadth of England?

The government will call for more fear, more repression, more regimentation and more abandonment of ancient liberties, and claim it is fighting terror. In fact it is doing nothing of the kind. Instead they are deliberately creating a crisis in order to push through an agenda.

For the Arab and Muslim world this means more instability and destruction, and for the Western world it means the imposition of a virtual police state. It is vital that everyone realises this.

Full story...

Netanyahu warns West it must halt Iran nuclear plans

Want to know what the bombings and anti-Muslim shit are REALLY all about? If you do then read this article. All these bombs and wars are about making the Middle East safe for Israel. The tail is wagging the dog here!

The Israeli finance minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has warned that the West must do more to counter Iran’s potential nuclear threat following the election last month of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the hardline mayor of Tehran, as president of the country.

Netanyahu, in London to address a conference, said concerted action was required to rein in Iran, not least because of its links with Islamic terrorist groups such as Hezbollah and Hamas. He said he wanted the shipment of Russian nuclear equipment and nuclear fuel to a plant under construction at Bushehr to be stopped.

“The Iranian regime supports terror, both ideologically and operationally,” he said. “I think the regime will go as fast as it can to develop nuclear weapons, regardless of who leads it.”

Netanyahu, prime minister from 1996-9, said that if Iran succeeded in developing nuclear weapons it would boost radical Islamic groups by providing them with “a nuclear umbrella”.

“This is not an Israel problem — this is a world problem that concerns everybody, including Russia,” he said. “There has to be a common solution here: first to prevent the transfer of nuclear technology or fuel, secondly to punish regimes that deviate from this and, thirdly, to put pressure on the Iranian regime, in all avenues possible, to stop this programme.”

Netanyahu contrasted Iran’s apparent determination to develop nuclear weapons with Libya’s decision to abandon its own fledgling programme in response to the American attack on Iraq. “The deterrent effect has worked on some, but so far has not worked on others,” he said.

Full story...

Former British MI5 Agent Says 'Many Similarities' Between London Bombings And 9/11

As usual the only people not connecting the many dots are the duplicitous whores in the mainstream media. Those who get their news solely from official outlets are about as misinformed as people who believed the Earth was flat... The unfortunate thing is that we have to wait for all of them to wake up before anything will change. The signs are all there if you look for them, you may not want to see them but right now we don't have the luxury of being an ostrich. Do you want your children to grow up in a world akin to something from Orwell or Huxley? Do you want to be chipped, traced, controlled and killed for the benefit of some rich fat fuck who's never done anything to earn or deserve the power that he feels is his by virtue of birth? One voice will be silenced, a million voices will be ignored, what we need is a billion voices all saying the same thing, all asking the same questions, never shutting up, never letting those bastards get any peace!

by Greg Szymanski

A former British intelligence agent, jailed in 2002 for linking the British government with paying an Islamic militant group $160,000 in a failed assassination attempt on Colonel Mu'ammar al-Qadhafi of Libya, said this week the recent London bombings have all the earmarks of an inside job just like 9/11.

“It’s amazing how many aspects of the two events are so similar,” said David Shayler, the former MI5 agent and whistle blower, in a telephone conversation this week from his home in Eastbourne on the southern coast of England.

Shayler, a thorn in the British government’s side ever since he blew the whistle in 1997 about rampant corruption within both arms of British intelligence, MI5 (domestic) and MI6 (foreign), said he has just began looking into the details of the 7/7 attacks, but what’s being released through the press and government reports shows a strikingly similar pattern to what he calls “the same type of misinformation thrown out after 9/11.”

“First, we learn about the training exercises going on here just like 9/11. Next, they release suspicious evidence left behind by the culprits as well as quickly releasing identifying pictures of the suspects just like the did after 9/11,” he said.

Shayler added that what’s even more suspicious is the private security firm in charge of the training drills prior to 7/7 had ties to former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani. Further, he also received information that one of the named suicide bombers, whose picture was released in the London press, has turned up alive and well in Pakistan.

“Just like in the United States, we here in England are being bombarded with what looks like a lot of misinformation in the press,” said Shayler. “Apparently, one of the supposed suicide bombers has turned up alive just like six or seven of the 19 Arab hijackers turned up alive after 9/11.”

Asked about the sentiment in Britain towards President Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair’s support of America’s war on terror after the London bombings claimed more than 50 lives, he said:

“To put it politely, there is downright hatred for Bush here on the streets of London. Many Brits feel, as I do, that he led us into this war and is actually responsible for making England a more dangerous place to live now than before the illegal war in Iraq.

“And after the release of the Downing Street Memo, which clearly provides high-level documented evidence from the head of M16 that Bush and Blair lied about the threat of WMD in Iraq, I think most of the British people are simply fed up but at the same time frightened at what might happen next.

“The British people would simply like to get rid of Blair, but unlike America, we have no political means set up to do this. However, most people here feel that Tony Blair actually acts more like the First Envoy to America rather than England’s Prime Minister.

Besides believing the London bombing was an inside job, Shayler also believes 9/11 was a staged event, saying the cover-up of hard evidence and eye witness testimony contradicting the official story are the main ingredients first leading him to believe the U.S. government caused 9/11 in order to create a world wide climate of fear and war.

“It’s a crime to obstruct justice and that is exactly what the American authorities did when they allowed FEMA to haul away all the steel from the World Trade Center, shipping it to China,” said Shayler. “Now this type of cover-up tells me right-off the authorities are hiding something much bigger, something that needs answering.

“The more I look at 9/11, the more I am convinced it was a staged event. I am convinced the U.S. government manipulated events - let it happen – to create a trigger for the invasion of Afghanistan, the invasion of Iraq and of course what they're trying to do now with the imminent invasions of Iran and Syria.”

Shayler said FBI intercepts, failed defense protocols and the suspicious activities of a number of officials in various government agencies days, weeks and months prior to 9/11 also directly point to an inside job.

Besides the government irregularities and cover-up, he also suggests 9/11 was most likely also intended to be, from an intelligence strategist’s view, an attempt at a larger coup de’tat to take over the American government and bring martial law.

“You have to remember that there were weapons discovered on planes that didn't take off on 9/11. Now people have obviously postulated that they were going perhaps to attack the White House or Capitol Hill. That looks to me like an attempt to destroy American government and declare a state of emergency, in fact a coup de'tat, a violent coup de'tat."

Making analogies between explosives used in IRA bombings he investigated while working on the Irish resistance, he said it was virtually impossible for jet fuel, as the American government contends, to bring down the Twin Towers.

He compared the WTC to an IRA bombing in front of the Baltic Exchange Building in Bishopsgate, saying a thousand tons of homemade explosives were used without a much smaller building collapsing.

“So you are telling me the World Trade Center collapsed from jet fuel? It’s highly suspicious if not impossible,” said Shayler. “And then ask yourself about the suspicious nature of Building No. 7. It all looks to me like a controlled demolition.”

Regarding the bigger intelligence picture and the state of the world with increased terrorism now erupting in London and Egypt, Shayler drew the battle lines facing both the people of Britain and America.

“Let there be no doubt that the people of the free world are engaged in a war,” said Shayler, suggesting however that the enemy is within and not simply radical Islamic terrorists. “In the next few years, we are either going to see the people of the free world rise up against these fascists, now setting the stage for global war, or we are going to see the end of democracy as we know it with martial law the end result.”

Shayler’s troubles with the British government in 1997 after he voluntarily left MI5 and blew the whistle, allegedly taking sensitive documents and accusing two MI6 agents, David Watson and Richard Bartlitt, of plotting to assassinate Mu'ammar al-Qadhafi of Libya in 1996.

He also accused MI5 of failing to warn or react to an impending terrorist attack on the Israeli Embassy in 1994.

After fleeing Britain, he was arrested in France, spending four months in a French jail and being held without charges being filed. Upon release, he won an extradition battle in the French courts, but voluntarily decided to return to England in 2000.

Upon his return, he was charged with violated England’s tough Official State Secrets Act, as a gag order was effectively placed on everything, including media coverage, surrounding his case.

“I was effectively never allowed to mount a defense or even show facts why I acted in the national interest,” said Shayler, being convicted in November of 2002 and sentenced to six months in jail, but only serving seven weeks of the sentence as well as seven weeks of house arrest.

Shayler, who joined MI5 in 1991 unable to find work as a journalist, said he was an unlikely candidate for the job, never thinking he would get hired after answering an advertisement hiding the true nature of the position.

“I was a journalist and came from an unlikely background for this type of work,” said Shayler. “I really didn’t know what the nature of the job was until the final round of interviews and I was shocked when I was hired.

“I stayed with MI5 until I saw the lies and corruption. All I wanted was to tell the truth, nothing more.”

Full story...

London bombings 'mastermind' is a known MI6 agent

The cockney slang, "Porky pies" doesn't even begin to describe what our glorious government is guilty of! To those who believe the official story I say, you've been royally had! They are lying to you. You are being told lies by your government, wake up people!

*** On FOX News Channel's Day Side, Terrorism Expert John Loftus revealed that Haroon Rashid Aswat, the suspect wanted by British Police for "masterminding" the July 7th London bombings and July 21st attempted bombings is in fact an asset of MI6, the British Secret Service. According to Loftus, Aswat has been under the protection of MI6 for many years. ***

TRANSCRIPT

Fox News, "Dayside with Linda Vester", 29 July 2005:

MIKE JERRICK [FOX NEWS]: John Loftus is a terrorism expert and a former prosecutor for the Justice Department. John, good to see you again. So real quickly here, have you heard anything about this Osman Hussain who was just picked up in Rome? You know that name at all?

JOHN LOFTUS: Yeah, all these guys should be going back to an organization called Al-Muhajiroun, which means The Emigrants. It was the recruiting arm of Al-Qaeda in London; they specialized in recruiting kids whose families had emigrated to Britain but who had British passports. And they would use them for terrorist work.

JERRICK: So a couple of them now have Somali connections?

LOFTUS: Yeah, it was not unusual. Somalia, Eritrea, the first group of course were primarily Pakistani. But what they had in common was they were all emigrant groups in Britain, recruited by this Al-Muhajiroun group. They were headed by the, Captain Hook, the imam in London the Finsbury Mosque, without the arm. He was the head of that organization. Now his assistant was a guy named Aswat, Haroon Rashid Aswat.

JERRICK: Aswat, who they picked up.

LOFTUS: Right, Aswat is believed to be the mastermind of all the bombings in London.

JERRICK: On 7/7 and 7/21, this is the guy we think.

LOFTUS: This is the guy, and what's really embarrassing is that the entire British police are out chasing him, and one wing of the British government, MI6 or the British Secret Service, has been hiding him. And this has been a real source of contention between the CIA, the Justice Department, and Britain.

JERRICK: MI6 has been hiding him. Are you saying that he has been working for them?

LOFTUS: Oh I'm not saying it. This is what the Muslim sheik said in an interview in a British newspaper back in 2001.

JERRICK: So he's a double agent, or was?

LOFTUS: He's a double agent.

JERRICK: So he's working for the Brits to try to give them information about Al-Qaeda, but in reality he's still an Al-Qaeda operative.

LOFTUS: Yeah. The CIA and the Israelis all accused MI6 of letting all these terrorists live in London not because they're getting Al-Qaeda information, but for appeasement. It was one of those you leave us alone, we leave you alone kind of things.

JERRICK: Well we left him alone too long then.

LOFTUS: Absolutely. Now we knew about this guy Aswat. Back in 1999 he came to America. The Justice Department wanted to indict him in Seattle because him and his buddy were trying to set up a terrorist training school in Oregon.

JERRICK: So they indicted his buddy, right? But why didn't they indict him?

LOFTUS: Well it comes out, we've just learned that the headquarters of the US Justice Department ordered the Seattle prosecutors not to touch Aswat.

JERRICK: Hello? Now hold on, why?

LOFTUS: Well, apparently Aswat was working for British intelligence. Now Aswat's boss, the one-armed Captain Hook, he gets indicted two years later. So the guy above him and below him get indicted, but not Aswat. Now there's a split of opinion within US intelligence. Some people say that the British intelligence fibbed to us. They told us that Aswat was dead, and that's why the New York group dropped the case. That's not what most of the Justice Department thinks. They think that it was just again covering up for this very publicly affiliated guy with Al-Muhajiroun. He was a British intelligence plant. So all of a sudden he disappears. He's in South Africa. We think he's dead; we don't know he's down there. Last month the South African Secret Service come across the guy. He's alive.

JERRICK: Yeah, now the CIA says, oh he's alive. Our CIA says OK let's arrest him. But the Brits say no again?

LOTFUS: The Brits say no. Now at this point, two weeks ago, the Brits know that the CIA wants to get a hold of Haroon. So what happens? He takes off again, goes right to London. He isn't arrested when he lands, he isn't arrested when he leaves.

JERRICK: Even though he's on a watch list.

LOFTUS: He's on the watch list.The only reason he could get away with that was if he was working for British intelligence. He was a wanted man.

JERRICK: And then takes off the day before the bombings, I understand it--

LOFTUS: And goes to Pakistan.

JERRICK: And Pakistan, they jail him.

LOFTUS: The Pakistanis arrest him. They jail him. He's released within 24 hours. Back to Southern Africa, goes to Zimbabwe and is arrested in Zambia. Now the US--

JERRICK: Trying to get across the--

LOFTUS: --we're trying to get our hands on this guy.

JERRICK: John, hang around. I have so many questions now.

LOFTUS: Oh, this is a bad one....

[commercial break]

JERRICK: On the phone with us, Mansoor Ijaz; Mansoor you know very well here at Fox News Channel and Dayside. Mansoor, real quickly here, you spent so much time in London, you're probably not that as impressed as I am about how fast Scotland Yard has worked on this case. So impressive, so successful. Why?

MANSOOR IJAZ: Well there are two things that a lot of domestic intelligence agencies don't around the world. One is an extraordinarily detailed database of information, and that database is buttressed by the fact that they have these photos, the graphic images of the faces of the people that they were looking for. So it saved them a lot of time when they got the forensic evidence, like fingerprints or other things that indicated where they could actually go find these people. Because remember, there was a lot of data left on the stuff these guys left behind from the failed bombing attack, and that's what helped to really unravel the cell. Now--

JERRICK: I guess--go ahead, Mansoor.

IJAZ: Now I think there's one very important thing that I think everybody needs to know. And that is that the cellular structure that this new breed of Al-Qaeda people have is such that there is not a clear indication that they all knew each other as much as it is that they had some sort of central control still sitting outside of the framework. Whether that's in a foreign country or a place that is removed from Britain and other place in Europe, that's what we're still looking for. But it's very clear now that these cellular structures were operating independent of each other, but with knowledge that something else was in fact planned in the pipeline.

JERRICK: Real quick, Mansoor. In that regard, maybe a ringleader could be this Haroon Aswat. What do you know about him?

IJAZ: Well, he's a pretty bad guy, and I think your previous guest gave the best assessment of who he is. He's the right hand man of the Al-Muhajiroun leader in London, and has been organizing and planning for some time. And I don't want to minimize the effect of the arrest in Rome, because what that indicates is that the cellular structure is elsewhere and we all know that Italy is a big target on their list.

JERRICK: OK, speaking of him, back to the comments by our John Loftus a little while ago. A question from the audience for you, John. Go ahead.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Hi Mr Loftus. I recently read a book by Morris Dees called The Gathering Storm , and it talks about extremist militia groups in the United States and how they might be manipulated by some people's rhetoric, very similar to Aswat in London. What do you think the US is doing to prevent terrorist attacks on our own soil that happen--

JERRICK: You're worried about it here?

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Yes, sir.

LOFTUS: The US government's doing a great job. We arrested the New York branch of Al-Muhajiroun two years ago. We found the subway bombers with the plans to blow up two different subway stations in New York City. The rest of the group is under surveillance. But the US was used by Al-Muhajiroun for training of people to send to Kosovo. What ties all these cells together was, back in the late 1990s, the leaders all worked for British intelligence in Kosovo. Believe it or not, British intelligence actually hired some Al-Qaeda guys to help defend the Muslim rights in Albania and in Kosovo. That's when Al-Muhajiroun got started.

IJAZ: Which is by the way why we know so much about them right now.

LOFTUS: Yes, I'm afraid so. The CIA was funding the operation to defend the Muslims, British intelligence was doing the hiring and recruiting. Now we have a lot of detail on this because Captain Hook, the head of Al-Muhajiroun, he sidekick was Bakri Mohammed, another cleric. And back on October 16, 2001, he gave a detailed interview with al-Sharq al-Aswat, an Arabic newspaper in London, describing the relationship between British intelligence and the operations in Kosovo and Al-Muhajiroun. So that's how we get all these guys connected. It started in Kosovo, Haroon was 31 years old, he came on about 1995.

JERRICK: OK. Here's another question for you.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Hello, John. With the quid-pro-quo relationship that London obviously had with these terrorists early on, what changed that caused them to all of a sudden get away from the you leave us alone, we'll leave you alone situation?

LOFTUS: The Israelis say that the truce went on for years. Guys from Al-Muhajiroun for example would bring suicide bombers to Israel to blow up Mike's Place. There was a definite link there. And yet the trainer, Sadiki Al Kahn, was able to go back to Britain and not be touched. What the Israelis believe happened is that Usama Bin Laden got desperate, and he said burn all our bridges--let's turn on the British. Break the truce, start the bombs.

JERRICK: Speaking of Usama Bin Laden, Mansoor, real quickly, maybe Scotland Yard and those folks over there, the Brits, should be looking for Usama Bin Laden. They seem to be so successful.

LOFTUS: The British police do a remarkable job.

IJAZ: Well, that's an interesting comment. The fact of the matter is, when you're dealing with it in your own backyard, and you have the computer infrastructure set up in such a way that you can immediately track these kinds of things that are in your backyard, it's a very different game from tracking them on places where we don't even have mountain maps any more of how the whole thing looks. So that's really what the fundamental problem is. If you'll permit me, I just want to, Mike, make one other very quick point.

JERRICK: Mansoor, can you hang over, do you have time hang over for a 30-second break here? John Loftus, got to cut you loose but thanks for the info. Boy, interesting stuff John...

[commercial break]

JERRICK: We have some more information from our Mansoor Ijaz, Fox News Foreign Affairs Analyst. Mansoor, still on the phone with me?

IJAZ: Yeah, I'm here with you Mike.

JERRICK: Talk about your information from British intel.

IJAZ: Well, let's not characterize the sources quite that way, but I've talked to some people who are analyzing what came out of the raids today, and there's a great deal of concern about the fact that there may be in fact a desire of these cells to move beyond transit systems as the target. And what specifically they found was evidence that indicates they're looking at now places where there are large collections of people, where they can actually take shopping bags and other large carrying bags of sorts without raising a lot of suspicion. Obviously shopping malls come immediately to mind, but it's important for everybody to know that London was planning on having a large I think it's a City Fair or something like that, I don't know what exactly it's called. They've now decided to go ahead with that, but it's obviously going to be much more scrutinized than it would have been before. Now London doesn't in general have a lot of large shopping malls, but they do have large concentrations of people in places at certain times during the week, and that's what apparently now has become the target, one of the new targets of these terrorist cells.

JERRICK: So Mansoor, when you hear that we have four for four, or four for five of these 7/21 bombers, nobody should fool themselves. This thing isn't over.

IJAZ: That is precisely the point I wanted to make sure everybody understood--that the authorities, the people that are worried about this and that are analyzing the data out of what they're getting in these raids, are basically saying we may have just hit the tip of the iceberg. This is not over by a long shot.

JERRICK: Mansoor, thank you for making that perfectly clear. Talk to you soon.


LISTEN TO THE INTERVIEW

Infowars (play the recording) - "London Bombings Mastermind is MI6 Asset"
http://www.infowars.com/articles/London_attack/mastermind_mi6_asset.htm

Johnny Dollar (read the transcript) - "He was working for British intelligence"
http://homepage.mac.com/mkoldys/iblog/C168863457/E162650694/


FURTHER READING

The Insider, "US regime actively blocked attempts to stop London bomber", 26 July 2005.
http://www.theinsider.org/mailing/article.asp?id=1412
Why did high-level US officials want to protect Haroon Aswat, one of the four London bombers? US Justice Department prosecutors planned to arrest and detain Aswat, but were ordered not to do so, and these strange orders came directly from the highest level. The fact that at least one of the four alleged terrorists visited the USA before the 7/7 attacks is beyond dispute. In contrast, claims by Western intelligence services that the bombers visited Pakistan have been exposed as false.
...


BBC News, "Wanted Briton detained in Zambia", 29 July 2005.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4726541.stm
US reports say the man is Haroon Rashid Aswat, who is alleged to have made contact with two suicide bombers before they carried out their mission.
...
It has been suggested that Mr Aswat was in the UK shortly before the London attacks and called two of the bombers on his mobile phone.
According to news reports from the US, he was arrested last week for his alleged role in planning a terrorist training camp in Oregon in 1999.
...
Scotland Yard declined to shed any light on claims Mr Aswat was the possible mastermind of the July 7 attacks.
...


The Independent, "The attacks on London...", 2 July 2005.
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/article302749.ece
...
In the meantime, speculation about a possible mastermind has fastened on a number of figures. Most attention has been devoted to Haroon Rashid Aswat, a British-born militant arrested in Zambia after he was incorrectly reported to have been held in Pakistan. He is now said to be telling his captors that he was once a bodyguard to Osama bin Laden.

Full story...

The State Of Surveillance

Proof that all the cameras have less to do with security and more to do with intimidation...

Lost in the recent London bombings, along with innocent lives, was any illusion that today's surveillance technology can save us from evildoers. Britain has 4 million video cameras monitoring streets, parks, and government buildings, more than any other country. London alone has 500,000 cameras watching for signs of illicit activity. Studying camera footage helped link the July 7 bombings with four men -- but only after the fact. The disaster drove home some painful reminders: Fanatics bent on suicide aren't fazed by cameras. And even if they are known terrorists, most video surveillance software won't pick them out anyway.

Tomorrow's surveillance technology may be considerably more effective. But each uptick in protection will typically come at the cost of more intrusion into the privacy of ordinary people. For now, the public seems to find that trade-off acceptable, so scientists around the world have intensified efforts to perfect the art of surveillance, hoping to catch villains before they strike.

Research laboratories envision tools that could identify and track just about every person, anywhere -- and sound alarms when the systems encounter hazardous objects or chemical compounds. Many such ideas seem to leap from the pages of science fiction: An artificial nose in doorways and corridors sniffs out faint traces of explosives on someone's hair. Tiny sensors floating in reservoirs detect a deadly microbe and radio a warning. Smart cameras ID people at a distance by the way they walk or the shape of their ears. And a little chemical lab analyzes the sweat, body odor, and skin flakes in the human thermal plume -- the halo of heat that surrounds each person.

All of these projects are on a fast track since September 11. Meanwhile, consumer demand is speeding their development by lowering the cost of the underlying technologies. Camera phones, nanny cams, and even satellite photos are commonplace. Biological sensors are flooding into households in the form of tests for HIV, pregnancy, and diabetes -- some of which can relay data to a doctor -- and soon there will be far more sensitive DNA-based tests. Next up are radio-frequency identification (RFID) tags. They're showing up in stores to help track inventory, and 50 people in the U.S. have had them planted under their skin to broadcast their ID and medical data, in case of an emergency.

Together these developments herald a high-tech surveillance society that not even George Orwell could have imagined -- one in which virtually every advance brings benefits as well as intrusions. Rapid DNA-based probes, for example, could help protect us from bioweapons and diagnose diseases, but they might also reveal far too much about us to health insurers or prospective employers. The trade-offs are uncomfortable, in part, because corporations and governments will continue to wield the most advanced surveillance systems. But ordinary citizens will also gain capabilities to monitor their surroundings with consumer technologies, from Web cams to Net search and tracking tools, allowing the watched to observe other watchers.

One great worry is that those who stand out from the norm or express unpopular views, minorities, the poor, or just the ill-mannered, may get stomped in new and surprising ways. A recent incident in South Korea shows how this can play out. A subway commuter posted on the Internet some cell-phone photos he took of a passenger who had refused to clean up after her dog relieved itself during the ride. In no time, a vigilante mob on the Web identified her by her face and the purse she was carrying, and she became the object of national vilification. "You can move into a surveillance society one tiny camera at a time," says Deirdre Mulligan, director of the Samuelson Law, Technology & Public Policy Clinic at the University of California at Berkeley.

If terrorism becomes endemic in Europe and America, emerging surveillance tools may be abused in even more egregious ways. At the same time, the overhead burdens of a police state, from the dossier-building to the endless security checkpoints, could impose crippling costs on a free-market economy. Witness the U.S. clampdown on foreign student visas, which could end up crimping universities' ability to do advanced research. "We could bankrupt ourselves, much like the Soviet Union did," notes Kim Taipale, executive director of Manhattan's Center for Advanced Studies in Science & Technology Policy.

Experts disagree about when the most visionary tools to thwart terrorist acts will arrive on the market -- and whether they will deliver on their promise. Sensors that can detect bombs, radiation, and toxins exist today, and will be far more sophisticated a decade from now. But strewing them across every city in America would cost untold billions of dollars. High-tech electronic eavesdropping on communications networks can be effective, but only if terrorists use telecom systems. And even with improvements in cameras, biometric devices such as iris scans, bomb sniffers, and tracking software, it will be years before they can pick a terrorist out of a crowd. In short, the march toward a surveillance society may be inevitable, but no simple cost-benefit equation can assure us that the sacrifices will be worth it. We'll be debating the point for decades to come.

Full story...

Shooting to kill needs no warning

UPDATE, THE SECOND: Now our glorious police have killed a Grandmother, accidentally of course but that's what you get when you MANHANDLE A 74 YEAR OLD WOMAN. Two women and a 12 year old boy harrassed by police to the extent that one of them dies. Has our constabulary lost all sense of reason? How the hell could they think that these people were a threat? What the FUCK is happening to this country? Has everyone gone stark-staring bonkers???

UPDATE: They just shot someone else. Would everybody STOP getting shot!

This is just great, the controls of the fascist police state are complete. You can now get shot for being suspected of being a suicide bomber. We have one innocent Brazillian dead and now many more could be shot for no reason whatsoever. This government is totally out of control, am I the only one who can see that? This is no longer a democracy, this is a police state where you can be shot for wearing a big jacket and sprinting for the train.

But then our police were trained in Israel so what the hell do you expect!?

Police have been given permission to shoot dead suspected suicide bombers without any verbal warning, the Guardian has learned.

The killing of an innocent Brazilian man in a London underground station on Friday has focused attention on new guidelines to defend against terror attacks.

Operation Kratos tactics say suicide bombers who are about to explode their devices can be shot in the head.

There is still confusion over whether Jean Charles de Menezes, who was shot eight times, received a verbal warning.

A police source has told the Guardian that there is no need for officers to verbally warn a suspect before opening fire.

The source said: "If the firearms team are reasonably certain the person is a suicide bomber then there is no need to issue any warning.

"Experience from other parts of the world shows that if a suicide bomber knows they are being followed by police, they will detonate."

Yesterday, Barbara Wilding, the chief constable of South Wales police and one of the architects of the shoot-to-kill policy, said old guidelines telling officers to fire at the upper chest were redundant in the face of the dangers posed by suicide bombers.

She told the BBC that criminal law still governed officers' actions: "We always have to be able to answer, have we used reasonable force in the light of intelligence of the situation and the risk?"

The Metropolitan police commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, said there had been 250 incidents since the attacks when police thought they may have been dealing with a suicide bomber. And he indicated that on seven occasions police had been on the brink of acting.

"I know there have been 250 incidents since July 7 where we have considered whether we are seeing a suicide bomber," he said. "I know that when I last saw it there had been seven times when we have got as close to calling it as 'that' and we haven't."

Full story...

About Those Nuclear Attack Speculations

More rumours circulating about WMD terrorism and a subsequent invasion of Iran, let's hope that rumours are all they are...

Jesse's Blog

Some rumors eventually prove to be accurate foreknowledge. I hope that this one turns out to be silly paranoia spawned by someone (me) who gets too much email and worries too much!

We hear it every day from our government officials: “It’s not a matter of if, but when!” This phrase of course referrers to the domestic nuclear terrorism that our government tells us in inevitable. Naturally when our our government tells us this we have to respect their words. But when similar information is sourced to independent media the “conspiracy theory” tag is immediately applied. Let’s all hope that we can look back at this note and tag it as well meaning alarm and not as foreknowledge.

Before I fill you in on the information rumor mill regarding supposed upcoming nuclear terror let’s keep a few things in mind:

1. The US government is warning us that a nuclear terrorists attack is imminent. It is just a matter of time.
2. Nuclear weapons have only been manufactured by governments; with the US government being the most prolific producer.
3. The above 2 facts should lead you to realize that nuclear weapons do not get used without some kind of government involvement. Governments are the only entities that have the ability to manufacture nuclear weapons and they have always been in complete control of these weapons.
4. The fact is that no nuclear device has or will ever go off without the knowledge of at least one government that has a nuclear weapons program. We all know about the official nuclear capable nations and we all know that Israel is the unofficial nation to have nuclear capabilities. What is taking place, as was the case with Iraq, is that Iran is being set up as a nuclear threat in the event of a nuclear terror incident. Iran is not a nuclear WMD producer and if they were their technology would be so primitive that they would not be able to produce a small nuclear device that can be delivered by a terrorist. Nations do not jump from having no nuclear capabilities to producing the state of the art miniature nuclear devices. It just does not happen. Only the Soviet Union, the US and Israel would have that capability at this time. Perhaps some of the other nuclear nations can produce such devices but it is unlikely. What is surely unlikely is that Iran can produce them. Keep that in mind.

Full story...

Israel, Iran, Mossad and a Nuclear False Flag Attack

MI5 admits Iraq link to London bombings

This is why we call him PHONY Tony!!

"All governments are lying cocksuckers, I hope you know that." - Bill Hicks

Iraq has become a "dominant issue" for Islamic extremists operating in Britain, domestic intelligence agency MI5 said.

In an analysis titled "Threat to the U.K. from International Terrorism" posted on the agency's Web site, a team of MI5 analysts concludes, "Though they have a range of aspirations and 'causes,' Iraq is a dominant issue for a range of extremist groups and individuals in the U.K. and Europe."

In the wake of the July 7 bombings Foreign Secretary Jack Straw and Prime Minister Tony Blair insisted there was no link between Britain's role in the Iraq invasion and the attacks. Their views came in contrast to a leaked assessment by the Joint Terrorism Analysis Center, based at MI5, which claimed three weeks before July 7 that Iraq was continuing to act "as a focus of a range of terrorist related activities in Britain."

Blair has since acknowledged that terrorists may use Iraq for recruitment.

In their analysis, the MI5 officers add: "Some individuals who support the insurgency are known to have traveled to Iraq in order to fight against coalition forces. It is possible that they may return to the U.K. and consider mounting attacks here."

Full story...

The Morals of Tony Blair

I don't think Phony Tony has any, he's sold his soul for whatever it was he sold it for and with it he sold us out, he knows it and he's scared that everyone else will find out too... Tony is a scar on the conscience of this country.

9/11. 3/11. Then 7/7. On July 7th, 2005, 4 bombers murdered 52 Britons (and themselves) and injured over 700 hundred more. In response, British Prime Minister Tony appeared on television, pledging to defend "our values" and "our way of life," saying "It is important that the terrorists realize our determination to defend our values and our way of life... It is our determination that they will never succeed in destroying what we have here in this country and in other civilized countries around the world," and offered the typical Bushian mantra of "us vs. them" – a perverted world-view that is indistinguishable from Bush's and a steady recipe for perpetual conflict and misunderstanding.

As one blogger said it best, "Even by Blair's standards, it was a performance of nauseating hypocrisy, as he sought to seize the moral high ground in relation to [the] violence and destruction that he himself helped unleash."

On Monday, July 11, Blair refused the lickspittle Conservative "opposition’s" demands for a government inquiry into the bombings, insisting, following Dick Cheney’s lead, that an investigation into his regime’s failures would distract from the task of catching the perpetrators, and announced that he believed an inquiry into the bombings would be a "ludicrous diversion."

In response to the bombings, several people drew the obvious link between Blair’s participation in the war crime of invading Iraq and the blowback of revenge killings in Britain, just as it had in Spain. George Galloway, who brought both barrels to his appearance before the sham investigation into the embargo on Iraq and allegations of bribery with illegal oil sales, issued a statement that in part read:

"We have worked without rest to remove the causes of such violence from our world. We argued, as did the Security Services in this country, that the attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq would increase the threat of terrorist attack in Britain. Tragically Londoners have now paid the price of the government ignoring such warnings. We urge the government to remove people in this country from harms way, as the Spanish government acted to remove its people from harm, by ending the occupation of Iraq and by turning its full attention to the development of a real solution to the wider conflicts in the Middle East."

Liberal Democratic party leader Charles Kennedy made the obvious observation when he remarked: "Those, like President Bush and Tony Blair, who have sought to link Iraq with the so-called 'war on terror' can hardly be surprised when members of the public draw the same link when acts of terrorism occur here in the United Kingdom."

Charles Kennedy spoke for many when he stated the obvious, that the Iraq War gave Jihadists a popular recruiting cause, a training ground and further reasons to try to strike the West.

Even Blair's former Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook, saw the link: "There may be room for debate over whether there is a connection between the war in Iraq and the London bombings, but there is no escaping the hard truth that the chain in that country is a direct result of the decision to invade it," he told the Guardian.

London Mayor Red Ken Livingston offered these uncharacteristically wise for him, comments on the bombings, when asked what he thought motivated the attacks:

"I think you've just had 80 years of western intervention into predominantly Arab lands because of the western need for oil. We've propped up unsavory governments, we've overthrown ones we didn't consider sympathetic. And I think the particular problem we have at the moment is that in the 1980s ... the Americans recruited and trained Osama Bin Laden, taught him how to kill, to make bombs, and set him off to kill the Russians and drive them out of Afghanistan. They didn't give any thought to the fact that once he'd done that he might turn on his creators … If at the end of the First World War we had done what we promised the Arabs, which was to let them be free and have their own governments, and kept out of Arab affairs, and just bought their oil, rather than feeling we had to control the flow of oil, I suspect this wouldn't have arisen."

However, to admit that his actions precipitated the events would be a repudiation of Tony Blair’s entire post 9-11 career. So, naturally, he did what comes naturally to every politician. He ignored reality. Unfortunately for the fatuous Blair, along came the ICM poll published in the Guardian newspaper. With a margin of error of 3 percentage points, the poll found that 33 percent of Britons said that Tony Blair himself bore "a lot of responsibility" for the bombings, and 31 percent thought he had "a little" responsibility.

In response to the poll Blair snorted: "Of course these terrorists will use Iraq as an excuse. They will use Afghanistan. Sept. 11 happened of course before both of these things, and then the excuse was American policy, or Israel. They will always have their reasons for acting. But we have got to be really careful of almost giving in to the perverted and twisted logic with which they argue."

Perverted and twisted logic. Yes, let’s not give into that. Let’s deny all the evidence. Like the repeated claims by Al-Qaeda and it’s imitators that they are acting to frustrate and repulse the decades long Anglo-American imperialism in the Arab world and now the installation of a new Anglo-American condominium over the Muslim world under the cover of "democratically-elected" puppet regimes to deflect widespread and rising hostility to their allied military despots and domestic sympathizers. Let’s ignore cause and effect and continue to insist on illogical and perverted explanations that purely by coincidence, I’m sure, continue to justify continued imperialism and it’s expansion into new lands in the futile search for a military solution to a political tactic.

If as Tony Blair and George W. Bush say, the terrorists strike out to destroy Western values and societies, why have they not bombed Portugal, which is very similar to Spain? Why not Switzerland and Sweden? Austria and Germany? Canada, Brazil, France, Mexico, Greece and any other Western countries? Why do they continue to attack countries that are occupied by inhumane regimes that participated in the invasion of Iraq and the continued occupation of the Arab world through proxy despotisms? Unfortunately, for Blair, he conveniently forgets that Al-Qaeda has repeatedly cited the pre-9/11 U.S. occupation of Arabia and the embargo of Iraq as the reason for their attacks on 9/11 and the Madrid bombers openly cited Spanish participation in the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

Did the IRA commit their bombings, including an attack on Downing Street itself, because they hated the English way of life and English values or did they hate the government’s policy of occupying Northern Ireland? Could it be that just as one earlier occupation of a neighboring land produced terror on British soil, another occupation of a distant land has produced terror again.

Full story...

‘Nothing to link Muslims with attacks’

It's not just the Muslim community that has its doubts. British people know that their government is basically run by a bunch of scalliwags and hooligans, what they don't yet understand is the extent to which the government is guilty of deceiving all of us. Look at all the dirty little "official" secrets there are in Whitehall and then try and tell me they are squeaky clean. Nope, I'm standing up right here and right now and saying that I don't think Muslims had anything more to do with it than the role of pawns on a chessboard. The media is being led by the hoof, we don't NEED government censorship because the profession of journalism teaches them how to censor themselves! Any who don't are ostracised or branded "conspiracy theorists" and subsequently sacked then left homeless and hungry. As far as the London Bombings goes, the key is to find out WHO the chessmasters REALLY are. Find them and then hang them from Tower Bridge after they've been found guilty of the High Treason that they most certainly are guilty of.

Mohammed Naseem, Birmingham's most prominent Muslim leader, claimed yesterday there was nothing to prove Muslims carried out bomb attacks in London on July 7 and 21.

The comments of the chairman of Birmingham Central Mosque are surprising given the wealth of evidence, including DNA matches and CCTV images, linking at least eight young Muslim men to the outrages.

However, his views are held by a significant number of British Muslims. Some blame the US and Israel for terrorist attacks such as September 11, revealing a deep distrust of the British authorities.

Mr Naseem denied there was any convincing evidence the September 11 attacks on New York had been carried out by the al-Qaeda terrorist organisation. He said: “Muslims across the world know of no organisation called al-Qaeda. That information comes from the CIA.”

Mr Naseem, who represents a congregation of several thousand, was speaking in Bordesley Green close to the scene of yesterday's police anti-terrorism operation. Asked whether he believed Muslim terrorists attacked London on July 7 and 21, he said: “I have not seen the evidence for that.” He said: “All we have is CCTV camera photos, identity cards and driving licences. These could have been innocent men.”

Talib Hussain, a representative of Birmingham council who was also present, said: “Certain faith groups have been identified as being behind [the bombings] and that is wrong.” Mr Naseem said Muslims had lost faith in anti-terrorist police and the security services.

Full story...

London Bombing Aftermath: The Spin Continues

by Paul Joseph Watson

Since the Friday shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes, an innocent man with no links to terrorism or suicide bombers, we have been subjected to further spin and misdirection in an attempt to stifle real questions about the 7/7 bombing.

The original bombing story has been permanently removed from the front pages of the nation's newspapers. Publications like the London Mirror were starting to ask serious questions about how the alleged bombers were set up by another group and were unaware of the fact that they would be killed in the blasts.

As this website has consistently claimed, the 7/7 alleged bombers were hired as the unwitting fall guys for an operation of which the planning and execution was organized at the very highest levels of the parallel British government.

The dupes were told they were part of a drill to test security provisions in dealing with suicide bombers. The men booked return tickets, pay and display tickets for their cars, expected to be paid handsomely and to have helped protect their country before returning to their homes in Leeds.

We received an interesting e mail from an individual who was listening to BBC Radio Five on the day of the bombings.

I thought I'd follow up on what you've obviously been getting from England regarding the recruitment of volunteers for terror drills. I heard the same thing with a notable differnce. I heard this on BBC Radio 5 Live on 7/7.

My honest recollection is that it was broadcast somewhere around lunchtime. They mentioned that Transport for London (the people running the underground) in conjunction with the Dept. of Transport would run drills where fake devices would be placed on the network and the staff reponse times measured in terms of locating them.

To the best of my re-collection they did not really elaborate any further on this, but the shock I felt was real when I started to think 9/11 and the CIA, NRO planes as weapons wargames and the USAF's hi-jack field training exercises.

Please note also that the Sky News Foreign News Editor Tim Marshall reported seeing British Army soldiers/bomb disposal people in the Charing Cross area at around 1100 - 1115 hours. When his interview (by mobile phone) was over the news anchor read a brief Army statement "...Civil Contingency Support Measures are now in place".

The anchorman then said "...Army on the streets of London trying to manage this major terrorist situation."

The time was 1118 hours when said this.

Other websites have also echoed claims that Muslims were being recruited for drills on the London Underground.

Of course the biggest smoking gun of them all is the fact that there was a drill at the exact same time targeting the exact same locations in the London Underground.

Channel 4 News attempted to dismiss our investigation into this by claiming that it was an inquest that was only relevent up until the identity of the 'bombers' was made public. This is plainly a ridiculous claim. Just because some grainy CCTV footage of four men is released does not make an event that has been calculated to be an astronomically impossible coincidence irrelevent. Furthermore, the fact that the four men pictured were on the scene at the time of the bombings does not mean that the exercise is unrelated. In fact, from the very start we have consistently emphasized the fact that the alleged bombers and the exercise are directly related.

Yet more evidence as to the bombers' unwitting role in the horrific reality of the attack has emerged.

Eyewitness Bruce Lait was yards away from the bomb that exploded at Aldgate East station. The following is what he told the Cambridge Evening News.

"The policeman said 'mind that hole, that's where the bomb was'. The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train. They seem to think the bomb was left in a bag, but I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag."

For individuals to plant bombs underneath trains and secure them in place without being caught, they would need to secure access to the trains. In this scenario, London Underground could have been told that a dummy device was to be placed underneath the train as part of an exercise to test security an alertness. When the real attacks happened some LU officials would have been alarmed but their suspicions would have dampened when it was revealed that the bombs were carried in backpacks, meaning that the drill was just a strange 'coincidence'.

The fact that the bombs were actually planted underneath the trains could have easily been buried in an avalanche of official announcements to the contrary.

On the other hand the backback bombs could have just been the diversionary blasts to enable patsies to be framed, just like the planes flying into the towers acted as the diversionary cover for the explosives planted inside the WorldTrade Center.

The 7/21 copycat bombings have succeeded in monopolizing media coverage and taking attention away from the highly suspicious 7/7 bombings. The fact that all four bombings were badly planned and failed suggests that there was no inside involvement.

Full story...

Brazilian did not wear bulky jacket

Ok, so why the hell was this poor guy shot? They let him get on a bus thinking he was a suicide bomber and then shot him before he got on a tube train. They say he had a big jacket on: he didn't. They say he vaulted the barrier: he didn't. The wrestled him to the ground and unloaded an entire magazine into him based on the fact that he came out of a building that had a flat in it that was once occupied by someone connected to the bombings. Now it turns out most of what they told us was bollocks anyway. Any talk of the officers concerned being sanctioned? Any reprimands? ANY FUCKING JAIL SENTENCES??? NO! Why? Because in the words of the immortal Bantu Stephen Biko "The System will never convict The System."

These are the actions of a fascist police state, not one of the world's oldest democracies! Wake the fuck up people!

Relatives say Met admits that, contrary to reports, electrician did not leap tube station barrier

Jean Charles de Menezes, the Brazilian shot dead in the head, was not wearing a heavy jacket that might have concealed a bomb, and did not jump the ticket barrier when challenged by armed plainclothes police, his cousin said yesterday.

Speaking at a press conference after a meeting with the Metropolitan police, Vivien Figueiredo, 22, said that the first reports of how her 27-year-old cousin had come to be killed in mistake for a suicide bomber on Friday at Stockwell tube station were wrong.

Article continues
"He used a travel card," she said. "He had no bulky jacket, he was wearing a jeans jacket. But even if he was wearing a bulky jacket that wouldn't be an excuse to kill him."

Flanked by the de Menezes family's solicitor, Gareth Peirce, and by Bianca Jagger, the anti-Iraq war campaigner, she condemned the shoot-to-kill policy which had led to her cousin's death and vowed that what she called the "crime" would not go unpunished.

"My cousin was an honest and hard working person," said Ms Figueiredo who shared a flat with him in Tulse Hill, south London. "Although we are living in circumstances similar to a war, we should not be exterminating people unjustly."

Another cousin, Patricia da Silva Armani, 21, said he was in Britain legally to work and study, giving him no reason to fear the police. "An innocent man has been killed as though he was a terrorist," she said. "An incredibly grave error was committed by the British police."

Mr de Menezes was shot seven times in the head and once in the shoulder at 10am last Friday after being followed from Tulse Hill. Scotland Yard initially claimed he wore a bulky jacket and jumped the barrier when police identified themselves and ordered him to stop. The same day the Met commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, said the shooting was "directly linked" to the unprecedented anti-terror operation on London's streets.

The following day Sir Ian apologised when detectives established that the Brazilian electrician, on his way to a job in north-west London, was not connected to attempts to blow up three underground trains and a bus in the capital.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission has began an inquiry which is expected to take several months. Yesterday it emerged one armed officer involved has been given leave, and two have been moved to non-firearm duties. Ms Figuerdo condemned Sir Ian's decision to authorise the leave, saying she wanted to see the man who shot her cousin, and he should be in jail.

The body of Mr de Menezes is being flown to Brazil tonight for a funeral tomorrow. Simultaneously, a memorial service will be held at Westminster Cathedral, with TV coverage beamed live to Brazil.

Ms Peirce condemned Sir Ian's statements on the case, saying there had been a "regrettable rush to judgment".

Full story...

Child Abuse at Abu Ghraib

These stories should all be taken in the context of Joe Vialls' theories about Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman. I am one of the few people in the UK who still does not believe that Ian Huntley and Maxine Carr are guilty. If you're interested read the codshit coverage of the Soham murders linked below.

Soham Murder Trial Update
BBC Conspires to Pervert Justice
Holly and Jessica
Holly Wells & Jessica Chapman Murders
Who Really Murdered Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman?

Data is emerging, no matter how the administration attempts to hide it, that the new photos and video of abuse at Abu Ghraib prison include the torture of children.

Norway's Prime Minister's office says it plans to address the situation with the U.S. "in a very severe and direct way."

Could this mean losing yet another ally in the Iraq occupation? Amnesty International in Norway has said that Norway can no longer continue their occupation of Iraq, or their support of US policy in this matter.

And some countries, as Tom Tomorrow notes, actually listen to their activists.

While there isn't even an inkling of this in the US Mainstream media, all over the world people are beginning to read about the US abusing children at Abu Ghraib.

Der Spiegel

The Sunday Herald in Scotland has a piece on the abuse of children at the notorious prison:

From Iraq's Child Prisoners, written one year ago:

It was early last October that Kasim Mehaddi Hilas says he witnessed the rape of a boy prisoner aged about 15 in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. “The kid was hurting very bad and they covered all the doors with sheets,” he said in a statement given to investigators probing prisoner abuse in Abu Ghraib. “Then, when I heard the screaming I climbed the door … and I saw [the soldier’s name is deleted] who was wearing a military uniform.” Hilas, who was himself threatened with being sexually assaulted in Abu Graib, then describes in horrific detail how the soldier raped “the little kid”.

A DailyKos diarist has artist renditions of the abuse of a little girl being shown in magazines across the world.

Full story...

Brazilian was shot eight times, inquest told

So, our glorious police let him get on a bus thinking he might be a suicide bomber. There are doubts about the verbal warning given, one witness reports hearing no warning. Now we find out that the pigs emptied an entire magazine into him after after pinning him to the ground. Great job guys! Super, splendid bit of police-work there! The armed bacon at the station makes me feel so much better knowing that they could shoot me for sprinting to catch my train!

Inquiry by police complaints authority to look at all ranks involved, including those who gave orders

Jean Charles de Menezes, the innocent Brazilian man killed by police after being mistaken for a suicide bomber, was shot eight times at Stockwell Tube station on Friday, not five times as had previously been reported.

The details of the number of rounds emptied into the 27-year-old Brazilian electrician after his pursuit through Stockwell station by an armed plainclothes squad emerged at the opening of an inquest into his death yesterday.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission also began an inquiry into the shooting yesterday.

The commission's chairman, Nick Hardwick, told the Guardian the investigation would look at "officers of all ranks", potentially including those who authorised special shoot-to-kill tactics against suicide bombers.

Mr Hardwick said: "It would be wrong to look at people [just] on the frontline, you have to look at who gave the orders and who is in the chain of command."

He added he was confident of getting access to all police documents and personnel involved.

Southwark coroner's court heard that Mr De Menezes, who arrived in Britain three years ago on a student visa, had been on the way to a job in Kilburn, north-west London, when he was challenged and pursued by armed police. He was shot seven times in the head and once in the shoulder.

Witnesses to the shooting last Friday spoke of hearing five shots.

The Metropolitan police commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, had initially said the shooting was "directly linked" to anti-terror operations. But detectives later established he was not connected to attempts to blow up three underground trains and a bus in the capital the day before.

At a Downing Street news conference yesterday Tony Blair said he was "desperately sorry" for the death of Mr De Menezes but that police were working in very difficult circumstances.

"I think it is important that we give them every support and that we understand that had the circumstances been different and, for example, this had turned out to be a terrorist and they had failed to take that action, they would have been criticised the other way," he said.

"At the same time therefore, in expressing our sorrow and deep sympathy for the death that has happened, it is important that we allow the police and support them in doing the job they have to do in order to protect people in this country."

The prime minister's apology came amid conflicting reports on whether Mr De Menezes' student visa, which allows people to work for a small number of hours, had expired, hence his failure to stop when challenged by police. The Home Office said it was unable to comment on the claims, which were reported by the BBC yesterday and attributed to security sources. Normally, a student visa would expire within two years.

Shami Chakrabarti, director of human rights organisation Liberty, said she was "disgusted" by the suggestion that someone's immigration status might have any relevance to the value of their life, adding that Liberty had been at pains to reserve judgment on the Stockwell shooting pending the outcome of an independent investigation.

Full story...

Public doubts grow over shoot-to-kill

I am so angry about this, every time I see the news reports I can feel my blood boiling. An innocent man is dead! What I want to know is if this poor guy was such a threat, why the FUCK did those murderous bastards in the police let him get on a fucking bus at Tulse Hill and travel to Stockwell before deciding to pump 5 shots into him?! Why did they pin him down and then shoot him, surely they had him restrained. Why did a witness not hear the police warning Jean that they were armed police? The whole thing stinks of incompetance! Reports say the family is suing the police, good! I hope they win a very large amount of money!

Public opinion over the police's controversial shoot-to-kill policy has wavered dramatically since an innocent man was shot dead in London last Friday.

Jean Charles de Menezes, 27, a Brazilian electrician on his way to work, was shot by police as he tried to get on a train at Stockwell Tube station on Friday.

He had been followed from a block of flats which was under surveillance, but he turned out to have no connection to terrorism.

A poll on the Mail online on Friday and Saturday showed that 84 per cent of readers were in favour of the shoot-to-kill policy in respect of suspected suicide bombers, compared with 16 per cent against.

But a second poll started on Sunday showed a dramatic swing in opinion. At 10.30am on Monday, only 68 per cent of readers were in favour of the policy, compared with 32 per cent against.

Full story...

Final minutes of the innocent man mistaken for a terrorist

Cheney's Plan: Nuke Iran

If you ask me Dick Cheney is Evil Incarnate, anyone that voted against the imposition of sanctions on Apartheid South Africa is a fascist!

Stand athwart the apocalypse, and shout: "No!"

by Justin Raimondo

A recent poll shows six in ten Americans think a new world war is coming: the same poll says about 50 percent approve of the dropping of the atomic bomb on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of World War II. Somewhat inexplicably, about two-thirds say nuking those two cities was "unavoidable." One can only wonder, then, what their reaction will be to this ominous news, revealed in a recent issue of The American Conservative by intelligence analyst Philip Giraldi:

"The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice President Dick Cheney's office, has tasked the United States Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with drawing up a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States. The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option. As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States. Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing – that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack – but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections."

Two points leap out at the reader – or, at least, this reader – quite apart from the moral implications of dropping nukes on Iran. The first is the completely skewed logic: if Iran has nothing to do with 9/11-II, then why target Tehran? As in Iraq, it's all a pretext: only this time, the plan is to use nuclear weapons. We'll wipe out the entire population of Iran's capital city because, as Paul Wolfowitz said in another context, "it's doable."

The other weird aspect of this "nuke Iran" story is the triggering mechanism: a terrorist attack in the U.S. on the scale of 9/11. While it is certain that our government has developed a number of scenarios for post-attack action, one has to wonder: why develop this plan at this particular moment? What aren't they telling us?

I shudder to think about it.

The more I look at it, and the more I think of it, the more I sense a monumental evil casting its shadow over the world, and I have to tell you, it makes me wonder how much more time I want to spend on this earth. In my more pessimistic moments, I doubt whether we can avoid the horrific fate that seems to await us just around the next corner, the next moment, looming over the globe like a gigantic devil stretching its wings and blotting out the sun.

It seems to me that the question of whether life is really worth living anymore is inextricably bound up with the question of whether or not these madmen can be stopped. If not, then the only alternative is to live it up while we can and laugh defiantly in the face of the apocalypse. Why write columns, why comment at all, if we can't have any effect on the outcome? On the other hand, some ask

"Surely the New York Times and the Washington Post can find a lede here: 'US has plan to nuke Tehran if another 9/11.' Can we get at least a bloody story out of this?"

Might I suggest another lede?: "Armageddon approaches." Or perhaps, for the literary-mind secularists among us: "After many a summer dies mankind."

Where oh where is the "mainstream" media on this? That's a laughable question, because the answer is heartbreakingly obvious: they are nowhere to be found, and for a very good reason. As the Valerie Plame case is making all too clear, the MSM has been a weapon in the hands of the War Party at every step on the road to World War IV. It's an American tradition. As William Randolph Hearst famously put it to an employee in the run-up to the Spanish-American conflict of 1898:

"You furnish the pictures, I'll furnish the war."

Any objective examination of the Anglo-American media's role as a megaphone for this administration's "talking points" would have to conclude that the Hearst school of journalism has been dominant since well before the invasion of Iraq. Aside from the post-9/11 hysteria that effectively swept away all pretenses of a critical stance, the MSM was well acclimated to simply reiterating the U.S. government line on matters of war and peace all through the Clinton era, when friendly media coverage of the Balkans and numerous other Clintonian interventions habituated the press corps to a certain mindset. By the time the Bush administration set out on a campaign of deception designed to lie us into invading and occupying Iraq, the MSM was largely reconciled to playing the role of the government's amen corner.

Full story...

Egyptian experts say Mossad could be behind bombings

It makes perfect sense for Israel to do this:

1. Destablises Egypt politically, one of Israel's major regional competitors
2. Keeps the notion going that Muslims are so crazy they'll blow up their own
3. Costs Egypt money in lost tourism revenues

"By way of deception, thou shalt do war."

Several Egyptian security experts and political analysts said that the Mossad, Israel's spy agency, was behind Saturday's attacks on the Red Sea resort of Sharm al-Sheikh.

Similar accusations were made against Israel in the past, particularly after last year's attack at the Taba Hotel in October and after the 9/11 attacks in the United States.

Saturday's pre-dawn blasts killed more than 64 people, according to Egypt's health ministry, although hospital officials put the toll as high as 88.

Many Egyptian security officials said at least one car used in the bombings had special plates indicating it had come from the Israeli border at Taba on the Sinai peninsula.

On Saturday, Egypt's state-run television interviewed retired army general Fuad Allam, who said that he was confident that Israel played a key role in Sharm al-Sheikh bombings.

Fuad also said that investigations showed that the mastermind of the Taba attack, which killed more than 34 people, was a Palestinian "apparently linked to Israel's security forces."

He added: "I'm almost certain that Israel was also behind this attack because they want to undermine our government and deal a severe blow to our economy. The only ones who benefit from these attacks are the Israelis and the Americans."

Other Egyptian political figures and prominent journalists and editors interviewed by Arabic TV channels made similar accusations.

Dia Rashwan, a political expert, said that Israel is the only country that benefits from such attacks.

Dismissing the idea that "al-Qaeda" was behind the bombings, Rashwan explained: "We are giving al- Qaeda more credit than it deserves. What happened here negates the possibility that the attacks were carried out by ordinary elements. This is the work of an extraordinary element – one that benefits from such attacks. All the available details indicate that only the Israelis could have done this."

Majdi Birnawi, another security expert, said that the Mossad was behind the attacks. "I believe that Mossad or some other [Israeli] security organization carried out this attack,"

Birnawi said he believed the Sharm el-Sheikh bombings were related to the Taba attacks, in which 12 Israelis were killed. "Everyone knows that there are no Israelis in Sharm e-Sheikh," he said.

"There are only Western tourists there. That's why it's wrong to assume that the perpetrators were targeting Israelis."

Full story...

I Was In The Tube Bomb Carriage - And Survived

From near the end of the article:

"The policeman said 'mind that hole, that's where the bomb was'. The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train. They seem to think the bomb was left in a bag, but I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag," he said.

OK, now is this true? If it is then there is NO WAY that a bomb on a person or in a bag would cause the metal in the floor of the train to blow upwards, can't happen. So, IF this story is true then it is a smoking gun.

Cambridge Evening News

Cambridge dancer Bruce Lait has spoken of his miraculous escape when a bomb exploded just yards away from him in a Tube train carriage.

The 32-year-old was knocked out by the blast and awoke to a terrible scene of devastation in the underground tunnel near London's Aldgate East station.
So lucky: Bruce recovers in hospital
Mr Lait, who teaches dance in Cambridge, believes he and his dance partner Crystal Main were the only passengers in the carriage who survived the blast without serious injury - even though they were sitting nearest to where the bomb detonated.

When he came to, there was a body lying on top of him and he was surrounded by the dead and injured. But incredibly, the only wounds the dance coach sustained were facial lacerations and a perforated eardrum.

"I feel extremely, extremely lucky," he said.

The explosion happened just after Mr Lait and Ms Main, 23, got on the train at Liverpool Street on their way to the South Bank for a rehearsal.

He recalled that the carriage had about 20-25 people in it, from all walks of life, and aged from their teens to over 60.

"I remember an Asian guy, there was a white guy with tracksuit trousers and a baseball cap, and there were two old ladies sitting opposite me," he said.

"We'd been on there for a minute at most and then something happened. It was like a huge electricity surge which knocked us out and burst our eardrums. I can still hear that sound now," he said.

The impact of the blast made him pass out. As he came to, he wondered whether he was alive or dead.

"We were right in the carriage where the bomb was. I was knocked out. I did not know what was going on.

"I wondered if I was dead or not. I said to myself, you can't be dead because your brain is having conscious thoughts, so concentrate hard. I was telling myself 'wake up Bruce, wake up'."
Royal visit: At Royal London Hospital
Disorientated, he only gradually realised where he was and what had happened.

"When I woke up and looked around I saw darkness, smoke and wreckage. It took a while to realise where I was and what was going on, then my first concern was for Crystal.

"She was okay but she was in shock because she was trying to deal with the person on top of her who had massive head injuries. We have just found out that this person died," said Mr Lait, who lives in Suffolk.

He too was afraid to move because there was a seriously injured woman lying on top of him.

"I realised someone was lying on top of me. I tried not to move her because I didn't know if she was still alive, or I could have made it worse. This person also died, while on top of me."

At the same time, he slowly tried to work out whether he or Crystal had been injured.

"I thought if I can wiggle my toes I'm okay, and I could, and I asked Crystal to do the same."

Describing the scene as they waited for help, he said: "It was just the most awful scene of death and there were body parts everywhere. There was something next to me. I was trying not to look. I couldn't figure out what it was."

When paramedics arrived, they confirmed that the woman on top of him was dead and carefully moved her body. Mr Lait said the middle-aged woman had blonde curly hair, was dressed in black, and could have been a businesswoman.

He and Crystal were helped out of the carriage. As they made their way out, a policeman pointed out where the bomb had been. It was like a huge electricity surge which knocked us out and burst our eardrums.

Tube survivor Bruce Lait

"The policeman said 'mind that hole, that's where the bomb was'. The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train. They seem to think the bomb was left in a bag, but I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag," he said.

They were led through the tunnel to the platform at Aldgate, which was just a few hundred yards away, and taken out of the station to wait for an ambulance.

Mr Lait was taken to the Royal London Hospital, Whitechapel, where he was visited by the Queen on Friday.

He said: "They asked would I mind if my name were put forward and I said I'd love to meet the Queen, even if the circumstances weren't ideal."

Sitting with his parents, Pat and Tom, Mr Lait told the Queen as she stood at his bedside: "I'm very thankful to still be here."

He said of Her Majesty: "She just seemed very nice and concerned, she seemed very genuine."

Now back at home, he has been trying to recover from the ordeal, with the help of friends and family.

Mr Lait, who teaches the Latin formation team XS, based in Cambridge, and the Cambridge Dancers' Club, said he has been moved by people's care and consideration.
On the floor: Bruce & dance partner Crystal, who was also on the train
"I've had people who know me phone me from all over the world and ask if I am alright. Those pictures of me and the Queen have gone all over the world."

And he said the terrible experience has given him a new outlook on life.

"It has made me realise how important life is, and that we only get one life, and we've got to be happy with what we've got in our lives."

Reflecting on the ordeal, he said: "Out of that whole carriage, I think Crystal and I were the only ones who were not seriously injured, and I think we were nearest the bomb.

"It makes me thank Him up there. I'm not overly religious but I'm not a disbeliever. I pray now and again. Something like this has just made me think, 'thank you Lord'."

Full story...

UK Channel 4 Whitewash London Underground Exercise Story

'Coincidence theorists' say nothing to worry about, go back to sleep

by Paul Joseph Watson

A firestorm erupted amongst alternative media after this website first highlighted the inconceivable coincidence of Visor Consultants holding an exercise which centered around bombs exploding in the exact areas and at the same time as happened during the real 7/7 London Underground attack.

However, no mainstream media has reported on this massive story, instead focusing on drills that had taken place months and years before the actual event.

Until now.

British Channel 4 News has produced a special report which whitewashes the entire affair as one big coincidence and attacks this website for even questioning the unusual nature of the concurrent exercises and attacks on 7/7.

Before we offer a rebuttal to the perspective of the report, it's interesting to relate the reaction of Visor managing director when he was questioned as to the lack of mainstream media coverage on this issue.

Colman Jones, an Associate Producer on CBS:Sunday Night, met Power at a conference on disaster management in Toronto. As they were leaving the building he enquired of Power 'why there had not been more media coverage of this.' 'They were trying to keep it quiet,' Power purportedly responded, with what Jones called 'a knowing smile.'

Who is trying to keep it quiet? If this is all just hot air as Channel 4 later go on to claim, then why is it being kept secret? Why hasn't Power even revealed the name of the company he was running the drill for?

Quoting from the Channel 4 report,

Visor's crisis team, Power explained, were planning to practice the switch from what he called 'slow time' thinking to the 'quick time' thinking required by a crisis situation. In the event, they were forced to do so for real. 'Unusual though it may be to stop an exercise and go into real time,' he comments, 'it worked very well - although there were a few seconds when the audience didn't realise whether it was real or not.'

After quoting our report and Al Jazeera (who the Channel 4 writer JJ King failed to notice had just copied our article wholesale and claimed it as their own), Channel 4 claim that this website engaged in 'careless speculation' in that we failed to contact Visor.

All we were doing is drawing attention to the comments that Power had made on both BBC Radio 5 and ITN News. Furthermore, Power refused to respond to anyone who wasn't what he called 'accredited media' - and just sent the same template stock e mail out to anyone who enquired about the drill.

Channel 4 and JJ King then state,

In fact, the 'exercises' he spoke of on Five Live were carried out purely 'on paper', or at least PowerPoint, by a small group of seven or eight executives (Power remains tight-lipped about the client) seeking to examine the impact on corporate decision-making of a potential crisis situation.

OK, let's take a step back here.

Channel 4 quoted Power earlier as saying that when the real attack began, th exercise switched from 'slow time' to 'quick time' thinking and that Visor stopped the exercise and went into 'real time'. This, coupled with comments previously made by Power, suggests that Visor had some kind of actie role in the command structure in dealing with the management of the crisis, the real attack. How can the exercise have just been paper based when Visor started managing the real attack, not the scripted one, after it happened.

Even putting this aside for a moment, the drill need not have any link whatsoever to the attack as it unfolded, but still could have been cited by the government as a fallback excuse had any of their operatives been caught in the act of facilitating the bombings. This was the point of our original article and we made it clear that Visor and Peter Power could have been completely unwitting dupes in this process. In fact that would have been the favourable because it reduces the chance of good people stepping forward and blowing the whistle.

In the light of a brief interview with Power, the 'unbelievable' coincidence of events suddenly seems entirely comprehensible: the train stations targeted, after all, were all in central London -- any planner would pick these amongst a list of possible targets.

Take a look at a map of the tube stations. Factor in the amount of different stations with the fact that the exercises targeted the exact same stations at the exact same time as the real event happened.

Then consider the fact that the exercises planned simultaneous bombs going off in different stations. The fact that the 7/7 attacks were simultaneous bombs only emerged two days after the event, making the coincidence theory even less plausible.

One individual calculated the likelihood of this being just a coincidence. The odds were one in 3,715,592,613,265,750,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. This is obviously a figure open to conjecture but it gives you an idea of the ballpark improbability we are talking about.

Channel 4 cite poison gas attack drills on the Underground and a BBC documentary which dramatised an attack on the Underground as proof that the Visor drill was very much part of a trend and nothing more than a coincidence. This misses the point entirely.

Again we have to repeat, the key elements of the Visor drill are that the exact same locations were targeted at the exact same time as the real attack. This is beyond coincidence. We are aware that there were other drills and the mainstream media has covered them over and over again. Why haven't they covered this one?

Channel 4 conclude their whitewash piece by questioning this website's 'journalistic nous'.

This is pretty rich coming from a mainstream media that for example takes Al-Qaeda responsibility claims as gospel even if there's no evidence the group exists.

Yesterday Sky News carried the headline 'Group Claims Bombings' - in relation to the failed attacks on Thursday.

The group in question was Abu Hafs al Masri Brigade. Previous investigations by the Boston Globe and others concur that this group doesn't exist and is likely to be one man sat at a computer.

So how can Sky News might as well have reported that Intergalactic Imperial Reptoids claimed responsibility for the attack, and yet it is the alternative media that consistently gets lambasted for bad journalism?

The tide is turning, newspaper sales are down, TV news viewers are falling. The mainstream media has lost all credibility and people are turning to those who actively seek the truth rather than actively seek to suppress it.

Even in the face of this barrage from both sloppily researched 'special reports' and government hackers trying to shut our websites down, we will continue to cover the events in London with a skeptical eye. In fact the more we are attacked, the more we will re-double our efforts to reach more people.

The truth will always triumph over the scoffing sardonic whims of establishment media news whores.

Full story...

Jewish Musician Says London May Be Mossad False Flag

I think it's more likely that this was the Mossad (or a dark and disturbed faction within the Mossad) than it was anyone else. Israel gets its clash of civilisations and can use it as an excuse to further oppress the Palestinians. I think it was a French politician who referred to Israel as "that shitty little country" - spot on mate!

Gilad Atzmon, a London based musician and friend of Israel Shamir, has communicated this via email to some friends:

...The conclusion we can draw is clear. The real perpetrators of the underground bombing are still free, they are out there and they may attack again, but then who could they be?

It is very difficult to determine. Blair is trying to tell us that they must be Muslim fundamentalists, but in fact they can as well be just Arab nationalists. Thinking about it, isn't it fathomable that they could be far right British nationalists? The BNP was the first to say "didn't we warn you all about those Muslims?" But it goes further, as many informal commentators mentioned, we shouldn't exclude the possibility that some foreign intelligence services may be involved. Both Mossad and CIA are reasonable candidates. In the course of the years, Mossad made itself some serious reputation for its "false flag" operations. Why would the Mossad be interested in such a kill? Just because Zionism benefits from the emergence of the alleged "cultural clash" between the so-called "Judeo Christian" world and the Muslim one.

Cyte says: Good. Let's start talking about it. Maybe other non-Zionist Jews would be equally or even more forthcoming. Where are the whistleblowers when a confused world needs them?

Full story...

Man shot dead by police on Tube

This is more like an execution than the actions of the police. Why manhandle him to the ground if he's going to blow himself up, why not shoot him in the head like they're trained to do? Why 5 shots after they already seem to have him restrained? This feels like another Oswald/Ruby moment...

A man has been shot dead by armed officers at Stockwell Tube station, as police hunt four would-be bombers.

Passenger Mark Whitby told BBC News he had seen a man of Asian appearance shot five times by "plain-clothes police officers" with a handgun.

"I saw the gun being fired five times into the guy - he is dead," he said.

Passengers were evacuated from the Northern Line station in south London. The incident followed four minor explosions in the capital on Thursday.

Police have cordoned off a 200-metre area around Stockwell station.

Services on the Victoria and Northern lines have been suspended following a request by the police, London Underground said.

Ambulances including an air ambulance have been sent to the scene at Stockwell.

Mr Whitby, told BBC News: "I was sitting on the train reading my paper.

"I heard a load of noise, people saying, 'Get out, get down'!

"I saw an Asian guy run onto the train hotly pursued by three plain-clothes police officers.

"One of them was carrying a black handgun - it looked like an automatic - they pushed him to the floor, bundled on top of him and unloaded five shots into him."

Passenger Alison Bowditch told BBC News: "The tube pulled into the station and we were sitting there, you know, as you do and then there was just a lot of shouting and the sound of gunfire and then people were saying, 'Get off, get off!'

"Somebody definitely went to the ground and as they went to the ground I heard gun fire and assumed they had been shot."

Full story...

How did Greenspan Know about the London Bombings Two Days before?

A tell-tale sign of Illuminati handiwork in the London bombings. Forget about the Muslims, this is about things that are MUCH larger than that. You are being lied to, wake the fuck up!

by Mike Whitney

Two days before the London subway bombings, Fed-Master Alan Greenspan flushed nearly $40 billion in liquidity into financial markets. The sudden activity was an astonishing departure from the current policy of tightening interest rates to stifle inflation. The Chairman has not explained his erratic behavior, but there’s growing speculation that Greenspan may have had information about the likelihood of terrorist attacks and decided to “preemptively” head-off a run on the markets. As it turns out, his actions may have been a positive factor in stabilizing the market following the incident, (check: The Cunning Realist; “following the money” for more on the Fed’s unusual action but that doesn’t address the larger issue of whether Greenspan had inside information that an attack was imminent.

Many people are unaware that the Federal Reserve gets information directly from the CIA. Perhaps, the level of “chatter” was sufficiently high to warrant the extraordinary measures. (“The Fed almost doubled its temporary pool in just a few days!”) That doesn’t explain, however, why alarms were not raised in England. In fact, as Democracy Now reported on July 19, “London lowered the security threat just before the July 7 bombings”.

Why?

The details now surfacing about the London bombings are familiar to those who have researched the anomalies surrounding September 11. In both cases the government version of events is shot with holes.

“Israel Insider” cites Mossad Chief Meir Dagan, in an interview with the German Newspaper Bild am Sonntag:
“The Mossad office in London received advance notice about the attacks, but only six minutes before the first blast, the paper reports, confirming an earlier AP report. As a result, it was impossible to take any action to prevent the blasts.”

So, at the very least we have confirmation that Israeli Intelligence had some advance warning of the attacks. But, the Mossad’s announcement doesn’t square with other reports on the same day.

Just hours after the July 7 attacks, the Stratfor Intelligence Agency published an article “Israel warned United Kingdom of Possible Attacks” on antiwar.com that stated, “Israel warned London of the attacks a ‘couple of days ago,’ but British authorities failed to respond accordingly to deter the attacks” and “While Israel is keeping quiet for the time-being, British Prime Minister Tony Blair soon will be facing the heat for his failure to take action.”

The article concludes on a somber note, “The British government sat on this information for days and failed to respond. Though the Israeli government is playing along publicly, it may not stay quiet for long. This is sure to apply pressure on Blair very soon for his failure to deter this major terrorist attack.”

The Stratfor report has gotten little attention from anyone except conspiracy theorists, but it is likely to resurface in connection to Greenspan’s inexplicable behavior and as the official story upheld by Blair and co. continues to melt-down under greater scrutiny.

The Blair narrative has taken full advantage of the “evil ideology” theory of terror and completely eschews the facts as they dribble in from the police investigation. At FOX News the government approach was clear from the very onset; they believed that the attacks were the work of suicide bombers, a theory that promotes the racial-stereotypes that appeal to FOX viewers. From the FOX perspective, this justifies pushing through Blair’s new regressive legislation, savaging civil liberties, and pursuing an endless war against Islamic extremism. Blair’s posturing has followed the speculative analysis of FOX in nearly every respect. Armed with nothing more than over-heated rhetoric and unsubstantiated claims, Blair has framed the bombings as an attack on “our way of life”; a spurious charge intended to fuel the public rage and incite violence against immigrants.

The fact that the “alleged” terrorists bought round-trip subway tickets, placed a “Park-n-Ride” ticket in the window of their car at the station, and didn’t strap the bombs to their bodies, has increased suspicion that the government’s story may veer substantially from the truth.

One of the suspects actually stayed out partying late the night before. Is that what one would expect on the last day of one’s life?
Another has an 18 month old baby, and still another had a baby on the way.
Men don’t commit suicide when they have kids on the way, despite Mr. Blair’s impassioned rhetoric. So far, the government version is laced with inaccuracies; a hopeless tangle of loose-ends, spurious allegations and blatant propaganda.

The myriad unanswered questions about the bombings suggest that we should reserve judgment about the real culprits before further investigation. Like 9-11, a disturbing pattern seems to be emerging of government officials manipulating public fear to advance their domestic policies and press-ahead with the war agenda. It’s easy to wonder about the real source of these terror-incidents when they always seem to benefit the same class of characters.
As the details leak out and drips and drabs, no one will be too surprised if the unanswered questions, misleading information and barefaced lies contradict the feeble demagoguery issuing from 10 Downing Street.

The Blair-Bush-Greenspan cabal may not have known it was “bombs-away” for poor London, but it is apparent that they knew a lot more than they are letting on. The primary tools of empire, fear and deception, are being invoked with ever-increasing precision and their manipulation is having a devastating effect on democratic institutions and global security. The only ones who continue to gain are the privileged few at the top of the political and economic pyramid.

Full story...

The Perfect Conspiracy: The London Bombings

by Trowbridge H. Ford

Whenever any high-profile, violent event occurs - whether it be the assassination of some important politician, an unexpected conflict, or a sudden, devastating act of terrorisim - everyone immediately wants to know its causes, key players, and consequences. The problems occur for those needing to react or those just seeking to understand because they bring to the process too much conceptual baggage they have amased along the way, and take too many short cuts in seeking solutions. Despite what counterterrorist experts claim about wanting to make what they are doing predictable - some kind of science - almost all these events are highly individualistic ones because of the specific context in which they occur, the unexpected action by some previously uninvolved party, and the most likely occurrence of some mistake or oversight along the way.

In today's world of asymetric warfare, actions come so thick and fast that we have developed abbreviations to denote them - like 9/11, 3/11 and 7/7 - as if they were as common as neighborhood dispensers of modern man's essentials - and all kinds of items - acronyms, abbreviations, tradecraft, jargon, new facts, speculation and the like - are used to describe and define them. Then all observers bring to their tasks all kinds of assumptions and biases which both shape and distort what they have been trying to understand and explain. It is apparetnly the only way we can keep from going completely mad and impotent in today's unpredictable, violent world.

One only has to look at any day's headlines to see what this approach to events produces in the way of content and understanding: "Youths Lost to Islam Became 'Suicide' Bombers in London", "9/11 Attacks Were Inside Jobs", "Dr. Kelly Killed Himself", "Mossad Pulls Off Another False Flag Operation in Gaza", "Al-Qaeda Strikes Gold Again", "House Inquiry Reconfirms Oswald JFK's Assassin", "FRU Refuses to Come Clean about 'Psyops' in Ulster", "KGB Planned to Kill
Politician in Scandinavian False Flag Move", "Mossad Had Most to Gain in Attacks of 9/11", and the like.

The trouble with such articles is that they are based upon a level of information, prejudice, and uncertainty which would not be permitted in other stories. All these incidents involved governments whose security services must be protected at all costs, so information is only
disclosed or leaked which helps promote explanations which serve their interests. The services of other governments give a wide berth to the process in order to receive the same privilege when they are in center stage though all the world's leading security services are intimately involved in all kinds of ways when anything important happens. As a result, claims of incompetence, corruption, and bad luck by officials are very much at a premium in explanations. It is the culprits who are usually guilty of oversights, manipulation, and good fortune in such accounts.

As a result, the mainstream media generally discuss such events as tragedies, surprises, and accidents while sites on the internet are prone to see them as the result of conspiracies. Actually, they are usually the result of cock-ups by authorities, plans or counterterrorist operations which have gone wrong because of blunders. Even when deadly conspiracies are plotted, they generally go astray even if they are carried out by official agencies because of some oversight, accident, or more pressing matter. In sum, the suspicion that conspiracies have occurred should be the last option that officials and their critics resort to rather than the first when such events occur.

Having followed this advice in examining the underground and bus bombings in London on July 7th, I have come to the conclusion that it is one of the best examples of a conspiracy conceived, and carried out in a long time - or, if you prefer, Britain's counterterrorists effected one of the biggest cock-ups of all times. Conspiracies and cock-ups are inversely proportional except when some plot is prevented, and the concepts can be used to calculate the performance of either the terrorists or the counterterrorists. In this case, the Leeds sleeper cell must be given total marks, and their protagonists among the authorities virtually nothing.

To understand why Britain's counterterrorists did so badly, one must go back to the end of the Cold War when MI5 aka Security Service - unlike what was happening to the FBI in the States - was given new powers, personnel, and privileges to combat the terrorists, especially the Provisional IRA, in Northern Ireland. In 1993, MI5's new T Branch was given overall control of the kingdon's counterterrorism efforts, much to the expense and chagrin of Scotland Yard's Anti-Terrorist Unit aka SO-13, and the Royal Ulster Constabulary's Special Branch. Whitehall wanted results in combating the Provos, and was not too worried about legal niceities along the way, providing that it only had to answer to the Home Secretary for its performance.

And the changes did not come a minute too soon as the PIRA was in the midst of its most deadly bombing campaign ever throughout the kingdom. Its temporary ceasefire in December 1990 after Mrs. Thatcher stepped down as Prime Minister was not followed by the expected permanent one but a renewed campaign of terror when the UK could least afford it because of its involvement in the Gulf War. On February 7, 1991, the Provos fired three mortar rounds at No. 10 Downing Street -reminiscent of how it had obliterated the Newry Police Station, and nearly killed the former PM back in the mid-1980s -setting off a wave of tit-for-tat killings between republicans and loyalists which would only end when the Provisionals declared a "complete cessation of military operations" on August 31, 1994.

During the bombing campaign, Sinn Fein and the PIRA Council were badly divided over its conduct. While SF leaders Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness were talking to MI6's Michael Oatley in the hope of establishing real peace, the Council, especially Sean Kelly, was most desirous of pressing ahead with the war. The bombing in London's Soho, Oxford Street, and the Baltic Exchange, the Warrington Gas Works, its shopping centre, the City of London's NatWest Tower, St. Ethelburga's Church in Bishopsgate, six no-warning bombs in North London, and many others seemed to be Kelly's handiwork, and little wonder that T Branch was most desirous of catching him red-handed - what could only be achieved by penetrating the PIRA Council back in Belfast.

At the same time, Special Branch officials back in Northern Ireland, especially those in the Stevens Inquiry investigating British collusion by the Army's Force Research Unit (FRU) in sectarian murders, were finally regaining control of the spiraling terror by getting the Ulster Defence Association's Johnny 'Mad Dog' Adair, commander of its 'C' Company aka Ulster Freedom Fighters (UFF) in the Shankill Road, to resume its dirty work for it. (For more on this, see my article "Just Who Is Lord Stevens of Kirkwhelpington?") While UDA's intelligence chief Brian Nelson was being scapegoated for all the killings in which the FRU participated, and UDA members, especially John Gregg, who wanted to kill Sinn Fein leaders seeking a peaceful settlement were being imprisoned, Adair's assassins so attacked innocent Catholics in West Belfast that the PIRA Council had to increase its efforts to protect Catholics back home, operations at the expense of the bombing campaign on the mainland.

After five unsuccessful attempts to assassinate Adair, the UFF, RUC, and some of Stevens' people were finally able to take Kelly's measure. With a meeting of Adair's people scheduled on October 23, 1993 in his office above Frizzell's fish shop on the Shankill Road - though the personnel prudently were advised to stay away in case there were any unexpected fireworks - Kelly and Thomas Begley walked into the shop, dressed in white coats to make it appear that they were making a delivery, with a time-fused bomb, set to destroy the above office, after they had given a warning, and everyone had made their escape. Unfortunately, the bomb exploded while still in Begley's possession, killing him and nine others when the building collapsed.

The massacre, especially after Adair committed one of his own in retaliation, was a great boost to the peace process, and a big set-back for Kelly and his bombing campaign. While Kelly received nine life sentences for his blunder - something he accepted would make him be seen as a terrorist for the rest of his life - the British and Irish government soon agreed to the 'Downing Street Declaration' which established the principles for the making of a settlement, and the Provisional's ceasefire followed. It was then basically a question of making it permanent, with the PIRA decommissioning its weapons, and joining the peace process.

The only problem is that the Provisionals never followed through, and Steven, though ultimately the Met's Chief Commissioner, especially since his immediate subordinate Hugh Orde was now head of the province's new police force, the PSNI, never lost sight of it - particularly now that Kelly and Adair had both been released from prison under the terms of the Good Friday Agreement.
According to Sir John, Kelly was constantly looking for the right opportunity to resume his paramilitary career, especially his bombings. "With the IRA ceasefire," Mark Urban wrote in UK Eyes Alpha, "some senior policeman began to worry that the Security Service would now be searxching for new territories to conquer." (p. 281) Stevens was dedicated to making sure that it did not happen.

Consequently, while a series of operations were occurring to make the Provisionals finally decommission their heavy weapons and come to the peace table - the alleged PIRA spying ring at Stormont Castle after provincial government had finally been restored, their alleged raid on the files at the Castlereagh police headquarters in East Belfast on St. Patrick's Day, 2002, and the Northern Bank raid around Christmas, 2004 - British police, especially the Met, made sure that MI5's efforts in countering international terrorism, G Branch's responsibility, always had a domestic, hopefully Ulster, component.

When British subjects Asif Hanif and Omar Khan Sharif went to the Occupied Territories in late 2003, and blew themselves up in Mike's Bar in Tel Aviv, killing and wounding several Israelis, Stevens and other senior policemen were immediately reminded of what Kelly and Begley had accomplised in Frizzell's fish shop a decade before, and worried about what this indicated for the future, particularly in light of the domestic feedback the war on terror was creating. This was after T Branch had made a complete cock-up out of what psychopath Kamel Bourgoss, an asylum seeker from Algeria, was attempting in his Manchester flat - what it claimed was a laboratory site of a ricin-based WMD attack but turned out to be, after a massive roundup of would-be terrorists, only the murder site of Special Branch detective Stephen Oake.

To get G Branch interested in the domestic dimension of its pursuits, T Branch, thanks to apparent input from the Met, then tried to make out that Muslims youths at the PC UK Internet Cafe in Crawley were part of an international conspiracy which was circling the world (Operation Crevis). The plot concerned the "Portland Seven", especially Haroon Rashid Aswat, wanting to go to Pakistan so that they could make contact with Al-Qaeda in order to fight for it in Afghanistan; the buying of a large amount of fertilizer which could be made into bombs, and the storing of it near Heathrow by alleged Canadian terrorist Mohammad Monim Khajawa; the recuitment of Muslim youth, and then sending them to Afghanistan for terrorist training by fiery Muslim radical Abu Qatada, close associate of his counterpart in Spain, Abu Dahdah; and many of the youth who frequented the Crawley cafe. This started in November 2003, just after Jeffrey Leon Battle had been sentenced in Portland to 18 years in prison for trying to fight for foreign terrorists. (For more on this, see my article "War on Terror Sucks More Still" in the Trowbridge Archive.)

The plot turned out to be a utter fiasco, given the fact that it just diverted international counterterrorists away from what Al-Qaeda was plotting in Madrid on March 11, 2004. Still, G Branch, especially agent 'Gould', tried to reclaim something from it by getting the youths - Jawad Akbar, Omar Khjam, Anthony Garcia, and several others - to flee to Pakistam as if they were guilty of something. Stevens joined the call by shouting out to all who would listen that a domestic terrorist attack was not a question of if but when. The FBI did what it could by trying to connect Portland lawyer Brandon Mayfield to 3/11. Unfortunately for G Branch, the Met, and the Bureau, none of it worked, as the youths stayed put and avoided indictments, as did Khajawa and Mayfield.

The trouble with this domestic overkill over the issue of domestic, Muslim terrorism was the terrible blowback it created. Some Muslim youths became convinced that the security authorities were dedicated to proving, one way or another, that they were domestic terrorists. This gave them a calling that they had never had before - what became ever more attractive as the illegitimate invasion of Iraq turned into a civil war which could promote the expelling of the West from the Middle East. Stevens' shouts became a self-fulfilling prophecy.

In this context, Mohammad Sidique Khan, a friend of one of the Luton youths arrested during Operation Crevis, put togther a conspiracy which would give the Met Commissioner and his colleagues all they bargained for, and more. Khan, after recruiting Shehzad Tanweer, Hasib Hussain, and Germaine Lindsay to join the operation, put together a plan which would supply them with everything they needed for a suicide mission while betraying nothing which would elicit any suspicion of them or it. Their families even had no idea as to what they were up to, as they never discussed anything with them, or conducted any necessary acts anywhere near them. They observed a tradecraft which the Agency and SIS have rarely, if ever, emulated. It was something the MOSSAD would be proud of.

After visits to Israel and Pakistan to determine just how bad the plight of Muslims is, and the apparent merits of such a plot, Khan's group decided upon a London attack while a G8 meeting was taking place in Edinburgh. The timing seemed ideal because the Joint Terrorist Analysis Center had just agreed to reducing the threat level of terrorism from "severe" to "substantial", though it added, to please the just-retired Met Commissioner apparently, that the threat of a domestic terrorist attack was growing because of the occupation of Iraq.

It assumed that domestic Muslim terrorists, some 200 according to Stevens, still did not have the means of carrying out their designs. To make sure of this, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland Peter Hain ordered on June 20th the reimprisonment of Kelly because of his alleged resumption of terrorist activities, thanks to advice provided by Stevens' closest police associate, PSNI Commissioner Orde, though no details were given to justify the action. Counter terrorist officials were apparently convinced that Kelly was the most likely supplier of what potential Muslim terrorists needed, and with him being back in prison, it would not happen.

7/11 proved them totally wrong. The four suicide bombers followed a most carefully thought-out plan down to the last detail. Setting out from home as if they only intended to spend the day in the capital - what required no tearful, revealing good-byes - they then joined up at Luton where they picked up their backpack bombs which had probably been put together in a car-rental vehicle which they duly paid the parking fee for before embarking. They wanted to make sure that no possible surveillance would spot any irregularity, and inspect it. They bought return tickets in order to prevent similar suspicion and inquiries.

Once they reached London - at the lowest state of alert in a long time, thanks to the G8 summit, a terror alert exercise in the underground which would inconvenience the least amount of people, and the counterterrorists most concerned about keeping Israeli Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu informed of rather than the general public - the suicide bombers had a cakewalk in the capital. The exercise, unlike the ones NORAD was conducting during the 9/11 attacks to steal a march on the would-be highjackers, was just a coincidence.

The simultaneous explosions in the underground made up for the fact that not more people were killed and injured. Under the circumstances, 55 persons killed would be almost as effective as killing 3,000. And they did not shout Muslim oaths when they set off the bombs only to embarrass counterterrorist officials more when their true identities were discovered at the site because of the papers and plastic they carried with them - what are the least likely items destroyed in explosions. The later blast on the bus, intended just to spread more panic, proved successful, though Germaine Lindsay may have been rushed into setting it off prematurely for fear that he was being discovered, and stopped. His was apparently intended for the rescue teams making their way to the victims at King's Cross.

When the full extent of the conspiracy was revealed, all the counterterrorists could do was to plead surprise, and grab for straws - try to hook up an Egyptian biochemist who returned to Cairo as the plot's mastermind, see that Pakistani authorities finally arrested Haroon Rashid Aswat in the hope that he could be fitted out for the role, and now, it seems, re-stage underground attacks at Shepherd's Bush, Warren Street, and Oval Stations, and on a No. 26 bus at Hackney Road in minute miniature to keep the plan of making the best out of a terrible situation going. In sum, the answer to a dreadful conspiracy by your worst enemies is a most devious one of your own.

More Explosions in London: Psy-ops in Progress

The plot thickens....

by Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones

Ask the question, who benefits?

Today is the last day of parliament before an 80 day break. So if the governmen wanted to get those anti-terror measures through which were proposed after the 7/7 bombing, then this status of high alert is the perfect climate to get them rammed through without dissent.

Sky News reported that members of parliament could be recalled tonight in a special session for the express purpose of passing that legislation.

And what does the legislation include? Designating anyone who writes articles or puts out a website that advocates or gives aid and comfort to the terrorists.

So you have a situation whereby they could say that someone like myself writing articles accusing the government of involvement, has a negative impact on the public’s trust of the government in fighting the war on terror and therefore aids the terrorists.

The definition is so loose that they could classify what we do on this website as aiding terrorists.

When of course all we’re really doing is shining a spotlight on the real terrorists and attempting to save both lives and liberties.

The government is setting up a database of undersirables to be watched under this legislation.

Related: Clarke 'lowers bar' on terror crime via web, writing, preaching

In the early confusion about what is actually happening in London, several things are already clear.

- This immediately stalls questions about the first bombing. The mainstream media were finally beginning to highlight the fact that the government's official story did not fit together. This takes those issues off the front pages.

- This further promulgates the fearmongering and creates a pliable public that is willing to accept draconian anti-terror laws. They are trying to turn us into Israel, with an alert or a bombing every fortnight.

- On the very day that the Patriot Act is due to be renewed, Bush can use the alert level to grease the skids and bully Congress into re-authorizing the bill.

Related: Bush sees London attacks as reason for Patriot Act

Some early reports from the scene of the incidents are very interesting.

Reports are that Arabs were seen running from the sitesof the explosion. London's population is 20% Arab. If a bomb exploded near you, would you run? One of the Arabs is reported as saying "what is wrong with these people?" which suggests he was just scared but was immediately identified as a scapegoat.

Sky News is showing scenes of random Arabs being arrested. Watch for the fearmongering of 'four terrorists on the loose waiting to attack' - this will enable emergency stop and search powers to be used. How likely is it that all four bombs would fail to detonate?

ITN news reported that one of the suspected suicide bombers was arrested and taken into Whitehall. Why would somebody so potentially dangerous be taken into a government building and not to the police station?

Sky News reported that 'something was in the air' and that several stations had been closed due to an alert at 11am.

BBC reported that one of the individuals' rucksacks exploded and he looked surprised and dismayed. Who is planting these devices in people's luggage? Or are these people copycats?

Sky News reported that Tony Blair was already in a crisis meeting in an underground bunker which overlapped with the alert. Another case of preparing to 'control' the chaos as it unfolded?

Sky News also reports Blair was set to meet with MI5 and MI6 as well as Secret Service later today. This suggests Blair's schedule was planned ahead of time to coincide with these incidents.

There are already 'Atta passport' type stories of Arabs planting the bombs and running away and being chased by members of the public. This immediately creates the psy-ops stroyboard that this is the work of Al-Qaeda.

Australian Prime Minister John Howard defends his country's policies in Iraq and Afghanistan by citing the so-called claim of responsibility for the London bombings which was carried on an internet forum, which criticized Australian involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan. The original claim was of course proven to be a hoax.

The Israeli government is renowned for pulling off these dummy bombings to keep their population in a state of fear.

Full story...

Three London subway stations evacuated following "incidents"

Breaking news in London, everything is still very unclear at the moment. Police are saying they're not treating it as a "major" incident but I guess they don't know anything either at the moment.

LONDON (AFP) - Three London subway stations were evacuated following a number of unspecified "incidents," police said, as witnessses reported panic and screaming in the Underground system.

There were no immediate reports of casualties.

Services on the Victoria and Northern lines were suspended.

"I was in the carriage and we smelt smoke -- it was like something was burning," said Sosiane Mohellavi, 35, was travelling from Oxford Circus to Walthamstow when she was evacuated from a train at Warren Street.

"Everyone was panicked and people were screaming. We had to pull the alarm. I am still shaking," she told Britain's domestic Press Association.

"We pulled into Warren Street and were evacuated. It was horrible," she said.

Passengers at Warren Street, one of the affected stations in the north of the British capital, reported seeing smoke but the police were unable to confirm this.

"Emergency services personnel are responding to reports of incidents at three locations on the Underground - the Oval (to the south), Warren Street and Shepherd's Bush (to the west)," said a spokeswoman for Scotland Yard.

The alert came exactly two weeks after the London bombings that killed 52 people and four suspected suicide bombers.

A Sky reporter at the scene of one of the stations reported seeing dozens of fire engines and police vehicles. There were also reports that buildings around Oval station had been evacuated.

Full story...

Rove-Plame Scandal Leading to Deeper White House Horrors?

We can but hope...

by Bernard Weiner, The Crisis Papers

At long last, Plamegate -- the scandal surrounding the outing of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson by two "senior administration officials" -- has exploded out of the D.C. beltway to become a major national news story.

It would appear that this scandal goes way beyond Karl Rove and who said what to whom when about Ms. Plame. It certainly is true, though, that turning over that slimy Rove-Plame rock was the way into the larger issues upon which Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald and his grand jury apparently are focusing.

(Ain't it almost always so in Washington? The cover-up is always a greater problem for the perpetrators than the original crime, for inevitably even seamier scandals are unearthed one by one; see the Pentagon Papers, Watergate, Iran-Contra, et al. The moral lesson -- admit your mistake early, bear the immediate hit, and move on unencumbered -- rarely seems to "take" among politicians, of whatever party.)

What's being covered up in the Plame/Rove case seems to revolve around the Bush Administration's orchestrated, and perhaps illegal, propaganda campaign to justify its invasion of Iraq. Valerie Plame and her husband Ambassador Joseph Wilson -- who wrote the op-ed in the New York Times that got this whole thing going -- are just the tips of very large icebergs, and one of those icebergs has a name: the White House Iraq Group (WHIG), which we'll examine below.

One of the ruling judges on the case of the two reporters who refused to divulge their Plame-outing source was about to go easy on them when he read Fitzgerald's new information -- eight pages of which were redacted from the public -- and said that the national-security seriousness of what he read changed his mind. The court then ordered Time's Matthew Cooper and the New York Times' Judith Miller to testify or else; Cooper finally did, and Miller is in jail for contempt of court.

We don't know what is in those eight blacked-out pages -- and, if they really do involve national-security matters, we may never be permitted to know precisely. But apparently they provide the locus around which Fitzgerald is building a case that could result in perjury indictments, at the least, for a number of Administration officials and perhaps journalists as well.

(Another judge said that the prosecutor's classified filing -- those missing eight pages -- "decides the case." In other words, to quote Lawrence O'Donnell: "All the judges who have seen the prosecutors secret evidence firmly believe he is pursuing a very serious crime, and they have done everything they can to help him get an indictment.")

Further, depending on what Bush and Cheney knew and when they knew it -- and what they did or covered-up in the possible light of such knowledge -- there may be plenty of ammunition for likely impeachment hearings. (Note: Bush hired a private attorney last summer for this CIA-leak case. )

And the two journalists in question, Cooper and Miller, have their own attorneys. It's defense-attorney heaven in the nation's capital these days.

Full story...

Bomb 'mastermind' was victim of name confusion

And most of the 9/11 hijackers are still alive and this whole official explanation is descending into a farce! They are playing us like con-men playing a mark.

A man widely reported to have slipped into Britain to "mastermind" the London bombings was an innocent Pakistani who happened to have a similar name to a suspected al-Qa'ida leader.

The man, in his 30s, was the subject of intense media speculation surrounding his visit to the UK, which culminated in him flying out of London the day before the attacks. His presence in the country, apparently unmonitored, led to criticism of MI5.

However, The Independent has learnt that the man had no role in the attacks. Inquiries in the past week have discovered that the man was an innocent Pakistani traveller who had a similar name to an al-Qa'ida terrorist who was on a watch list of several foreign security agencies.

A similar mix-up is understood to be behind the claims by US intelligence that Germaine Lindsay, 19, the bomber who carried out the King's Cross attack, was on a British watch list. This was because the "fourth" bomber was wrongly identified in the United States as Lindsay Jermaine - someone with a similar name to a terrorist suspect.

Full story...

London plot thickens, as does propaganda

by Larry Chin

As was the case following 9/11 and all post-9/11 "terror" events, an official new propaganda legend is being constructed to justify whatever Anglo-American-Israeli aggression that is sure to follow.

Meanwhile, the list of unanswered questions, irregularities, and inconsistencies continues to grow, along with dramatically zigzagging cover stories and anti-Muslim agitation. Another large-scale government and media deception is well underway.

Two recent observations by the astute (but anonymous) Xymphora at "Birth of the London Bomb Official Story" (July 13) and "Yet more on the London Bombings" (July 15) provide analysis on the mounting anomalies. William Bowles and Edward Teague ask, "Were the London Bombings a set up?" "The 7/7 London Papers" is another site that provides a timeline exposing problems with the official version. Independent researchers like these, not the mainstream media, are the only ones undertaking this important investigation.

It is already known that the UK authorities received advance warning of a terrorist attack—from Israel. So did Benjamin Netanyahu. Stratfor confirms evidence of foreknowledge in this report: "Israel warned UK about possible attacks" (July 7). The analysis of Bowles/Teague casts doubt on many aspects of the emerging legend of the four bombers—today's version of 9/11's "19 hijackers."

London is already playing out in a way all too similar to the byzantine 9/11 terror propaganda construct described by Chaim Kupferberg. As Bowles and Teague wrote, "without the four men to tell their side of the story, it's all too easy to make the facts fits the theory as it serves the larger ideological objective of the state to present them as 'fanatics.'"

Other parallels with 9/11 (and Bali, Madrid, etc.) are too obvious to ignore. Researcher and activist Jeff Strahl notes:

"The media obediently follow the cues provided by the US and British governments, and read the handed-down script regarding the London bombings, even as crucial details are being changed daily; not even a pause in the face of mounting inconsistencies. And this includes the "progressive" media, be it The Nation or Pacifica Radio, eager to prove they are, of course, not supportive of 'terrorists.' Read or listen all you want, you will find virtually no reference to many questions being raised about the official accounts. This is quite similar to how the 9/11 events have been treated. If people don't seriously press the media, the latest propaganda will become 'fact,' as has happened with 9/11, whose crucial details remain unexamined, whose official story remains accepted across the political spectrum.

"Why and how did former Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu get a warning to stay away from a place where he was to speak, located above one of the blast sites? How does 'suicide bombers' square with earlier police claims of timing devices? Why did the 'suspects' leave a car full of explosives in a parking lot in Luton, 30 miles from London? (Did they expect someone to find the car and put the explosives to good use?) What about the anti-terrorism exercises scheduled for the same hour in which the bombings took place? How did former head of the Mossad, Efraim Halevi, writing in the Jerusalem Post on July 7, the day of the attacks, know that the bombs went off simultaneously, (when the London police did not say so for days)? And how could he claim they were 'nearly perfect'? Why did the 'suspects' take credit cards along on a suicide mission?

"Authorities now say the explosives used were not military grade after all, but home brews. Seems like they had a tough time explaining how the supposed culprits could get military grade stuff. The Boston Herald reported yesterday that one of the supposed culprits carried not only his own ID, but also documents of one of the others. How did such documents survive the blasts, which should have torn their bodies into small pieces? This is the same as the magic 9/11 passport that appeared in the rubble.

"The supposed mastermind has been arrested in Egypt today, but he denies any connection. Not content with a car full of explosives, he left behind a house full of explosives, for someone to find and put to good use. Shades of 9/11 again, i.e., the car left at an airport parking lot with a Koran and a flight manual for a 767 in Arabic."

The London event also fits the post-9/11 pattern in other ways. There continues to be no mention of the fact that 1) "Islamic terror," including Al-Qaeda, is a creation of Anglo-American military intelligence; 2) these groups remain key instruments of Anglo-American policy—directly and indirectly guided, and controlled, by CIA, MI6 and affiliated intelligence agencies, such as Pakistan's ISI.

According to new reports, some of London's four bombers were trained in Pakistan—but there has been nothing in the media reports about the nature of this training. Pakistan, and its ISI, remains one of biggest elephants in a stinking post-9/11 living room.

Full story...

The London Attacks - Latest

from Prisonplanet

British police are considering the possibility that the four key suspects in the recent London attacks may have been tricked into setting off their bombs.

"We do not have hard evidence that the men were suicide bombers. It is possible that they did not intend to die,” a Scotland Yard spokesman said.

According to one police hypothesis, the bombers were tricked by a "master” who told them they would have time to escape — when, in fact, the devices were set to go off immediately.

"The bombers’ master might have thought that he couldn’t risk the four men being caught and spilling everything to British interrogators,” an unnamed security official has said.

Lending weight to the theory is the fact that all four men had paid up their parking tickets before boarding a train at Luton for King’s Cross and that they all bought return tickets to the Capital.

Moreover, the paper said, the men were carrying their explosives inside rucksacks, as opposed to strapped to their bodies, as is common practice among suicide bombers.

None were reported to have cried "Allah-o-Akbar” before setting off their charge — something which most suicide bombers do.

So the official line is now leaning towards the theory that an "Al Qaeda" Mastermind duped the "pawn" bombers into their actions, covering for all the inconsistencies we have thrown up so far.

This comes as no surprise, after the mainstream media have been questioning the official line all weekend. Both the London Mirror and the Independent published articles directly challenging the suicide bomber theory. The bombers were certainly duped, yet there is absolutely no evidence to suggest there was an Al Qaeda guiding hand. The fact that these men had been to Pakistan in 2004 seems to be, for some outlets, stone cold proof that they were Al Qaeda terrorists.

Full story...

The London Conspiracy-Theories: Here We Go Again

I am so sick of this newspeak! The whole meaning of "conspiracy theory" has been twisted like the meaning of "anti-semitism" now means "anything We disagree with or think is dangerous". Sorry guys, but if it was the four Muslim guys then we still have a "conspiracy theory" we just have a good "conspiracy theory" so it's called "truth".

People like this author seem to want to blindly accept the official stories no matter how self-contradictory and weird they get. But that's not unlike a lot of other people I've talked to. The brainwashing is complete, the signals are all coming in to their brains in the exact way necessary to generate the conclusions the system wants them to generate. The conclusions that the questions lead to fundamentally alter the shape of most people's Universe, so they simply ignore the frightening questions in favour of a less-frightening official "truth". They don't see that those of us in the "judeo/christian" camp are being manipulated into thinking that "muslims" are all potential wife-beaters, child-rapists and suicide bombers. While those in the "muslim" camp are becoming more and more radicalised and see the j/c camp as being secular decandent perverts thus fanning the flames of their hatred.

Can't you people see where this is going? Can't you see that the only outcome of this insanity is a global war between the j/c and the m camps? World War 3 with high-tech weapons and mega-tonne nukes, am I the only person here that thinks it would be a really bad idea? But, the media has them all so brainwashed that people can write unquestioning, neo-fascist, anti-intellectual, Zionist crap like the article below. She doesn't answer one question she just uses the tired tactic of trying to smear opponents of the official line.

This is not about "conspiracy theories" this is about manipulation, you can dismiss me as a kook, you can dismiss this website as weird. What you can't do is detract from the fact that I am asking valid questions that have not been answered. You can't simply ignore the fact that terrorist drills were happening at the exact same time in the exact same stations as the bombs and yet everyone is. That fact has been buried along with a lot of others we know about and more we don't. The fact that the bombers look and feel and smell like patsies doesn't mean they're seen as patsies, no, it's simply taken as a sign of how insipid these nastymuslimcrazypeople have become, now it could be anyone!

I can almost hear Orwell on the other side saying "I told you so!"

by Cinnamon Stillwell

The dust hadn’t even settled after the terrorist atrocities in London and already the conspiracy-theories and self-recrimination had begun. Unwilling to blame the actual perpetrators, members of the perennially paranoid among the Western left, the Muslim world, and even the mainstream media had to find someone, anyone else, to blame.

Websites such as WhatReallyHappened.com, Indymedia.com, and Al-Jazeera were filled with rumors that all was not as it seemed. Meanwhile, leftist groups accused “imperialist governments” of using the attacks to justify the war in Iraq and insisted on referring to the “so-called” war on terror even as the victims of suicide bombings lay entombed in a London subway.

Whether it be the Israeli conference attendees who were falsely accused of having foreknowledge of the attacks, or the idea that Western powers, by engaging the Islamic terrorists with which they are at war, had brought it on themselves, denial was running high.

Ever adept at promoting conspiracy-theories throughout the Muslim world, Al-Jazeera was quick to come up with plausible denial. Turning to the statement put out by the “The Secret Organization of Al Qaeda in Europe” claiming responsibility for the attacks, they set their sites on the alleged errors in the Koranic verses it cited. Based on observations made by MSNBC translator Jacob Keryakes, Al-Jazeera wasted no time in labeling the document “phony.”

Since translations are hardly foolproof, this claim was premature to say the least. As we now know, the perpetrators were indeed British Muslims of Pakistani descent. The Al-Qaeda connection is still under investigation, but the link with worldwide Islamic terrorism is undeniable. The attacks in what has become known in recent years as “Londonistan“ may have been the unfortunate wake-up call that Britain needed to address the growing radicalism in their own backyard.

At the heart of Al-Jazeera’s denials is a larger issue: the inability of the Muslim World to take responsibility for its own actions. Whenever terrorism rears its ugly head, blame is laid elsewhere. Having read the various statements put out by Islamic clerics in the days following the attacks defending them as “blessed acts“ and “just desserts” for their enemies, it would seem that the shoe fits. Not to mention the usual celebrating among the Palestinians whenever Westerners are slaughtered indiscriminately. But, of course, the London suicide bombers couldn’t have been Muslims. As the director of London’s Al-Maqreze Centre for Historical Studies Dr. Hani Al-Siba’i put it: “We do not rule out the possibility that it was done by the intelligence agency of another Western country hostile to Britain…or some Zionist Americans who wanted to overshadow the G-8 summit.”

While other Muslim organizations, leaders and individuals did condemn the bombings, trust has become a major issue for Western audiences in such instances. Also, these proclamations tend to focus more on concern for a real or imagined “backlash” against their own communities and less on concern for the victims of terrorism. Whether or not the London bombings will lead to the much-anticipated rejection of radicalism from within remains to be seen. In any case, only when the Muslim masses are able to withstand self-criticism will their dependency on conspiracy-theories disappear.

The other conspiracy-theory circulating the very day of the London attacks took the ubiquitous “Blame the Jews” angle. Sure enough, along came the accusation that the Israeli embassy and in particular Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who was in town for a conference aimed at supporting investment in Israel, had been warned beforehand of the attack. Actually, the attendees were told by British Intelligence to stay in their hotel after the first blast. They were staying at the Great Eastern hotel near the Liverpool Street subway station, one of the stations hit in the attacks. If anything, the Israelis may have been among the intended targets of the attack, but instead they were treated as if they were perpetrators.

Lest it be thought that such conspiracy theories emanated solely from the Muslim world or the fringe left, the Drudge Report featured a blood red headline on the morning of the attacks: “Netanyahu Was Warned!” The headline referred to an Associated Press article, which erroneously claimed that the warning was given before and not after the first bombing. AP later issued not a correction, but rather another article headlined, “Israel ‘not warned’ about London attacks.” Instead of removing the link to the incorrect story or replacing it with a correction, Drudge featured it prominently at the top of his homepage for the entire day.

To add insult to injury, AP soon generated another faulty story by misquoting Tony Blair as saying that the “easing the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians” is one of the “very deep roots” of terrorism. This article was later retracted. For anyone who still thinks wire services such as AP and Reuters (known as “Al-Reuters” in the blogosphere) and the mainstream media in general are immune to pushing conspiracy-theories, all of this was further proof otherwise.

Media outlets such as the BBC and Reuters that refuse to use the word “terrorism“ when referring to acts perpetrated against Israelis and sometimes Americans, but have no qualms when the victims are British, European or anyone else, bespeaks an agenda that goes far beyond conspiracy-theories. This too was exposed in the aftermath of the London attacks, when all of a sudden the BBC discovered the T-word. Perhaps recognizing their own hypocrisy, they have since stopped using the term in their London reporting. Now it’s just called “bombing” or “bombers” as if such acts occur without any evil intentions.

Full story...

London blasts boost Bush and Blair

Written the day of the bombings, I missed this one along the way but it's still a very good article.

The question who profits? concerning the Madrid-like 9/11 scenes in London, where bomb blasts tore apart a bus and rocked five subways, will not be heard for a while. And also not heard nor seen for a while in all mainstream media will be the valid protests against the US government's lies surrounding the 9/11 disaster and the illegal neocon wars fomented by many of the criminal heads of state, which also are present at the G8 meeting in Gleneagles, Scotland.

The explosions silenced many more than intended, and from that point of view, the criminals who did this must be the stupidest terrorists around; boosting Bush and Blair's bad image at a time when opinion polls had them in the gutter and they needed it most.

Because that is the immediate effect, apart from some hundreds of millions of profit in blood money made in the stock markets.

But also the protest movement has partly been wounded and is blasted away for a while, meaning the G8's Bilderberg-agenda with it's fake 'help' for Africa* can be accepted without further criticism or ado. And again for some time, nobody will dare to criticize the permanent crimes against humanity in the neocon's War of Terror by the US and it's criminal allies, which is one of the main reasons for global resistance which is called terror.

Bush backing Dutch Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende, who is a 'Christian' neocon shame for the country, said on Dutch State TV during a press conference: ''that attention was heightened, especially at the borders," like in other European countries and even in the US. The spineless Netherlands government is an abject, sorry example of an American 'Lapdog of War.'

As this is written some hours after the blasts, according to the BBC and, of course, CNN, there is a new 'Arab' group with a 'terror claim': 'on a web site which also is used by al Qaida.' The terror in London is thus said to be claimed by 'a secret European branch of Al Qaida' nobody ever heard about before. Have a look: What's Al Qaida?

Full story...

London Bombings - Unanswered Questions

I want some proper answers to these questions and until I get them I will continue to believe that there is a cover-up involved here. This list is not yet comprehensive but I hope to make it so in time, it will grow as more unanswered questions emerge. If you want to add to it leave a comment at the end. The list is not in any particular order.

by ewar

1. What was Visor consulting doing on the morning of 7/7 and who hired them? Why is this not being reported in the media?

2. Why did the bombers buy return tickets and leave enough of a trail that police could find them within days?

3. Why did the bus cctv cameras not work when the systems are checked at least twice a week by the bus company?

4. Why didn't the bombers wear suicide vests that are much less hassle on the tube and easier to conceal?

5. Why were there no shouts of "Allah Akhbar" which are a hallmark of suicide bombers and habitual expressions of religious fervour for fanatical Muslims?

6. How can ID documents from one bomber be found in both Aldgate and Edgeware road?

7. What truth is there in the report that only the number 30 bus was diverted on the morning of the bombings?

8. Was Israeli finance minister Netanyahu warned, when and by whom?

9. Why would men who's wives were expecting babies or had recently had them decide to kill themselves?

10. Why is the government refusing to accept a link between the bombings and Iraq when even Chatham House is saying there's a link?

11. Why did the bus bomber blow himself up at the top and rear of the bus rather than the bottom middle where he would have killed more people?

12. Why aren't more people dead on the underground? These guys had the chance to kill a LOT more people than they did, why didn't they?

13. Why was the number 30 bus the only one that was diverted and is it true the driver was asking for instructions when the bomb went off?

14. Was anyone shot by the police as reported by a New Zealand newspaper and why were 8,000 people in the HSBC Tower ordered to not look outside their windows for six hours?

15. Who exactly is "Richard Jones" the witness to the bus bomber and one of the people saying it was a suicide attack? Why has his story changed so many times?

16. How is it that paper documents can survive bomb blasts that rip apart steel and people?

17. If you were going to use four bombs in four locations, blowing yourself up in the process, why would you leave extra bombs in your hire car for the police to find?

18. How could the police talk about timers one minute and suicide bombers the next, where did they get the evidence about timers from?

19. What evidence is there that proves 100% that these were suicide bombers?

20. Did passenger Bruce Lait actually see a hole in the floor of his carriage with the metal blown upwards, if so how does this fit with the official story?

The "Bomber" Witness, The Dog That Barked In The Day-Time & The Vanishing Eleven

The more eyewitness accounts that come in the less the official story makes sense, this one is worth reading and raises yet more interesting questions.

There is a lead which has come to my attention, because of all the contradictions attributed to it (him), and which I would think needs to be followed. Especially since it is now obvious the MSM & the Police aren't going to.

Quote:
"I'm just feeling unbelievably lucky. I had just stepped off the bus when I felt a huge explosion and heard a huge noise...I kept saying to people, 'I just got off that bus'." - Bus Blast Eye-witness RICHARD JONES

Some background is in order here. The explosion did NOT occur at a bus-stop. According to the majority of eye-witness accounts available - the driver had stopped to ask for directions from a parking attendant who was talking to someone else on the curb, in Tavistock Square, near "77" Russell Street *, after the bus was diverted and please note well - could not possibly have arrived at any passenger's legitimate destination.

* "77" Great Russell Street was the first headquarters of the World Zionist Organization that preceded the Counterfeit-Jewish State in (but not of) Israel and is where the Balfour Declaration was issued, which led to the now 57 year-old illegal occupation of Palestine.

In the first article I will link to shortly and quote from, Richard Jones makes it a point of stressing over and over again that the "bomber" was annoying him and that his fidgeting with a ruck-sack was responsible for making him and eleven other passengers get off the bus seconds before the blast even though they had not arrived at their destination. He did not think it was a bomb the "man" was playing with but an i-POD.

But marvel of marvels... Richard Jones also claims in another article, which I will also quote from, that he got off at his destination on his own, at Tavistock Square, which was not on any legitimate destination list since the bus had been diverted from its normal Route 30, and was exactly where the bus blew up seconds afterwards.

Richard moans repeatedly in the first article about the "bomber's" fidgeting with a ruck-sack, and claims that this fidgeting is the reason why he and eleven others, got off the bus (seconds before the blast) before arriving at any possible legitimate destination.

It is the first time I've heard of a miracle resulting from "annoyance". Still, you learn something new every day if you're not careful. But if you're not careful what is it you will learn? The truth or lies?

Would it be such a stretch of the imagination, to entertain the possibility that the real murderers are alive, not dead? Would it be conceivable, to your mind, that the Police are not infallible, and could have been misled by planted evidence at the scene, after the event? We already know the Main Stream Media aren't infallible, that's for sure...

If you have not been completely conditioned to see things backwards, the way the (earthly) "powers that be" wish you to see them, please read on. And even if you have, I doubt many of you will choose to stop... and that should be a clear indication to you from a certain (for sure) point-of-view, that you don't really believe the Government, MSM & the Police version of events.

But before you see the quotes attributed to him: please be aware of a very important factor in this "77" equation - Richard Jones' account is the ONLY "solid"(?) evidence the Main Stream Media have in this investigation so far, which has come up with patently ridiculous conclusions about who truly carried out the bombings, moulded around previous False Flag Ops.

Please consider, what other "solid" evidence do they have? After the Police blowing up cars, several rooms if not entire houses, and tainting the crime or clue-scenes with military-type explosives?

What have the Police got so far except cctv camera images (it is claimed) which captured "Four Bombers" who were enjoying themselves immensely according to the descriptions of the as yet publically unseen footage? And who have not been observed on any train or getting into any train but rather outside, or partly inside, King's Cross Station.

Neither for that matter, have the Police revealed how they knew these four Brit-born Muslims were carrying bombs, from the footage, and were not just possible passengers, or hired "actors" playing the role of "baddies" in the DRILL taking place on the same day.

What do we have except an apparently manic schizophrenic's * claims that he saw one of the "bombers" on the bus, especially when the FOUR cctv cameras on the bus were "coincidentally" out of order that day?

* You'll see what I mean.

We should also take with a pinch of salt the ludicrous claims that the "Four Bombers'" identity has been established from the blast sites - reminiscent of the "nuke-proof" passport/s from 9-11...

And let us not forget poor Mr. Mohammed el Guerbozi, who has been accused of being a Madrid 3-11 ringleader living in Britain, all over the MSM, and who acted promptly to counter this slander:-

Quote:
In fact Mr Guerbozi read these newspaper reports at his Kilburn flat and rang a local police station in London on Saturday to volunteer himself as available for any interview if so required. He was put on "hold" for so long that he finally put the phone down.

It is far likelier, as usual, that the real murderers remain alive, and I'm sorry that is not the case for the victims of the attack including the four Brit-born Muslims, who were set-up to take the fall. Possibly through being secretly hired by the Company carrying out the secret (at the time) DRILL, as actors playing the part of "terrorists". They would have to be of Pakistani origin, since the next False Flag Op scenario was fabricated with that angle in mind at least a year ago. The ISI and Musharraf had promised to play ball on the next one.

Prior to the US stolen "elections" last year, it was claimed that communications ("chatter") had been intercepted between Pakistan and Britain. The MSM spinned this as a possible attack on the US but later changed its story to "Britain was the target" and that the locations were not definitive... once Bush had grabbed his second-term on November 2nd 2004.

Quote:
Nov. 17 2004 The Real Target? New intelligence suggests that Al Qaeda was planning to attack London, not U.S. financial centers, in the run-up to the presidential election.

The new view is that there was indeed an active Al Qaeda plot underway earlier this year-one that involved coded communications between high-level operatives in Pakistan and a British cell headed by a longtime associate of September 11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed.

... subsequent analysis of the Pakistani computer evidence-and other evidence gathered in related raids in Britain-now puts much of that intelligence in a different light. While follow-up investigations have produced little corroboration for the idea that operatives in the United States were still working on an attack against the financial targets, the evidence gathered in Pakistan and Britain has shed important new clues to Al Qaeda's intentions.

Evidence gathered in the two countries included messages between suspects in Pakistan and Britain in an elaborate and initially opaque makeshift code. One break in the case came when a captured suspect agreed to help investigators decipher that code. They concluded that suspects in Britain-including a key figure who is believed to have been previously involved in the surveillance of the U.S. financial buildings-were working with a computer and communications expert in Pakistan on an active plot against targets in the London area.

According to a source familiar with evidence in the investigation, the alleged plotters' plans for possible action in Britain were very elaborate and flexible. Some of the alternative targets-including Heathrow Airport and Westminster Abbey-were considered in detail by the plotters, though the evidence suggests they never settled on their final objective.

Some U.S. law-enforcement officers based in London, NEWSWEEK has learned, have become extremely concerned about evidence regarding possible active Al Qaeda plots to attack targets in Britain. According to a U.S. government official, fears of terror attacks have prompted FBI agents based in the U.S. Embassy in London to avoid traveling on London's popular underground railway (or tube) system, which is used daily by millions of commuters. While embassy-based officers of the U.S. Secret Service, Immigration and Customs bureaus and the CIA still are believed to use the underground to go about their business, FBI agents have been known to turn up late to crosstown meetings because they insist on using taxis in London's traffic-choked business center.

As you read this of course, please recall those "scurrilous" rumours flying about prior to the US "election". Remember? If Bush wins - "Al Qa'ida" won't attack. Well he didn't win. But he stole it and that was good enough for those who don't view playing fair as a virtue but as a weakness. And so, the "Al Qa'ida" attack was shelved.

Until 77/05, London. When the NWO, through the Mossad and probable involvement of other agencies like the CIA and MI5, resuscitated this post-poned "Al Qa'ida" plan and decided it was time to give Britain a taste of "Islamic terror".

There is absolutely nothing of any real value whatsoever so far that pins the blame on the four accused except this man's testimony... or is there anything at all of any value? That is what I hope we will find out through investigating a little bit more about Mr. Richard Jones and the schizophrenic statements attributed to him.

The following quotes are not in a particular order. The article, as it is written, can be viewed by clicking on the highlighted words. This article is from the Sunday Mail, apparently from 12th July:-

Quote:
Richard, originally of Ardrossan, Ayrshire, ended up on the bus after the Tube was evacuated because of the earlier bombs.

He spoke of his astonishing escape yesterday and said he only got off because he was so annoyed by the man next to him fiddling with a rucksack.

Richard said: 'I thought he was maybe playing with an iPod.

The young man got on at the same stop * and immediately began to annoy Richard with his constant fidgeting. Finally, Richard got up from his seat and asked the driver to let him off.

'The fact this guy was annoying me so much was another reason why I was happy to get off. **'

As he and another dozen frustrated *** passengers who had also abandoned the bus began to walk away, it was ripped apart by the bomb. Thirteen people, believed to include the bomber, were killed and others were horribly injured.

Richard said: 'I had to bang on the front door and shouted something like, 'Come on, Jimmy, we want off'.

'About half a dozen got out the back door just before us and the same number, including me, left by the front.

* Which bus-stop? Why are these details always missing, if not because they would contradict the official story?

** Really Richard? "Another reason why I was happy to get off "? One would think the "annoyance" would pale not only into insignificance but into oblivion considering the carnage which ensued and which you "astonishingly" survived.

*** Where are the other eleven passengers who Mr. Jones claims got off the bus with him in the nick of time because the accused "bomber" was "annoying" them too? Where are their statements? Why have we only heard from Richard Jones?

Please be reminded that the statements in the articles I have quoted from, might very well not be Richard Jones' words. I do hope however, if this letter and/or others reach him, that he will be greatly offended by realising what an utter buffoon he is being made out to be by those newspapers he has granted interviews to, and will kick up a fuss at the very least.

Okay. How about some smoke & mirrors now? After all, someone with even the most rudimentary knowledge that 2 + 2 cannot equal 5 might notice some irregularities here and there...

Please take a look at today's Sun newspaper and what it says "Mr. Jones says" on 14th July:-

Quote:
Passenger Richard Jones was convinced he saw the bomber setting his device *.

He said he became suspicious ** of the olive-skinned man because he looked anxious and was fiddling constantly with his bag.

Richard, 61, said: "I noticed him as he looked nervous. He was continually diving into his bag, rummaging round and looking in it."

"I did not see his face because he was constantly looking down."

Richard stepped off the bus at his destination ***. Seconds later it exploded behind him - with the "bomber" still on board.

* So now, according to the Sun, Richard is convinced the "bomber" was setting the device instead of "annoyed" with the "bomber's" fidgeting, as the Sunday Mail reported.

** He is now also suspicious not just "annoyed".

*** Stepped off the bus at his destination? Oh really? When the bus had been diverted from its normal Route 30? It had nothing to do with "annoyance" after all? Where is the mention now of the eleven other passengers who were "annoyed" and got off as well? The Sun, ladies & gentlemen, has vanished them into thin air.

In fact, shredding the previous story up into practically unrecognisable blather, in order to confuse people and keep them guessing about what the story really is. In this case, Mr. Richard Jones' story, who is either taking us all for a ride or being taken for a ride himself by the presstitutes (you really deserve being called by your true name) he's granting interviews to.

Here is yet more contradiction, in the very same article, which one would think at least they would have noticed, but no...

Quote:
Terence Mutasa, 27, a staff nurse at University College hospital, said: "I treated two girls in their 20s who were involved in the bus bomb.

"They were saying some guy came and sat down and that he exploded *. The girls received minor injuries and were in shock and distressed.

"They said the guy just sat down and the explosion happened *. They thought it was a suicide bomber."

* No fidgeting, no "annoying", no playing with I-POD's or setting a bomb device he just sat down and exploded.

So who's telling the truth?

None of them.

The nurse is only a second-hand witness and he doesn't even know for a fact if those two un-named girls had been in the bus. And from what we've seen of both the Sunday Mail and the Sun they are making 75% of it up anyway.

I doubt very much if they would allow a witness to speak the truth about how the blast went off or if they even know how it happened.

From what we've heard of Richard Jones, he is not a reliable witness, and yet the Main Stream Media is utilising his "testimony" as the strongest "evidence" with which to convince the sheeple that four British-born Muslims planned and executed the operation. Richard Jones is the only named "witness" of a "suicide-bomber" in action, so to speak. And he is the PRIME corroborator of the "suicide-bomber" theory.

If the statements which have been attributed to Richard Jones are not true, then it would appear Mr. Jones is playing along with the disinfo game for some reason, since I am hard put to remember when newspapers have taken so much liberty with what a person has said. The impression one gets is that he doesn't care about what they are attributing to him.

Therefore the Main Stream Media has no (real) evidence, just manufactured evidence to fit who the Zionists and B-liar wanted to frame from the beginning:-

Ex-Mossad Chief Calls For World War After London Attack:-

Quote:
...There will be supreme tests of leadership in this unique situation and people will have to trust the wisdom and good judgment of those chosen to govern them. The executives must be empowered to act resolutely and to take every measure necessary to protect the citizens of their country and to carry the combat into whatever territory the perpetrators and their temporal and spiritual leaders are inhabiting.

The rules of combat must be rapidly adjusted to cater to the necessities of this new and unprecedented situation, and international law must be rewritten in such a way as to permit civilization to defend itself. Anything short of this invites disaster and must not be allowed to happen."

Speaking of "trusting the wisdom and good judgment of those chosen to govern them":-

Quote:
"We know those who did this did so in the name of Islam" - Phoney B-liar, on the afternoon of "77".

At which time, there was absolutely NO "evidence" whatsover except a faked web-site attributing the attacks to a previously unknown comically named group. But this IS clear evidence of B-liar following the script that people like Efraim Halevi are writing, like a dog being wagged by its tail.

The Police investigation has been rushed through (with all those car explosions, etc) to its amateurish conclusions by its steerers at the "top", to try and stem the tide of growing evidence pointing to who really did it, and put the skeptics on the defensive.

Richard Jones the bus "bomber" witness (one and only) is described as an IT consultant. Can anyone please help in finding out some background about the bus "bomber" witness Richard Jones and answering the following questions please? Who does he work for, what are his connections? Was Richard Jones a consultant for ESCW (Executive Service Corps of Washington)? Is ESCW connected to IESC (International Executive Service Corps) which has amongst its Advisory Council members George Soros and Senator Joseph Lieberman? Has Richard Jones ever worked for Online Business Systems?

Or do we have to simply swallow the propaganda that every person presented to us as an "official hero TM" is a hero simply because the MSM say they are, without establishing this for a fact through impartial inquiry? Without putting in any work for ourselves because the MSM have their story straight already??

Remember, the government beast (and its propaganda vehicles) isn't going to inquire about the truth for you. It's going to lie, spin, twist, turn upon itself every which way it can and cover everything under a pile of emotional twaddle which will not serve to bring true justice to the victims of the London "77" attacks, and indeed will obstruct any unarguable & legitimate attempts to remove from positions of "authority" and bring to trial as war-criminals, those who are truly responsible for the London mass-murder; the Iraq mass-murder; the Afghanistan mass-murder; the Madrid mass-murder; the New York mass-murder; the Oklahoma City mass-murder, etc, etc, ETC.

Already there are many unanswered, even completely unaddressed questions, such as for example the reports of two men being shot dead in the Canary Wharf area around 10:30am on Thursday "77".

It would not be amiss to point out that there are approximately 8,000 possible witnesses, some of whom could be approached by "accredited" journalists and interviewed, since the New Zealand Herald report on 09-07-05 states that 8,000 people in the HSBC Tower were ordered to not look outside their windows for six hours.

How hard is it for an "accredited" journalist to establish if this is true or not please? Is it too much trouble to pick up the phone even? Are you really in credit, or are you in debt after all? In bondage to your evil Satanic NWO masters, responsible for spiritual wickedness in high places?

It is highly unlikely that "actors" would not be employed in the DRILL to play the role of "baddies". But we should also very seriously consider the very real possibility that actors, not necessarily of the "stage" or "screen" variety, may have been employed in a follow-up role for this murderous False Flag operation, and might be numbered amongst the "witnesses" who have given statements to the media and "leads" to the police.

So what better place to start making absolutely sure that this is not the case, than with Mr. Richard Jones himself, the ONLY named "witness" at the moment who has actually come forward to say that he has seen one of the FRAMED "bombers" doing something which looked suspicious?

In Sherlock Holmes' "The Silver Blaze", the dog that didn't bark at night was the give away as to whom was responsible for the crime. It was a clever deduction... yet not a "rule".

Why?

It's not a "rule" because masters can also get their dogs to bark whenever they choose to.

And the barking is being heard loud... if not clear... from one "dog".

Below are some questions for Mr. Richard Jones, the MSM & the Police, and indeed for everyone to consider if they will. Please feel free to add your own questions to these.

(1.) Where are the eleven so far silent fellow-passengers who all got off the bus just in time along with Mr. Jones? Why aren't they coming forward and corroborating Mr. Jones' account?

(2.) Or who invented that fable about eleven other passengers getting off if Mr. Jones was not responsible for it?

(3.) How come Mr. Jones, as well as the eleven others, all got so "annoyed" because of a person's fidgeting, instead of feeling concerned or worried, or indeed afraid?

(4.) Or how come Mr. Jones alone got suspicious and failed to warn anybody else on the bus and simply stepped off at his so-called "destination" to save his own skin?

(5.) Which bus-stop was it that both Mr. Jones and the person he suspects was the "bomber", got the bus from?

(6.) Why was it that around six passengers left the bus through the back door and another six left by the front door? Logically thinking, would the six near the front of the bus have been "annoyed" by the person's fidgeting at the back of the bus?

As Monsieur Neary in Close Encounters of the Third Kind, demanded: "who ARE you (these) people!".

(7.) Or did the eccentric eleven never exist?

(8.) Why was it that Mr. Jones and the eleven "lucky" passengers preferred to get off the bus at Tavistock Square, which was not their destination, rather than put up with a little "annoyance". Indeed, why did they not ASK the "bomber" what he was doing and if he was alright? If he needed any help maybe?

Remember, they were just "annoyed" with him, not scared.

(9). Or, as the other story goes, if Mr. Jones got suspicious, and was convinced the "bomber" was setting the bomb... then why did he bail out on everybody else without even a warning?

So much for a hero...

(10.) Have you ever heard of twelve passengers getting off a bus before they arrived at their destination because all of them were "annoyed" with one passenger, until it "happened" in this case?

(11.) Or indeed, have you ever heard of an innocent man getting off the bus at his destination-detonation as he claims?

(12.) Why, if they were twelve, and the "bomber" only one, did they not ask the driver of the bus to ask the one person who was "annoying" them all, to please get off the bus?

(13.) Or indeed, why did they not ask him themselves to get off the bus, since they were the ones complaining of how this person "annoyed" them?

(14.) Does the bus-driver remember either Mr. Jones or the person Mr. Jones says was the "suicide-bomber", getting into the bus? Again, why hasn't anyone else come forward to support Mr. Jones' accusation?

(15.) Was Richard Jones ever on the bus? Since the contradictory statements attributed to him only concur on one account - that he saw a "suicide-bomber" on the bus?

(16.) Finally, as we can see, all these media reports paint an extremely non-sensical and contradictory picture of Mr. Jones and his reasoning, if not his motives. So when can we expect Mr. Jones to clear all these conundrums up?

If he's granting the interviews, he must be reading them, if not, he really is the fool he's being made out to be by the presstitutes.

Or is he happy with the result?

Time to start questioning the "official heroes TM", or for Mr. Richard Jones to swiftly & strongly denounce how the media are painting him - like a stupid brat who delights in telling different fables to different people, thinking they will never come together and join...the...dots.

Quote:

Do not say that the struggle gains nothing,
and that the labour and the wounds are in vain,
and that the enemy does not faint or fail,
and that as things have been, they remain;
for whilst the tired waves seem to be vainly
breaking and seem no painful inch to gain;
far back through creeks and inlets making,
comes silent flooding in the main.

Full story...

MI5 said bomber was not a threat

But they're still not holding an inquiry into what happened, even if you believe the horseshit official story, this is an obvious failure of MI5 and yet it's not being investigated! What the hell kind of incompetant government have we got in this country anyway? Or are they not incompetant at all? Did their plan work perfectly?

I'm sorry to say this dear reader but if you believe the official story then you're an idiot! I know you think I'm a paranoid conspiracy nut but whether you believe me or not is totally irrelevant, history will prove me right.

One of the London bombers was investigated by MI5 last year but was deemed not to be a threat, it has been revealed.

Mohammad Sidique Khan, 30, was subject to a routine assessment by the security service because of an indirect connection to an alleged terror plot.

He was one of hundreds investigated but not considered a risk.

It had previously been believed that the four bombers were unknown to British security services.

'Concentric circles'

Fifty-five people died in the London attacks, including the four bombers.

Khan, from Dewsbury, West Yorkshire, killed himself and six other passengers in the Edgware Road bombing on the London underground.

Full story...

Who are the British authorities trying to protect?

The only thing I can tell you for sure about these bombing is that I don't believe the official story at all. There are larger things going on here, maybe it's MI5/6 maybe it's Mossad, who knows. What I do know is that these 4 men were set up and subsequently framed for the bombings. There are too many questions, just like there were with 9/11, that are not being asked which need to be asked. Some of mine include:

1. What was Visor consulting doing on the morning of 7/7 and who hired them? Why is this not being reported in the media?
2. Why did the bombers buy return tickets and leave enough of a trail that police could find them within days?
3. Why did the bus cctv cameras not work when the systems are checked at least twice a week by the bus company?
4. Why didn't the bombers wear suicide vests that are much less hassle on the tube and easier to conceal?
5. Why were there no shouts of "Allah Akhbar" which are a hallmark of suicide bombers?
6. How can ID documents from one bomber be found in both Aldgate and Edgeware road?
7. What truth is there in the report that only the number 30 bus was diverted on the morning of the bombings?
8. Was Israeli finance minister Netanyahu warned, when and by whom?
9. Why would men who's wives were expecting babies or had recently had them decide to kill themselves?
10. Why is the government refusing to accept a link between the bombings and Iraq when even Chatham House is saying there's a link?
11. Why did the bus bomber blow himself up at the top and rear of the bus rather than the bottom middle where he would have killed more people?
12. Why aren't more people dead on the underground? These guys had the chance to kill a LOT more people than they did, why didn't they?

Doesn't anyone else think that this bombing does a number of things:

1. It covered up the fact that the G8 summit achieved nothing despite all the hoo-hah before-hand.
2. Bush gets to deflect attention away from domestic problems, Downing Street memo thing.
3. Ariel Sharon gets to fuck more Palestinians up the arsehole.
4. Blair gets his ID cards and probably lots of other nasty opressive laws.

Give me some answers and I'll print them on the site.

Think about this people, think about it! We have been had!

Since even British officials are now backing off from the theory that the London bombs were the work of men who intended to be suicide bombers, we are left with trying to determine what the four of them thought they were doing.

The authorities would like us to believe (or here) that their Islamic terrorist handler misled them into believing that the timers in the bags was set so that they could get away before the bombs went off. That still doesn't explain why they seemed so cavalier about being seen together in video cameras.

Some conspiracy theorists believe that the four were tricked by an intelligence agency handler into believing that they were participating in some sort of terrorism preparedness drill in the London Underground. While it is possible that they were tricked that way, it seems to me that it would be very implausible to them that they would be picked out of Leeds to perform a job which could easily be done by some intelligence operatives working out of London.

I think the most likely scenario is that they were tricked into thinking they were involved as drug mules in the movement of drugs from Leeds to London (see also here). They would have no need to be concerned about the video cameras, as they would have no fear of being seen together and leading authorities back to their 'cell' (which of course doesn't exist). The rucksacks too big for the bombs inside might have been filled with stuffing intended to feel that they were filled with drugs. Their instructions would have been to meet with someone either on a particular subway car or bus, or at the end of a particular subway or bus route, and hand over the rucksack. Then they would all assemble at a central location in London to receive their payments.

No Islamic will or video celebrating suicide, no public celebration of the 'martyrs', unsatisfactory assumption of responsibility, overly large rucksacks, happy-go-lucky bombers with no concerns about being videotaped together or leaving behind identification that would lead back to the 'cell' which supposedly had plans for future attacks, uncharacteristic candidates for suicide bombers - it all adds up to one thing. Someone tricked the four into believing they were drug mules. Once we accept that fact, we have to accept that there is absolutely no reason to believe the Official Story that this violence was connected to Islamic terrorism. It could have been set up by anybody, including the intelligence organization of any country. Of course, the fact that four Muslim men were chosen as the patsies gives us a clue as to who might have been involved.

Unfortunately, British authorities seem to be in on the cover-up. The peculiar transformation of the original certainty that the bombs used were military plastic explosives - and this would be a certainty as their analysis would be based on chemical residues - to the theory that they were a home-made mix in the Egyptian patsy's bathtub, indicates that the British investigation has become completely corrupted. Military explosives were in the rucksacks, but since the investigators couldn't tie military explosives to the four bombers they had to attempt to frame the Egyptian by claiming he made the explosives in his bathtub. Now that the frame-up of the Egyptian has fallen apart, the whole cover-up has also fallen apart. Who are the British authorities trying to protect?

Full story...

Joe Vialls Passed Away Today

A sad day indeed. Our thoughts are with his next of kin. Joe opened my eyes to a lot of things, I was never sure whether to believe him or not but he had the power of his convictions and some very interesting insider knowledge. I'd love to know more about his background. In case his site dies I've downloaded all of his reports so if you're ever loking for one you can't find let me know.

May the Great Spirit nurture and protect his soul for eternity.

It is with great sadness that I pass on to you the information that my friend Joe Vialls passed away suddenly and unexpectedly last night in Perth Western Australia after a period of illness.

His wife Marilyn rang me early this morning to tell me the sad news. I was very surprised as I talked to him only a few days ago and he said he felt a little better.
As we all know Joe made a large contribution to Internet Journalism, in an effort to reveal the truth that the media fails to print.

The irony is that about 5 years ago I suggested to Joe that he get onto the net. He replied ' what on earth would I do on the Internet'? The rest is history, he got on the net and found his place there.

Farewell Joe - at this very moment he's probably checking behind Gods throne to see if the Mossad are there!

We who knew him will miss him greatly.

Full story...

Was it Suicide?

The mainstream asking some very valid questions, questions that must be answered. They point to Al Q as they are doing, are they talking about this Al Q? Rememeber, this is chapel perilous where up is down and truth is fiction. Your mission is to try and work out which is which :-)

Why did they buy return train tickets to Luton? Why did they buy pay & display tickets for cars? Why were there no usual shouts of 'Allah Akhbar'? Why were bombs in bags and not on their bodies?

mirror.co.uk

The London bombers may have been duped into killing themselves so their secrets stayed hidden.

Police and MI5 are probing if the four men were told by their al-Qaeda controller they had time to escape after setting off timers. Instead, the devices exploded immediately.

A security source said: "If the bombers lived and were caught they'd probably have cracked. Would their masters have allowed that to happen? We think not."

The evidence is compelling: The terrorists bought return rail tickets, and pay and display car park tickets, before boarding _ a train at Luton for London. None of the men was heard to cry "Allah Akhbar!" - "God is great" - usually screamed by suicide bombers as they detonate their bomb.

Advertisement
Falk AdSolution

Their devices were in large rucksacks which could be easily dumped instead of being strapped to their bodies. They carried wallets containing their driving licences, bank cards and other personal items. Suicide bombers normally strip themselves of identifying material.

Similar terror attacks against public transport in Madrid last year were carried out by recruits who had time to escape and planned to strike again.

Bomber Hasib Hussain detonated his device at the rear of the top deck of a No 30 bus, not in the middle of the bottom deck where most damage would be caused.

Additionally, two of the bombers had strong personal reasons for staying alive.

Jermaine Lindsay's partner Samantha Lewthwaite, 22, mother of his one-year-old son, is expecting her second baby within days. Mohammed Sidique Khan's wife Hasina, mum of a 14-month-old daughter, is also pregnant.

Our source disclosed: "The theory that they were not a suicide squad is gathering pace. They were the weakest link.

"We think it's possible they were told that when they pressed buttons to set off timers they'd have a short time to abandon the bombs and get away before the blast. Instead, the bombs exploded immediately."

Another intelligence source added: "Whoever is behind this didn't want to waste their best operatives on a suicide mission. Instead they used easily recruited low-grade men who may have believed they'd walk away."

At least 54 people were killed in the 7/7 blasts. Khan, 30, of Dewsbury, Shehzad Tanweer, 22, of Leeds, and Jamaican-born Lindsay, 19, of Aylesbury, Bucks, detonated devices on the Tube at Edgware Road, Aldgate and King's Cross.

Hussain, 18, of Leeds, blasted the bus at Tavistock Square. The Tube explosions went off almost simultaneously. But the bus went up an hour later.

Yesterday, Hussain's family told of their horror at the teenager's involvement in the massacre. They said in a statement: "We are devastated over the events of the past few days. Hasib was a loving and normal young man who gave us no concern and we are having difficulty taking this in.

Full story...

ARE THEY TALKING ABOUT THIS AL QAEDA???????

London Bombings: Cover Story Mutation Continues

by Kurt Nimmo

It should not come as a surprise Osama Nazir ratted out Shahzad Tanweer. Nazir, described as a “key al-Qaeda operative,” is locked up in Lahore, Pakistan, accused of killing Christians and participating in a failed attempt to assassinate Pervez Musharraf. Now we are told Shahzad Tanweer, supposedly one of the London “suicide bombers,” traveled to Pakistan to meet with Nazir. “Tanweer is believed to have visited a radical religious school, run by a banned Sunni Muslims militant group, while on a trip to Pakistan,” reports CTV (let’s not forget these “radical religious schools,” or madrassas, were funded by the CIA and Pakistan’s ISI). It makes perfect sense because Tanweer engaged in “relentless reading of the Quran and daily prayers became almost an obsession,” according to the Associated Press, and more important he was “withdrawn and increasingly angry over the war in Iraq.” Bingo! Here we have the perfect suicide bomber—a Muslim fanatic with an anger management problem. As for Osama Nazir, he will say whatever British intelligence want him to say—his Pakistani jailers are probably not feeding him Chicken Makhani, sipping tea, and playing Double Trumps with him. It’s no secret Pakistan has one of the worst human rights records in the world and political prisoners are routinely tortured.

Now we have Magdy el-Nashar, arrested in Egypt, who we are told is an al-Qaeda chemist. “El-Nashar, who studied at North Carolina State and Leeds University, was being interrogated by Egyptian authorities,” reports the Guardian, in other words they are torturing a confession out of him. “What we expect to find at some stage is that there is a clear al-Qaida link, a clear al-Qaida approach, because the four men who are dead, who we believe are the bombers, are in the category of foot soldiers,” Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair explained. No doubt, after el-Nashar’s testicles are shocked with a field telephone battery, he will provide the necessary background information on this “clear al-Qaida link.” Since forensic evidence is required to pedal the story el-Nashar served as an al-Qaeda chemist in Leeds, a “highly volatile explosive—acetone peroxide—has been discovered in a house in Leeds thought to have been used as a bomb-making factory,” according to the Scotsman. “The home-made explosives found in Leeds are similar to those used in other al-Qaida-linked attacks. They were also used by shoe-bomber Richard Reid.” I was under the impression Reid used a “very, very sophisticated” plastic explosive (PETN-based material), but now we are told acetone peroxide (or triacetone triperoxide) was used. “This is a shocking development in the sense that earlier ideas about commercial or military grade explosive being used in the bombs themselves would therefore seem to be wrong,” notes a “security source” quoted by the Scotsman. In other words, since it is dangerous for the cover story to have any link to military technology (and thus a link possibly leading back to military intelligence), a new story has emerged: an “al-Qaeda chemist” mixed up the explosives in a kitchen sink in the Burley area of Leeds (the explosive mix, as the Times Online tells us, is nicknamed Mother of Satan).

It is amazing how quickly details about the suspects (patsies) have emerged and how quickly the police have stacked up “evidence” against the conveniently dead and blasted to smithereens suspects, leading us to the conclusion al-Qaeda consists or rank amateurs. Magdy el-Nashar was on a security watch and yet “he was not put under surveillance, as he was not regarded as being of sufficiently high risk,” according to the Times Online. Meanwhile, in the United States, members of the innocuous Green Party are put on security risk lists at airports. Most of the London bombing cover story is riddled with holes you could drive a Mack truck through and yet our acquiescent corporate media never bothers to mention these problems or the highly suspicious tweaking of the story.

But never mind. Booga-booga. Rest assured the governments of Britian and the United States are dogged in their attempts to protect us from al-Qaeda terr’ists, never mind those terrorists were assembled, trained, and funded by the CIA, MI5 and MI6, and Pakistan’s ISI.

Full story...

Who shorted British pound? Currency fell 6% in 10 days before London terror attacks

Here's another tell-tale sign that this is a "false flag" operation, trace whoever made all the money and you'll have a good starting point to finding the paymasters who were behind all this. Either someone is increadibly prescient or someone had inside knowledge of what was going to happen. Whoever they are they have the blood of innocents on their hands.

In the 1988 Hollywood hit "Die Hard," starring Bruce Willis, a group of "terrorists" take over a Japanese banking institution in Los Angeles, hold hostages and make demands for release of "political prisoners."

But it turns out the terrorists aren't really terrorists. They are bank robbers trying to make off with the fortune in the bank's vaults.

Could it be Osama bin Laden has seen "Die Hard"?

That is a question Scotland Yard and other law enforcement agencies are actually asking themselves following the July 7 London transit system attacks that killed 54 and injured scores more as they continue to scour the planet for evidence and additional conspirators.

Why? Because it appears some profited by short selling the British pound in the 10 days leading up to the attacks.

The pound fell about 6 percent (approximately 1.82 to 1.72) against the dollar for no apparent reason – until, of course, the terror attacks sent the British markets reeling still further.

"This was an almost unprecedented weakness and far too sharp to be a coincidence," one economist with more than 35 years of experience in the investment industry, told Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin, the premium, online intelligence newsletter published by the founder of WND. "That is, after all, an annualized rate of loss of well over 100 percent."

The fall did not go unnoticed by investigators, who are wondering whether the terrorist masterminds behind the attacks decided to make some money on their action or whether other investors with inside information about possible attacks took advantage of that knowledge.

"Currencies of establish countries simply do not fall that fast based upon any kind of economic or financial analysis," said the economist. "Somebody – somewhere – knew something. Or maybe I should say 'somebodies.'"

Could it be the terrorists have learned to make their attacks self-funding operations?

Could it be the terrorists are actually motivated by factors other than Islamic fanaticism?

These are some of the questions law enforcement agencies are asking – but they're not really expecting to get answers.

The problem is that short selling of this kind can be done with near total anonymity.

"Trade currency futures through a Swiss or Austrian bank via an offshore company incorporated in Crete and you have a totally untraceable transaction," the economist noted. "No one will ever know who made the really big money off this situation, but I guarantee you this – someone did."

It's not the first time suspicion about terrorists – or someone – profiting from short-selling prior to an attack.

Following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the U.S., David Ruder, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission from 1987 to 1989, raised the question of whether terrorists may have gotten away with profiting from their attacks by short-selling shares in the U.S. markets.

Full story...

London Bombings - Web of Deceit: Peter Power, The Terror Drill, Giuliani and The CIA

Another excellent article from the chaps at Propaganda Matrix, the evidence about the drills is one of the nails in the coffin of the official story. At the moment I think everyone is still in shock but as this information gets out more people will ask more questions and we may just get somewhere... But we have a compliant media and an efficient cover-up machine, and they can brand people like us a kook or a weirdo.

by Steve Watson

As we revealed last week, on the very morning of the Bombings, a consultancy agency with government and police connections was running an exercise for an unnamed company that revolved around the London Underground being bombed at the exact same times and locations.

On a BBC Radio 5 interview that aired on the evening of the 7th, the host interviewed Peter Power, a former Scotland Yard official, working at one time with the Anti Terrorist Branch, now Managing Director of Visor Consultants, which bills itself as a 'crisis management' advice company.

Power was quoted as saying "At half past nine this morning we were actually running an exercise for a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning, so I still have the hairs on the back of my neck standing up right now"


Beyond the unbelievable "coincidence" of this scenario, the very fact that the bombs in the drill were simultaneous is a smoking gun because almost a week went by before it was revealed that the bombs had gone off simultaneously.

The importance of this drill cannot be understated. This is precisely what happened on the morning of 9/11/2001. The CIA was conducting drills of flying hijacked planes into the WTC and Pentagon at 8:30 in the morning. The two scenarios are comparable in that it is a tried and tested method of navigating around the everyday security services, and, more importantly, if the perpetrators get caught during the attack or after with any incriminating evidence they can just claim that they were just taking part in an exercise.

Peter Power has since toned down his claims in further interviews, changing his story of the drill to make it seem less identical to the real attacks. He has also issued a statement via e-mail in response to the thousands of requests he is receiving demanding clarity on the issue, that reemphasizes his backing away from his original "precisely" comment.

It seems that Power may feel he is in too deep and is backing away from the whole incident. This is probably due to the fact that Power himself and his company are not directly involved in the bombings, they have simply been used as a tool in a larger operation.

Power has been hired by the government before and he is always used to release information after terrorist incidents in London.

Two previous examples of this are the March 2001 BBC television center bombing and the September 2000 rocket attack on the MI6 building.

Was Power again used by the government as a conduit for information that would support their official version of events?


Power's comments (below) seem to suggest that his company was somehow involved in the response to the ACTUAL attacks, so if they were not working on behalf of London Underground or the Government then how were they allowed to be actively involved at multiple crime scenes?

In short, our exercise (which involved just a few people as crisis managers actually responding to a simulated series of activities involving, on paper, 1000 staff) quickly became the real thing and the players that morning responded very well indeed to the sudden reality of events.


Power is named among the elite of the Business Continuity (BC) community, he has regularly appeared on the BBC, covering terror incidents, as the "expert" when it comes to managing the crisis. He is also referred to extensively in a working paper on BC issued by the Bank of England, HM Treasury and FSA and has written for the British Bankers Association. His former clients make for interesting reading, they being JP Morgan Chase, ING, Mellon, Lloyds TSB, Morley Fund Management, Bank of New York, Arcadia Group, FCO and Universal Music.

Power has also spent time on the Advisory Board to the Canadian Centre for Emergency Preparedness(CCEP). This is significant due to the fact that a key member of that board was Richard Sheirer, Senior Vice President of Giuliani & Partners. Here they are listed together.

Sheirer was intimately involved along with Guiliani in the "crisis management" on 9/11. Giuliani himself was in London on 7th July after traveling down from Yorkshire from a speaking engagement at the Local Government Association conference in Harrogate, where he received a standing ovation for praising Tony Blair and hyping the war on terror.

Giuliani was also coincidentally only "yards from Liverpool Street station when the bombs went off." and later that day went on several TV networks saying that the crisis management teams (Peter Power's team, or so he would have us believe) seemed like they were expecting the bombing to take place.

Giuliani has met several times with government and police officials in London since 9/11.

Full story...

Yet more on the London bombs

Excellent posting from xymphora

This summary from Prison Planet is about as good a reconstruction as possible on how the deception was pulled (but note my comments on Peter Power below).

The main problem remains that it is completely ludicrous for the alleged terrorists to have behaved the way they did. London is the most notoriously videotaped city in the world, truly like something out of an Orwellian nightmare (and to add insult to injury, British authorities get to gloat over how helpful the cameras were in solving the crime). We are to believe that this was part of a larger operation that intended to make more terrorist attacks. And yet the four alleged terrorists took not the slightest steps to avoid leading police right back to their terrorist base. They allowed themselves, together with the mysterious fifth man (who now no longer exists, begging the question of who was on the video), to be seen in the same car, took the same commuter train into London (the car could easily have dropped disguised men at separate stations), allowed themselves to be videoed together at King's Cross station, and carried identification with them that made the work of the authorities remarkably easy. With just the slightest effort, they could have made it practically impossible to track their traces back to their base. The authorities want us to believe they were part of an operation that intended more attacks, and that they were so proud of themselves that they wanted to be identified by their ID's (as Kurt Nimmo points out, carrying an ID when you sit beside a bomb is a dumb way to ensure that your identity will become known to the authorities). These goals are completely inconsistent.

The ID's themselves are also problematic. The identity documents of at least one terrorist was apparently found at two attack sites, blocks away from each other. Of the three sites that the authorities were able to investigate, they found identities at each one, from terrorists supposedly sitting beside the bombs. No way!

The second problem involves the use of suicide bombers in cases where suicide bombers are unnecessary. The only reason suicide bombers are used as that it is otherwise impossible to get near the target. Suicide bombers are hard to come by, and terrorist organizations won't waste them unless they are completely necessary. They weren't necessary here, so why were they wasted? I note also that the supplied biographies of at least some of the alleged terrorists don't (or here) ring true as the biographies of suicide bombers.

The third problem concerns the change in the Official Story, which I've already been over. It is amusing to hear people talk of 'conspiracy theories', when we can clearly see that all theories are conspiracy theories. Jack Straw was musing about an al Qaeda attack before he could possibly have known enough to make a reasonable guess. The police kept coming up with reports expressed as certainties which they now claim are all wrong. If every theory is a conspiracy theory, including the Official Story, you owe it to yourself to make a reasonable judgment of your own, based on common sense, as to what really happened.

The French reported that the terrorists had all been arrested as part of a scheme to turn them and infiltrate the cell. This was immediately denied by the British (the two Reuters stories are nine minutes apart). Of course, this is the most terrifying claim that can be made against an intelligence or police service, that its own double agents were actually triple agents and fooled the foolers. Timothy McVeigh is probably an example of this. We have also seen hints of it in the investigation of September 11. MI5 has even used the technique with al Qaeda.

I still think Peter Power is just hyping his product, which is just the usual management bullshit where a bunch of middle managers sit around a boardroom table and brainstorm a case study involving bombs placed in London and what effect it would have on business. I see nothing in what he has said to indicate there was any tactical or operational aspect to what he does. What is interesting is that he seems to have business connections to Giuliani, who was in London at the time of the bombings (the connection was through the Canadian Centre for Emergency Preparedness which, by happy coincidence, held its World Conference on Disaster Management in Toronto from June 10 to 13). You have to wonder whether the point of his interview was to plant the seed of the idea that suicide bombers were involved, an idea that was still being rejected by the authorities at the time. The thesis that suicide bombers were involved fits nicely into the 'war on terror' that Giuliani now makes a good living talking about (he also hopes to parlay it into a bid to become President).

The British police have a history of framing people for bombing. At least it resulted in one of the best songs by The Pogues:

"There were six men in Birmingham
In Guildford there's four
That were picked up and tortured
And framed by the law
And the filth got promotion
But they're still doing time
For being Irish in the wrong place
And at the wrong time"

If you read Cryptome regularly, you'll see that British spies are still up to their old tricks.

Pakistan had a double agent in al Qaeda, whose cover was blown by Tom Ridge when he gave out too much information about the guy (as part of the ongoing Republican plan to use terror alerts for partisan political purposes). At the time, Pakistan was reported to be angry about the matter. The supposed 'mastermind' of the London bombs was connected to an al Qaeda official who attended an al Qaeda summit at which the bombing was supposedly planned. Had Ridge not opened his big mouth it is possible that the double agent might have helped lead to the arrest of the bombers. If you buy all this al Qaeda background - and it may just be part of the mythology - Tom Ridge and the Republicans may be responsible for the London bombings.

What is the motive for this attack? Cui bono? Anyone who wishes to support the Zionist lies that all Muslims are terrorists and the only way to fight terrorism is for more state terrorism and war against Muslims (a 'world war' 'until the enemy is eliminated'), anyone who wishes to further curtail civil liberties in the guise of protecting people from terrorism, anyone who wants to sell arms, anyone who wants to justify the Israeli treatment of the Palestinians and the Anglo-American treatment of the people of Iraq, and anyone who wants to use the 'war on terror' as a disguise for neocolonial geopolitics in the Middle East and around the world.

Full story...

London, Bush and Mossad

The voice of the mainstream, when you can't be bothered to be a real journalist you just attack everyone questioning your version of events. I normally have time for Freedland but this is the most fatuous piece of establishment gibberish I've ever heard. So much so that you can find my comments posted through his text to answer his statements.

by Jonathan Freedland

It’s become a familiar part of the post-tragedy landscape. A shocking outrage happens and instantly people start looking for the secret, hidden explanation - the conspiracy theory that explains all.
Erm, no actually the first bit was spent gathering information and trying to find news about what had happened. The doubts only started in my mind when the unanswered questions started.

The London bombings have conformed to the rule. Within hours of the explosions, email inboxes were filling up with rumours and whispered speculation. Why did the police say the Underground explosions were several minutes apart when in fact they all occurred at the same time? Why were there other evacuations on the tube that morning - before 8.50, when the bombs went off? Did the police know something they did not pass on? No, actually Mr Freedland, the first thing we were speculating on was who warned Bibi Netanyahu and when. That he was warned is irrefutable, the details have of course been ignored by Freedland's brethren and stories doctored or retracted, typical cover-up stuff.

As always, there are simple explanations for all such questions - in the case of the wrong timings, cock-up rather than conspiracy seems to have been at work. As for the evacuations, they happen almost every day somewhere on the vast network. But that has not stopped the rumour mill, which now turns at lightning speed and across the globe - thanks to the internet. If there are answers for all such questions then tell me why there were exercises being conducted at the same time, tell me how ID documents can be blown off a person and end up in 2 stations on opposite sides of the event radius? Tell me how the cctv on the bus was offline when it's checked twice a week by London Transport. Those are just some of the questions we're asking. Of course Jonnie boy only deals with the fatuous ones that nobody here is asking.

It was no different after 9/11 or the Madrid bombings of 2004. Even the themes are the same. The first points the finger not at al-Qaida, but at al-Qaida’s sworn enemy, the United States. The conspiracy theorists are very exercised by the revelation that the website which carried the first supposed claim of responsibility for the London attacks is hosted by a server in … Houston, Texas. What’s more, the server’s owners, brothers Robert and Roy Marsh, are distantly linked to the Bush family circle – via their friendship with the president’s former sister-in-law, Sharon Bush. To the conspiracy theorists, that counts as proof of a trail that leads all the way to the White House. Erm, Jon, your knowledge of the Bush family is as vacuous as this whole piece. Do some proper research and then come back. The website the statment was posted on is irrelevant, the statement is a farce so who's even asking questions about that? Our questions are a lot more serious than the location of the server hosting the supposed statement.

The second, wearily familiar theme casts not the US but Israel as the culprit. This time, the hare was set running by an Associated Press story – retracted shortly afterwards - claiming that the Israeli Finance Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, mysteriously cancelled his appearance at a London conference that morning because he had had some kind of warning that attacks were coming. Later it emerged that Netanyahu had indeed chosen to stay in his London hotel room - but only because the explosions had already happened. His security advisers decided it was too risky for him to venture out while bombs were going off. This is bull, no-one knew they were bombs until at least an hour after they happened because the story was about a power surge. For Netanyahu not to have been there he MUST have known before hand or he would have been on his way there. The fact that the story was retracted sortly afterwards is a classic sign of a cover-up. Believe it's a cock-up if you really want to be that naive.

Once again, that has not stopped the wild-eyed conspiracy theorists. Iranian state radio’s first guess was that Mossad, the Israeli secret service, was behind it all. Perhaps such fantasies are oddly comforting – especially when the emerging truth of what happened on July 7 is so hard to bear. We are NOT wild-eyed, we are doing our damdest to ask some really difficult questions about what happened. We do not feel we are being told the truth because the truth doesn't make any sense when one looks at the evidence logically and with an objective mind. The simple fact that one of the bombers had an 8 month old baby simply says to me he was setup. Muslim men love their kids as much as the rest of us, no political cause or anything else could ever counter that, the genetic urge to protect your kids is hard-wired. That's not a statement to the fanaticism of the "suicide bombers" it's a testament to the fantastical nature of the official explanation.

Sorry Jon but you're talking out of your arse.

Full story...

Mission Accomplished: Brits Embrace Police State

Think this is really so far-fetched? If so then pay close attention to the new legistlation the government will bring in on the back of this and then tell me I'm wrong!

"So there, we have figured it out, go back to bed America, your government has figured out how it all transpired. Go back to bed America, your government is in control again. Here, here's American Gladiators. Watch this, shut up. Go back to bed America, here's American Gladiators. Here's 56 channels of it. Watch these pituitary retards bang their fuckin skulls together and congratulate you on living in the land of freedom. Here you go America, you are free... to do as we tell you."
.: Bill Hicks :.

by Kurt Nimmo

“News of the breakthrough comes as a Times poll conducted in the aftermath of the bombings indicates that an overwhelming majority of the British public favors a tough approach to terrorist suspects,” reports the Times Online.

“Almost 90 per cent of people want the police to be given new powers to arrest people suspected of planning terrorist acts, tighter immigration controls and strict baggage inspections.” Never mind none of this will prevent “terrorism,” especially state-sponsored terrorism.

More importantly, this “consensus” will breathe new life into the Labor government’s compulsory National Identity Card plan and a nod and a wink for Blair’s so-called “anti-terrorism” laws I.e., the Prevention of Terrorism Bill) allowing the government to impose house arrest, curfews, and electronic tagging without trial of “terrorism suspects,” that is to say anybody the British government deems a terrorist (without evidence or the hassle of courts and defense lawyers).

Hermann Göring: “Of course the people don’t want war. But after all, it’s the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it’s always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it’s a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger.”

Full story...

Documents and explosives, a few simple questions

by Steve Watson

Following the "revelation" that the so called London Bombers left personal documents at the scenes of the attacks, plus a car load of explosives at Luton Station, there are a few unanswered questions that need addressing.

1. Why would suicide bombers carry personal documents?

Were they under the impression they would be traveling elsewhere after they blew themselves up? Even if the bombers themselves were not thinking straight, would the so called outside "Mastermind" of the operation really allow his trained bombers to risk being identified, thus possibly revealing a trail back to him?

2. How is it that paper documents can survive bomb blasts that rip apart steel and people?

If the bombers were carrying documents then surely they would have been in very close proximity to the bombs themselves, if not in the bags with the bombs. If not then why would the bombers all leave their personal documents in safe places away from the carnage? Perhaps they were made out of the magic paper that can survive air wrecks, fires hot enough to melt steel and the pulverization of concrete skyscrapers as on 9/11.

3. Why were two of the men's papers found in two or three different locations? Why would you give away your personal documents to a fellow bomber if you knew you were both going to die?

4. If you were going to use four bombs in four locations, blowing yourself up in the process, why would you leave extra bombs in your hire car for the police to find?

5. The bombers have been described as four "nice lads", "normal kids who played basketball and kicked a ball around" , one was the son of a fish n chip shop owner, one was a primary teacher. Their immediate family of one of the bombers, the 22 year old sports science graduate, have been quoted as saying they "could not comprehend why he had become a mass murderer."

HOW DID THESE NICE YOUNG LADS GET THEIR HANDS ON MILITARY GRADE HIGH EXPLOSIVES AND IF THEIR HOUSES WERE FULL OF THEM, ENOUGH TO WARRANT THE EVACUATION OF 600 PEOPLE FROM THE AREA THEN WOULDN'T THEIR FAMILIES HAVE NOTICED?

Of course the police have now confirmed that there must be a grand mastermind behind the whole plot. No doubt that person will have fled and a never ending manhunt will ensue. In any case these five simple questions highlight the fact that the official line defies all logic.

Full story...

London Stagecoach Employee Says Bus Bombing Suspicious

The commentary below was written earlier today, please forgive my profanity in this post, if it's not to your taste find another blog. I refuse to censor myself on this occasion because I am NOT A HAPPY CHAPPY.

Suicide bombers and Al Quaeda and bin Laden, my arsehole! Now I'm really pissed off, we have SO been had! We have been had and 50+ innocent beautiful people are lying decomposing and DEAD in a morgue in London. We have been had and 50+ families are destroyed and crying tears the likes of which those bastards Blair and Bush have never shed. Has either of them lost a loved one like a wife or son or daughter or girlfriend or boyfriend? NO! NO! NO! NO! Which is why those smug, smarmy gits can stand there and lie and lie and lie. I've lost someone I cared about and take it from me, you don't know what pain IS until that happens to you! Don't give me any fucking crap about official explanations, I don't believe it for a SECOND! Do your research, get your information from somewhere other than those complicitous WHORES in the mainstream media and you can only come to the same conclusions as I did. I'm not a nut or a kook or paranoid or anything else, we have been lied to and more people have died. I want some proper answers, not the SHIT we're being fed by the media. PEOPLE, WAKE THE FUCK UP AND SEE THE TRUTH BEFORE YET MORE INNOCENT PEOPLE DIE!

Can I just say that Paul Joseph Watson and Alex Jones have done a sterling job of keeping track of this whole thing, particularly Paul and his brother should congratulated for their work on this. Nice one guys!

by Paul Joseph Watson

We received an e mail from an employee of Stagecoach, the company responsible for the majority of London buses.

Our contact works a route roughly one mile from the site of the bus bombing last Thursday.

The bus driver pointed out that the number 30 bus was the only one to be re-routed after the initial bombs went off in the London Underground, every other bus carried on its normal journey, but for some reason this bus was diverted.

The driver notes the following about CCTV maintainence.

"CCTV gets maintained at least 2 or 3 times a week and can digitally store upto 2 whole weeks worth of footage. this is done by a private contractor....So when I heard that the CCTV wasn't working on a vehicle that's no more than 2 years old since last June.....I'm sorry that's rubbish, I work for the company I know different."

Also a point of interest....last saturday a contractor came to inspect the CCTV on the buses at the depot, According to my supervisor the person spent more than 20 hours over that weekend, 20 hours to see if the CCTV is working? Also that person who came was not a regular contractor, for security reasons the same few people always come to the depot to carry out work, this time it was different.

Drivers in the depot already think the so called bombers had inside help because it was to organised. Some even think it had help from the company."

I have received other information suggesting that the CCTV is regularly maintained and checked. The police pay the bus company to check it, and the bus company makes a substantial profit out of this, so all parties benefit from keeping the CCTV systems working.

This information makes it all the more suspicious that the bus cameras were not working.

Was the mammoth 20 hour inspection session of the CCTV a means of disabling the CCTV, or something even darker? Were the contractors, who were not familiar to the bus company employees, actually placing the bomb?

But don't worry, the media are drooling over this picture of supposed suicide bomber Hasib Hussain, who we are told detonated the bus bomb.

Well, it's a grainy picture of a Muslim guy with a rucksack, case closed! That's good enough evidence for me, I'm going back to sleep.

It's beyond doubt that these four Muslims were framed. They were most likely hired as MI6 spies, sent to Pakistan and then brought back and told they were to take part in an important exercise to test national security. Give them the rucksacks, get them on the trains and then detonate the bombs remotely.

Do you really believe for a second that guys with 8 month babies and guys who taught diasbled schoolchildren would want to blow themselves up and kill other innocent people?

Full story...

London Bombing: Ex-Mossad Chief Reveals Too Much?

Hmmmm, more interesting stuff coming out of Israel, I'll leave you to make your own mind up on this. I know you think I'm a kook and you're entitled to that opinion. But, if you really look at ALL the coverage and you look at history the conclusions speak for themselves. Qui bono? Ultimately Israel because ONLY Israel benefits from a campaign of hatred directed against Muslims. Did America benefit from invading Iraq? I think you'd have to be a bit of an Ostrich to answer yes to that question. Did Israel benefit from the invasion of Iraq? Hell yes they benefited!

I'm seeing pictures of the bombers with rucksacks on... Why weren't they wearing those suicide belts I've seen them showing on TV? I was suprised by the rucksack, something about it doesn't make sense, surely the belt thingy is a lot easier, less conspicuous and less hassle on the underground first thing in the morning. I know if I was planning something like that I'd choose the vest because it's easier to haul around. BUT what if the poor guy was just told to take the bag to somewhere and drop it off, doing a favour for someone, the thing's on a pre-set timer, little padlock on it so patsy can't get into the bag to see the explosives and BOOM! Perfect "suicide" boming and the bomber is a normal Muslim guy that did a favour for someone he knew...

These men were not extremists, they were ordinary British guys, they don't sound devoutly Muslim and by the sound of it they had no reason whatsoever to kill themselves. But instead of screaming RAT, the whole world is taking this as a sign of how insipid the Muslim threat has become, now it could be anyone so we should all be really scared and cc Tony in on all our email. Don't you see what they're doing? Don't you see that it all plays into their hands. The population here is in shock for the most part and they are believing the authorities because at the end of the day Blair is supposed to be keeping people safe. So the System presents lots of "concrete" evidence and the media spins a good yarn and people buy it and go about their daily live, shaken but not stirred. Except for one thing, the bloggers, not me because not many people read codshit (probably a good thing really) but a lot of other internet people are saying what I'm saying. As long as the information gets out, even if it takes a few months, the British people are not stupid and they categorically do not take any shit from their politicians.

All the collected data needs to get into the public domain, the media won't do it because it will show them up for the whores they are. So it's up to us, that's why I post these articles when I know not many people read them; maybe they will make a difference some where down the line. Doesn't really matter. Anyway, these bombings are the perfect psy-op, I bet they will put this in some dark textbook of dirty tricks in future years. Agree with me, or don't. It's up to you.

Global News Matrix

How did ex-Mossad chief Efraim Halevy know that the London bombings were "multiple, simultaneous explosions" when he wrote his warmonger screed for the Jerusalem Post on July 7 -- the very same day of the London Bombing?

Did Halevi reveal too much operational knowledge?

"The multiple, simultaneous explosions that took place today on the London transportation system were the work of perpetrators who had an operational capacity of considerable scope," Halevy began.

Was he decribing an operation with which he was familiar - since it was not widely known that the bombs exploded "simultaneosly"?

Also, It was reported that Israeli officials were ordered not to make public comments on the London Bombing.

Then there is this troubling quote from Halevi, when he wrote --
"There was careful planning, intelligence gathering, and a sophisticated choice of timing as well as near-perfect execution."

"Near-perfect execution"?

How would Halevi know the bombings were executed "near-perfectly," and not "imperfectly" or "perfectly," -- on the same day of the attacks?

What were his criteria of "success"?

Did Halevi know what "perfect" execution should have entailed?

That comment opens up a Pandora's Box of possible explanations.

What does Halevi really know about the London Bombings?

Sharon obviously didn't muzzle Halevi in time.

Full story...

The Myth of the Suicide Bomber

by "impatient"

Liberty Forum poster "impatient" presented compelling arguments on this thread that the suicide bomber is a myth and cannot exist in reality. "Impatient" refuted professor Robert Pape's research on the subject. I have only weaved his comments together and added section headings, an epilogue and a few comments between square brackets.

Introduction (Cheap trick alert!)

I set aside my impatience to read this article [The Logic of Suicide Terrorism - It’s the occupation, not the fundamentalism] start to finish. Beginning with the title we are told that there is logic behind suicide bombings. But what the title gives the subtitle takes away by giving us only two things to consider: occupation or fundamentalism, while the logic is assumed and thereby substantiated.

The professor amplifies our vague notions of what we have come to know as suicide bombers by describing the tonnage of materials he has collected for his book. We do not ask such an assiduous researcher how he came by all the material; quite obviously some foreign agency has an archive they happily made available to him.

After reading the article the main idea that we come away with is that suicide bombers are real, very real indeed. Though we were promised a revelation of the logic, these questions remain:

If the purpose of a suicide-terrorist attack is not to die, but to kill and to inflict the maximum number of casualties on the target society, why do they die?

If the purpose of the suicide bomber is to end the occupation of his country, why is the suicide tactic not as old as war and territorial occupation itself?

If the purpose of the suicide bomber is to end the occupation of his country and to inflict the maximum number of casualties on the target society why are the targets so disparate and scattered, without a clear relation to the occupation?

Why are suicide bombings publicized before any proof is brought by investigation?

For me these questions underline the illogical nature of suicide bombings. I believe to find logic you have to see the suicide bomber as a fabrication of the Zionists for their own purposes:

To demonize Islam

To make Muslims look stupid, fanatical, and murderous.

To create worldwide terrorism that they can claim has nothing to do with Israel, but everything to do with Islam.

To attack those who think themselves to be allies, but are not, e.g. America, Spain, Britain.

To shift the blame for any bombing Zionists perpetrate onto the Muslims, simply by calling it a suicide bombing.

To control public opinion in favor of Israel as the most grieved victim of terrorism.

To justify apartheid in Israel.

To justify war in the Middle East with the spoils of war accruing to themselves, while the costs are borne by their “allies”.

So it's not the fundamentalism, it's not the occupation, it's not suicide, it's not a guerilla tactic, it's the timeless strategy of the Jews working to advantage themselves on their journey toward dominion.

Israel Uses Myth as Cover to Attack "Allies"

[Israel uses the suicide bomber myth as a cover] to attack those who think themselves to be allies, but are not, e.g. America, Spain, Britain.

In 1983 Israel invaded and occupied Lebanon. The US and France had peacekeeping forces in place near the Beirut airport. The US had a naval presence off the coast. Early one Sunday morning, simultaneously, both the French and American Marine barracks were bombed. The story was that a truck had come at high speed through a gate and exploded, killing hundreds of Marines. As the two bombings were simultaneous one wonders why so little is said about the French barracks especially if we are to think there were simultaneous “truck bombs”; it would have been a neat trick.

Suicide was not mentioned in the original reports, in 1983, but in the twentieth anniversary reports the bombing of the US Marine barracks was said to have been done by a “suicide bomber”, and elsewhere the words “terrorist suicide bombing” were used. So by 2003 a simple bombing had become a suicide bombing. I think that change is significant.

Using Professor Pape’s logic of suicide terrorism applied to the situation in Lebanon we should wonder why the occupying Israeli force was not targeted rather than the French and Americans who were on the periphery as peacekeepers. Just because a target is handy does not make it strategically worthwhile. If the planning was so tight that simultaneous truck bombs could hit these two marginal targets, why not use that expertise and tonnage to hit the one perfect target?

The Israelis had prior knowledge of a truck being outfitted to carry a very large bomb but did not warn the Americans.(déjà vu) This was reported by Mossad operative, Victor Ostrovsky in his book By Way of Deception. The odd thing about this story is not that the Israelis neglected to warn the Americans, but that they could even imagine that the Americans would be the target rather than themselves. Why would they think that? The Israelis use the deception of admitting some knowledge as a way of deflecting suspicion away from themselves as perpetrators. In this case the admission of prior knowledge reveals more than disregard, it reveals an inconsistency that makes me believe they were the bombers.

The Fairy Tale Blocks Serious Questions

The moment people stop believing in the suicide bomber fairy tale, the sooner they'll start to ask some serious questions.

Remember how we all used to believe the holocaust tales? There are all those pictures, all that testimony, all those books written, all those memorials built. It is in textbooks and encyclopedias. It is taught in school.

Can't we handle the possiblity that the "Islamic fundamentalist, suicide bomber" may also be a lie? We should look at everything with the same skepticism we developed in dealing with the holocaust myth, especially those things that come from the same source.

Europe is Israel's Real Target, Islam Not the Enemy

It is the modus operandi of the Jews to stand aside while their enemies fight one another. It is well known that the Jews consider Muslims their enemy, but most white people in the world do not see themselves as the enemy of the Jews, when in fact they are. Why are we in Iraq? Is that really our battle?

A comparison can be made of WW I and II in which Europe was invited to self-destruct. Where were the Jews in those fights that benefited them beyond all others? Why is it that the Jewish banking interests fund both sides of a conflict? They come out of these terrible wars richer and more powerful while the power of the white world was diminished.

After the Russian Revolution and WW I, Jewish/Communism was triumphant and ready to conquer Europe. All of Europe had been weakened by WW I. The threat of Communism called for an alliance of Europe against the onslaught. It was not to be because Jewish influence on Churchill and Roosevelt made impossible the only sensible alliance of all Europe against Stalin.

Now the white world is being told that our enemy is Islam. Watch out.

The Intifada is Real and Justified, Not to Confuse with the Suicide Bomber Fable

Of course the Palestinian resistance is real and thoroughly justified. It is the fabricated "suicide bomber" that I seek to discredit. The myth is used to make the Palestinians and Muslims look stupid and effete. It is also the method by which they are set up as patsies for every act of terrorism Israel chooses. The forty foot security wall replete with guard towers was justified by the myth of the “suicide bomber”. Don’t confuse this cheap fable with the true courage of real people.

Treason and the Myth

[Mariner asked:] "Since the U.S. Intel people known [sic] use this - IF the Israeli's masterminded the bombing of the Marine Barracks - they know and are engaged in Treason by not making it known."

A fine example of such treason is the case of the USS Liberty. Knowledge went beyond Intelligence all the way to LBJ who gave the order for the rescuers to turn back.


It is Very Hard and Rare to Overcome Survival Instinct and Commit Suicide

[MrSpock:] The suicide bomber as a fabrication of the Zionists? How? Who dies?

Muslims, and sacrificial others. Part of what makes the "suicide bomber" preposterous is that no important Jewish target has ever been hit.

Suicide is absolutely unnatural; it is an aberration in creatures whose instinct is to survive. It is not easy to override that instinct. It is so contrary to instinct that stories of suicide for a cause are few and always make us marvel: the samurai who falls on his sword as penance for a loss in battle, the kamikaze pilot who knows he goes to certain death, the Roman who prefers death by his own hand to the humiliation of being killed by his enemies. There have been Christian and Buddhist martyrs who use suicide as a demonstration of belief and/or protest. All these are distinct from the unwilling martyrdom of dying in conflict.

The fact that suicide for a cause is so exceptional in our history is one thing that makes me question the burgeoning phenomenon of the “Muslim suicide bomber”. The Japanese Kamikaze pilot is understandable as a cultural phenomenon with roots in the concept of the samurai, but again, this is so exceptional that we look in awe on those whose sense of duty is so strong. Can we find a similar antecedent for this peculiar type of martyrdom among Muslims in these last fourteen centuries, keeping in mind the difference between dying in battle and an intentional suicide? I don't think so.

Are there any other instances of intentional martyrdom in all our history that have been met with such cruel derision and mockery as the “Muslim suicide bomber” of our time? Doesn’t such a reaction by itself make this case extraordinary?

That suicide for a cause is anti-instinctual, exceedingly rare, and when found, traceable to its cultural antecedents, makes me very skeptical that hundreds, perhaps thousands, of such cases would spring forth quite suddenly in a people, no matter what the provocation.

Professor Pape tries to avoid the question of religion in his article because he wants us to think that the occupation of territory in the Middle East is sufficient to cause this phenomenon. It cannot be. And Gabor would like to make the case for Islam as the sufficient cause of suicide bombing, and that cannot be either, for many of those purported to be suicides are not religious.

As for the Palestinian family whose son or daughter is said to have been a suicide bomber, are they not very much like families everywhere whose children die in battle? They desperately want to see that the death meant something, had some good in it. That is not hard to understand. Also familiar to all are the leaders who praise the dead, speaking of their heroism. It keeps up morale.

Neither of us has access to evidence for or against suicide bombings and cannot hope to prove anything one way or the other. What I have tried to do is look at it historically, psychologically, and rationally. I stand by my assertion that the “Muslim suicide bomber” is a myth. As you said about the Muslims, “They don't deny the suicide bombers, they are trying to explain it.” I am trying to explain it too, it needs a lot of explaining.

The Vulgar 72 Virgin Myth

[Judson:]...They desperately want to see that the death meant something, had some good in it. That is not hard to understand

How many times have you heard an American bring up the idea that suicide bombers are motivated by the thought of 72 virgins waiting for them in heaven? What audacious and gratutitous cruelty, how heartless, how vulgar. Is that what they would like to say to the parents of a son or daughter who has been killed in the struggle against the Zionists? And how much more horrible is it to think that they were not suicides but homicides? They should keep their mouths shut.

The Suicide Bomber Never Really Hurts the Enemy

[grizzle:] no important Jewish target has ever been hit. Kind of like the IRA isn't gunning for the queen and family.

Not quite. Take the example that is in this morning’s news:

A suicide bomber blew himself up among a group of teens near a shopping mall in the seaside city of Netanya on Tuesday, killing himself and two others in the second such attack since a truce was declared five months ago. ...The blast went off shortly before 7 p.m. near the Sharon Mall in Netanya. Police said a preliminary investigation indicated the bomber blew himself up among a group of teenagers crossing a busy intersection.

Unidentified teenagers crossing a street is not an important Jewish target. But this is typical for bombings in Israel. The victims are often not even Israelis, let alone important Israelis. Reports of victims and damage are deliberately vague, merely giving an impression, not facts or pictures. Asian and South American workers, other Palestinians, and what seems to be a favorite target - Russian immigrants are the usual victims.

After thinking carefully about suicide as a tactic and putting yourself in the place of a person contemplating this ultimate sacrifice – how would you choose a target to make your death worthwhile - useful to force an end to the occupation of your country? Would you blow yourself up in a shopping mall toy store, the entrance to a super market, a bus stop, near a hitchhiking post, in a restaurant frequented by foreigners, outside a shopping mall? It may not be possible to get through the security to hit the Knesset while in session, but surely you could come up with something better than a mall toy store.

The pathetic nature of the targets reinforces the idea that Muslims are stupid. But for me it reinforces the doubt that Muslims are suicide bombers.

The Suicide Hijacker--Similar Myth

[grizzle:]Palestinian vs Israeli is not 9/11 or 7/7. I doubt Muslims were involved in the latter two, unless they were the non-religious CIA shill type.

I do not believe that Muslims were involved in 9/11, but wasn't the notion of the suicide bomber the direct antecedent of the suicide hijacker? I believe there were no hijackers involved in 9/11. But for all those who buy the hijacker scenario the preparation they have been given to believe that Muslims have no qualms about suicide leads directly to the conclusion that Muslims must be the culprits.

Palestinian vs. Israeli is not 9/11, 7/7, 3/11, USS Cole, Nairobi, Kenya and Tanzania embassy bombings, the shoebomber, Beslan school, suicide bombings in Iraq, etc. If they are not Palestinian vs. Israeli, perhaps the Israeli part of the equation is what should be examined. The Israelis invented and perpetuate this myth, complete with the bombed-out bus tour of Europe and the US. It is not hard for them to come up with these tales, just think for a moment about the absolutely Byzantine concoctions provided by very ordinary Jews as they manufacture their holocaust tales.

Muslims Did Not Use Suicide as a Method in Previous Wars

[MrSpock:] So the person believes that he won't really die, only go "to another place". Isn't that what all religion is all about? Of course it is. Muslims just happened to "activate" this belief in a larger than average percentage.

Islam has been around for 1400 years. Is suicide a religio-cultural tradition? Looking only at history in the last 150 years can you point to suicide as a method of fighting the enemy? The French experience with Muslim terrorists in Algeria had its bombers, but no suicide bombers. The English experience in fighting the Arabs in 1918 in Iraq was fierce, but no suicide bombers. Israel has been fighting the Palestinians since 1948, where are the Muslim suicide bombers in those years between 1948 and 1985? If it were a religious predilection it would not have made a sudden appearance in Israel within the last twenty years. Islam is a worldwide religion, fighting battles in places far from the Palestinian conflict – before 1985 where were the Muslim suicide bombers outside of Israel?

In addition, it is the case that many of the so-called suicide terrorists are not religious. How can a religion induce a person to commit suicide with the promise of honor in heaven if that person is not a believer?

You agreed with my statement “Suicide is absolutely unnatural; it is an aberration in creatures whose instinct is to survive. It is not easy to override that instinct.. But just to add another dimension to our survival instinct, think of what you know about mothers. Is it not the case that protection of her young is primary? It is not difficult for us to imagine a mother who sacrifices herself for her child, we can understand that. But can we imagine a mother of two small children ready to commit suicide for a cause? A mother would not have the inducement of “72 virgins waiting on the other side” as Muslim haters mockingly cite.

Getting involved in a case by case dispute over hundreds, possibly thousands of these reports is not possible for us. I am just not willing to accept at face value the reports of suicide bombers coming out of the Middle East for all the reasons I have discussed. I do not have to present an alternative explanation for every death that has been attributed to a suicide bomber to cast doubt on the stories. It would be akin to disputing the six million figure for the holocaust by examining each of the six million. The story can be undercut in other ways. I have tried to do that.

Embarrassing Reality Check



Robert Pape
Ph.D., Chicago, 1988
Major Areas of Interest:
Selected Publications:
- The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism" in APSR (2003);
- Bombing to Win: Air Power and Coercion in War;
- "Explaining Costly International Moral Action: Britain's Sixty-Year Campaign against the Atlantic Slave Trade" (with Chaim Kaufmann) in International Organization (1999).

Robert A. Pape is Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago specializing in international security affairs. His publications include Bombing to Win: Air Power and Coercion in War (Cornell 1996), "Why Economic Sanctions Do Not Work," International Security (1997), "The Determinants of International Moral Action," International Organization (1999). His commentary on international security policy has appeared in The New York Times, New Republic, Boston Globe, Los Angeles Times, and Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, as well as on Nightline, ABC News with Peter Jennings, and National Public Radio. Before coming to Chicago in 1999, he taught international relations at Dartmouth College for five years and air power strategy for the USAF's School of Advanced Airpower Studies for three years. He received his Ph. D. from the University of Chicago in 1988 and graduated summa cum laude and Phi Betta Kappa from the University of Pittsburgh in 1982. His current work focuses on the effect of technological change on conflict and cooperation among major powers and the theory and practice of suicide terrorism.

Full story...

New Developments In London Underground Exercise Story

by Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones

Due to the bombardment of e mails that Peter Power and Visor Consultants are receiving on the issue of the London Underground exercises, Power has been forced to issue a standard e mail response to all inquiries, which forms the basis of his only response to the 'exercise' firestorm that has gripped the Internet since this website first highlighted the matter on Saturday.

Here are Power's unedited comments in italics with our response below.

"Thank you for your message. Given the volume of emails about events on 7 July and a commonly expressed misguided belief that our exercise revealed prescient behaviour, or was somehow a conspiracy (noting that several websites interpreted our work that day in an inaccurate / naive / ignorant / hostile manner) it has been decided to issue a single email response as follows.

This website certainly never displayed hostility to Peter Power or Visor Consultants. In fact we made it very clear that we were not saying that Power or Visor were wittingly involved in the bombings. It was Power himself who told national radio and television shows that the hair on the back of his neck was standing up due to the 'coincidence' of the exercise and the actual attack. It is Peter Power who was the first person to make big deal out of the exercises.

Many British newspapers reported on drills weeks and months before the bomings, but none of them picked up on the biggest story of them all, a drill on the day of the attack. Why?

It is confirmed that a short number of 'walk through' scenarios planed [sic] well in advance had commenced that morning for a private company in London (as part of a wider project that remains confidential) and that two scenarios related directly to terrorist bombs at the same time as the ones that actually detonated with such tragic results. One scenario in particular, was very similar to real time events.

Power has already started to back-peddle from his radio and television comments and attempt to minimize the scale of the exercises and their similarity to the real attacks. Recall what Power told the BBC.

POWER: At half past nine this morning we were actually running an exercise for a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning, so I still have the hairs on the back of my neck standing up right now.

HOST: To get this quite straight, you were running an exercise to see how you would cope with this and it happened while you were running the exercise?

POWER: Precisely.

So Power has backed off from all three locations being exact and is now saying only two were similar, with only one being very similar. Which Peter Power are we supposed to believe? He has changed his story in the space of less than a week.

Power also admits that the program was part of a "wider project," which again broadens the scope of this from being an insignificant drill for a small company with no affiliation to the government, to something potentially much bigger.

"However, anyone with knowledge about such ongoing threats to our capital city will be aware that (a) the emergency services have already practiced several of their own exercises based on bombs in the underground system (also reported by the main news channels) and (b) a few months ago the BBC broadcast a similar documentary on the same theme, although with much worse consequences [??]. It is hardly surprising therefore, that we chose a feasible scenario - but the timing and script was nonetheless, a little disconcerting.

Again, at no point did we suggest that Visor were the only group linked with drills on the London Underground. It has been known to be a target for years. But we rightly pointed out the sheer impossibility of the exercise targeting the same stations on the same day at the same time. One individual has calculated that this is less likely than two people hunting for the same grain of sand across the whole world. At the very least it is bizarre. Power gave inerviews saying he was shocked by the 'coincidence' and yet now he tries to downplay it when the heat is on.

"In short, our exercise (which involved just a few people as crisis managers actually responding to a simulated series of activities involving, on paper, 1000 staff) quickly became the real thing and the players that morning responded very well indeed to the sudden reality of events.

As we have asked before, if the exercise was a mere coincidence and was not related to any government agency or command structure which was involved in managing the aftermath of the attacks, then why did the crisis managers respond to the real thing? If they were actively involved in the command structure that managed the crisis, then they must have been hired by a sector of government in the first place. Power himself has worked for Scotland Yard.

"Beyond this no further comment will be made and based on the extraordinary number of messages from ill informed people, no replies will henceforth be given to anyone unable to demonstrate a bona fide reason for asking (e.g. accredited journalist / academic).

It is precisely because no 'accredited' or mainstream journalists have asked serious questions about these exercises that we are having to do so. What does Power suggest a bona fide reason for asking is? It was Power himself who went out on radio and television to talk about the exercise, we simply drew attention to his public comments. And when the public show an interest in Power's comments, he suddenly becomes defensive and hides behind an auto-generated e mail. Meanwhile, Power contradicts his own initial comments made on the day of the attack.

Couple this with all the other suspicious evidence surrounding the bombings and doesn't that suggest to the reader that these questions are of importance? Doesn't that suggest that we deserve more of a response than one brief, aggressive and contradictory statement?

Who was involved in the larger exercise that Power makes mention of?

How did the "players respond very well"? What were they responding to?

Full story...

London Patsies: A Replay Of The Pristine 9/11 Passport

by Jon Rappoport

The cover stories are flying thick and fast as British investigators try to put some kind of cap on the London attacks.

It turns out, if you believe the Brooklyn Bridge is for sale, that actual IDs of bombers were found in separate piles of rubble at the sites of the blasts.

These IDs must have been engraved deeply in three-foot-thick steel.

Remember the 9/11 hijacker passport that floated out of the crashing jetliner on 9/11 and landed intact on a New York street?

Here is a Sky News report out of London. There are too many points to make up front, so I've inserted comments in caps and brackets as you go:

BOMBER DIED IN TUBE BLAST

It is "highly likely" one of the Tube bombers died in the attacks on the Underground network, police say. [LATER IN THIS PIECE WE'LL LEARN THAT IT'S LIKELY ALL THE BOMBERS ARE DEAD.]

The suspected bombers travelled down from the West Yorkshire and met at Kings Cross station shortly before the attacks were launched on Thursday morning, police said at a press conference.

Their images were captured by CCTV cameras.

Personal documents have been found at all four bomb scenes and although the four attackers are thought to have died [OH THEY'RE ALL CONVENIENTLY DEAD BUT THE BOMBS THEMSELVES WERE ON TIMERS, WHICH WOULD HAVE GIVEN THE KILLERS TIME TO WALK AWAY FROM THE BOMBS---I SEE---IT WASN'T SUICIDE BOMBINGS, IT WAS JUST FOUR COINCIDENTAL SCREW-UPS BY THE TERRORISTS THAT RESULTED IN THEIR DEATHS] police were careful not to say whether Britain had suffered its first suicide bomb strike.

Anti-terror police said they had traced the bombers and six arrest warrants have been issued for addresses in West Yorkshire.

Police said there was forensic evidence that meant it was "very likely" the bomber responsible for the train explosion at Aldgate died there. [WHAT EVIDENCE? WILL WE EVER SEE IT?]

One of the four men had been reported missing by his family on the day of the attacks and his property was found at the bus blast scene. The second man's property was found at the scene of the Aldgate blast and the third man's property at both the Aldgate and Edgware Road blasts. [PROPERTY? PLANTED BY OPS AGENTS? DESKS, CHAIRS, JEWELRY? ENCASED IN STEEL VAULTS?]

One man has just been arrested in west Yorkshire in connection with the attacks. Deputy Assistant Commissioner Peter Clarke, head of Scotland's Yard anti-terrorist branch, said: "The investigation quite early led us to have concerns about the movement and activities of four men, three of whom came from the West Yorkshire area. "We are trying to establish their movements in the run-up to last week's attack and specifically to establish whether they all died in the explosions. [THEY'RE ALL LIKELY DEAD. NO MAYBE NOT. LOOKS LIKE YES. WE CAN'T TELL. BUT WE HAVE THEIR 'PROPERTY' RIGHT THERE AT THE BLAST SCENES. MAYBE IT WAS PLANTED SO THEY COULD ESCAPE. TYPICAL AL QAEDA. PRETEND TO BE A SUICIDE BOMBER AND THEN ESCAPE. FORGET THE OTHER COVER STORY ABOUT THE AL QAEDA MO BEING SUICIDE AND GOING TO PARADISE. THIS IS DIFFERENT. BUT IT'S THE SAME. IT'S AL QAEDA.] We executed six warrants under the Terrorism Act at premises in the West Yorkshire area."

These included the home addresses of three of the four men. A detailed forensic examination will now follow and this is likely to take time to complete." [THE PUBLIC HAS NO RIGHT TO LEARN THE DETAILS OF THAT EXAMINATION. NOT NOW. NOT EVER. WE'LL ONLY RELEASE THE CONCLUSIONS.]

He continued: "We know that all four of these arrived in London by train on the morning. We have identified CCTV footage showing the four men at King's Cross Station shortly before 8.30am on that morning, July 7. [THEY POSED FOR A JOINT PICTURE FOR THE CAMERAS? BUT THEY WERE BRIGHT ENOUGH TO LEAVE 'PROPERTY' AT THE BLAST SCENES AS EVIDENCE OF DEATH, AFTER WHICH, WITH THEIR MUGS ON CAMERA, THEY ESCAPED. SURE, THAT MAKES SENSE.]

"One of them who had set out from West Yorkshire was reported missing by his family to the casualty bureau on July 7. We have been able to establish that he was joined on his journey to London by three other men. We have since found personal documents bearing the names of three of those four men close to the seats of three of the explosions." [IN PRISTINE CONDITION, NO DOUBT, WITH LARGE RED ARROWS POINTING TO THE NAMES, RIGHT THERE AT THE VERY CENTERS OF THE BLAST SCENES. IMMORTAL IDs.] As regards to the man who is missing, some of his property was found on the route 30 bus in Tavistock Square. Property of a second man was found at the scene of the Aldgate bomb and in relation to a third man property with his name was found at the Aldgate and Edgware Road bombs." [BUNDLES OF CLOTHING WITH HIS NAME SEWN ON LABELS? CLOTHING MADE OF ASBESTOS?] We have strong forensic evidence that it is very likely that one of the men from West Yorkshire died at the explosion at Aldgate."

Sky News terror expert Steve Park said the documents may have been deliberately planted to "send police the wrong way". [STEVE PARK HAS JUST RECEIVED A NEW ASSIGNMENT REPORTING ON BIRDS IN ALASKA. ANYWAY, WHO WOULD HAVE DONE THE PLANTING OF EVIDENCE? TERRORISTS? AFTER THEY POSED FOR A JOINT PICTURE IN FRONT OF A TV CAMERA ON THEIR WAY TO LONDON? SAY IT, STEVE. OPS AGENTS OR COPS MUST HAVE PLANTED THE EVIDENCE.]

The news comes as armed police search a house in Leeds after the Army used a controlled explosion to get in. [I THOUGHT THEY HAD PEOPLE OVER THERE WHO COULD PICK LOCKS. AND IF THEY REMOTELY SUSPECTED EXPLOSIVE MATERIALS MIGHT BE IN THE HOUSE, WAS THE CONTROLLED EXPLOSION DONE TO GAIN ENTRANCE OR TO DESTROY REAL EVIDENCE?]

It was the discovery that the bus bomber was likely to have died in the blasts that triggered the raids. [AREN'T AMERICAN NEWS OUTLETS CLAIMING THE REAL CLUE WAS PROVIDED BY A PHONE CALL ON THE 7TH FROM A FAMILY IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD? CAN'T THEY KEEP THEIR COVER STORIES STRAIGHT?] Hundreds of people were evacuated from the area around Hyde Park Road, Burley.

Full story...

London Britches Falling Down

by John Leonard

A British disaster recovery consultant working at the scene of the London 7/7 bombings tells British TV and radio how they occurred precisely at the times and places scheduled in a terrorism drill he was running.

Terrorism experts Jones and Tarpley explain why terror drills are a sure sign of a false flag op—they create the alibi that covers up the activities of insider perpetrators.

July 13, 2005—The slip was showing On Her Majesty's Secret Service, broadcast on prime time TV for all Britain to see on the evening of 7/7—but almost no one noticed.

It happened on a special called Target London. Rescue workers on one half of the screen, and on the other, Peter Power, a British consultant, innocently giving the game away.

Can you see what's wrong with this picture?

Power: Today we were running an exercise for a company . . . 1,000 people involved in the whole organization—with the crisis team. And the most peculiar thing was, it was we based on a scenario of simultaneous attacks on a underground and mainline station. So we had to suddenly switch an exercise from fictional to real. . . .

Interviewer: Just to get this right, you were actually working today on an exercise that envisioned virtually this scenario?

Power: Almost precisely. [2]

Within the hour Mr. Power was on the radio, too:

Power: At half past nine this morning we were actually running an exercise for a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning, so I still have the hairs on the back of my neck standing up right now.

Host: To get this quite straight, you were running an exercise to see how you would cope with this and it happened while you were running the exercise?

Power: Precisely. [3]

You might need to be a paranoid 9/11 conspiracy theorist like me to understand what Mr. Power was saying, since as a normal person, he himself was surprised but not suspicious.

Well, this was exactly how the covert perps or moles in the US air defense agencies covered for whatever they had in the air on 9/11: with a drill for the very attack they were carrying out.

Here is how Joseph Paul Watson and Alex Jones explain it:

The exercise fulfils several different goals. It acts as a cover for the small compartmentalized government terrorists to carry out their operation without the larger security services becoming aware of what they're doing, and, more importantly, if they get caught during the attack or after with any incriminating evidence they can just claim that they were just taking part in the exercise.

This is precisely what happened on the morning of 9/11/2001. The CIA was conducting drills of flying hijacked planes into the WTC and Pentagon at 8:30 in the morning. [4]

Thus the drill also helps keep the number of witting accomplices small. You don't need an entire agency made up of homicidal sociopaths.

Terrorism expert Webster G. Tarpley gives an example in his 9/11 Synthetic Terror:

Staff exercises or command exercises are perfect for a rogue network which is forced to conduct its operations using the same communications and computer systems used by other officers who are not necessarily party to the illegal operation, coup or provocation as it may be. A putschist officer may be working at a console next to another officer who is not in on the coup, and who might indeed oppose it if he knew about it. The putschist's behavior is suspicious: what the hell is he doing? The loyal officer looks over and asks the putschist about it. The putschist cites a staff maneuver for which he is preparing. The loyal officer concludes that the putschist's activities are part of an officially sanctioned drill, and his suspicions are allayed. The putschist may even explain that participation in the staff exercise requires a special security clearance which the loyal officer does not have. The conversation ends, and the putschist can go on with his treasonous work. [5]

How could this have worked in London? Mr. Powers would be like the loyal agent without the supersecret clearance; his job in the drill was to unwittingly help provide camouflage. Several participants could be given the "play-acting" role of terrorists who plant bags with "fake" bombs in them at the appropriate point in the scenario—but this time, real bombs were substituted. Whether witting or not, they would run no risk of arrest—it was "just a drill." The WTC bombing of 1993 was perpetrated by the FBI in just this way: the patsies were told it was a sting operation to catch the terrorists, but at the last minute, live explosives were "somehow" used instead.

Hopefully, there are enough people out there who can add two and two together from Mr. Power's candor. The drill and the confidential identity of the "client company" may have covered over the trail, so this might be the best smoking gun we get on 7/7.

Although it does seem this penchant for false flag ops is going to trip them up sooner or later. It's gotten to be such an awfully regular habit, do they even know how to stop?

[1] Lampooning tyrants can be a good way of opposing them. The London in the title refers to the seat of government, and no disrespect is intended to the latest victims of London's atrocities by the title of this article. Hypocritical shills may snap at this with crocodile tears, but don't be fooled by it.

[2] WMV video file.

[3] Complete transcript:

POWER: Today we were running an exercise for a company—bear in mind now that I'm in the private sector—and we sat everybody down in the city—1000 people involved in the whole organization—with the crisis team. And the most peculiar thing was it was we based on a scenario of simultaneous attacks on a underground and mainline station. So we had to suddenly switch an exercise from fictional to real. And one of the first things is, get that bureau number, when you have a list of people missing, tell them. And it took a long time—

INTERVIEWER: Just to get this right, you were actually working today on an exercise that envisioned virtually this scenario?

POWER: Almost precisely. I was up to 2 oclock this morning, because it's our job, my own company. Visor Consultants, we specialize in helping people to get their crisis management response, how you jump from slow time thinking to quick time doing. And we chose a scenario with no assistance, which is based on a terrorist attack because they've been close to a property occupied by Jewish businessmen there in the city, and there are more American banks in this city than there are in the whole of New York—a logical thing to do.

INTERVIEWER: How extraordinary today must feel for you as it unfolds. You mentioned a few moments ago there our experience with Irish Republican terrorism. And of course it was very different wasn't it because however perverted their behavior, the IRA believed itself to have some sort of code of honour, and tended to issue some kind of warnings, of course they often came too late to do any good.

[4] Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones, London Underground Bombing 'Exercises' Took Place at Same Time as Real Attack, Audio file and text transcript of Power?s statement on radio.

[5] 9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA, by Webster Griffin Tarpley, p. 204–205.

Full story...

Suicide bomber 'had all to live for'

These really sound like 4 dedicated religious nutters ready to die for the cause... Not! Blair must think we're all stupid or something.

The family of Britain's first suicide bomber today said they could not comprehend why he had become a mass murderer.

Shehzad Tanweer, 22, was an outwardly ordinary young British man, a university graduate who studied sports science and loved cricket and football.

His father owns a fish and chip shop in Beeston, Leeds where he had lived all his life.

On July 7 he was the first of a four-strong suicide team to die when his bomb exploded on a London Underground train near Aldgate station.

Seconds later his friend Mohammed Sadique Khan, 30, who was from Dewsbury, West Yorkshire, blew himself up on a train near Edgware Road and another friend died in a blast on a train near King's Cross.

The fourth bomber, 18-year-old Hasib Hussain, from the Leeds suburb of Holbeck, killed himself in an explosion on the number 30 bus at Tavistock Square.

Tanweer, Khan and Hussain were all British with Pakistani ancestry.

Tanweer's uncle Bashir Ahmed, 65, said the bomber's family were destroyed.

Speaking at the family home Mr Ahmed said: "There is no explanation I can come to. "Our lives have been shattered. It's impossible to describe it.

"He was proud to be British. He had everything to live for. His parents were loving and supportive. They had no financial worries.

"He was intelligent. He went to university. His plan was to go into sports.

"The family is shattered. This is a terrible thing. It wasn't him. It must have been forces behind him."

Mr Ahmed said his nephew went to Pakistan for two months earlier this year to study religion.

Passport

But he denied that his nephew travelled to Afghanistan and took part in training camps.

"There is no way, I have seen his passport," he said.

Police and the security services fear the bombers could have been acting on the orders of an al Qaida mastermind and there may be another bomb team waiting to strike.

Asked whether he believed they were part of a larger cell Home Secretary Charles Clarke said: "A central hypothesis which has to be tested and investigated is that the individuals we know about were working within a wider community."

Mr Clarke, meeting European union interior ministers in Brussels today, also revealed that police were examining telephone records in the hunt for the bombers' accomplices.

He said: "We are looking very, very closely at the relationship between the people who may have committed the offences and the wider network around them.

"The telecommunications data is an important weapon in investigating that."

Mr Clarke is today seeking Europe-wide agreement on the retention of huge amounts of personal mobile phone and email records which would help future anti-terrorist investigations.

Prime Minister Tony Blair was "shocked" to learn the bombers were born and raised in the UK, his official spokesman said.

"But he is determined that we should take on this extremism," the spokesman added.

"It is his view that this is not a problem that is limited to this country, but it is a symptom of a much bigger problem and we need to look at that.

"This problem didn't start in this society, in this country. It started beyond our shores."

The bombers appear to be the security services' worst nightmare, so-called "clean skins", apparently ordinary young men who were below the intelligence radar.

Detectives are working furiously piecing together their lives as neighbours in West Yorkshire told of their shock that suicide attackers had been living in their midst.

Like Tanweer, Khan seemed an unlikely suicide bomber. Friends said he was married with an eight-month-old baby girl and that he worked with disabled children in a primary school.

Hussain lived with his parents and neighbours said he had become "very religious" two years ago.

When he left his home last Thursday morning, with only a few hours to live, he had told his parents he was going to London for the day with friends.

At 10.20pm they reported him missing to the police casualty bureau, providing one of the vital clues which led detectives to Leeds.

In a series of raids in West Yorkshire yesterday, including on the suspects' homes, detectives found an apparent bomb factory and explosives were also found in a car at Luton station.

Detectives

At least three of the bombers are thought to have used hire cars to travel from West Yorkshire to Luton last Thursday morning.

All four men then boarded a Thameslink rail service to King's Cross where they were captured on CCTV just before 8.30am carrying large military-style rucksacks. They then set out to deliver their bombs.

A senior security source, who has viewed the CCTV footage, said: "They were chatting. You would think they were going on a hiking holiday."

Detectives believe the suspects probably lacked the expertise to plan the operation or construct the bombs themselves and were more likely to have been recruited by a more senior figure.

One senior security source said: "Where is the person who had the expertise to organise it all? There is the possibility that it could be al Qaida - someone who would have been sent to the country to do the preparation and then would have left the day before the attack. Is the capability to mount an attack still somewhere else?"

Terrorism lecturer Professor Paul Wilkinson said he believed the men were expendable pawns in an international al Qaida operation.

He said: "I just don't believe this would have been four young men acting on their own.

"There would have been another person who primed and guided them and lured them into extremism."

At least 52 people, including the bombers, died in last week's attacks.

Inquests into the deaths of seven victims opened today.

A total of 51 injured victims remained in hospital today, health officials said

Full story...

How the Government Staged the London Bombings in Ten Easy Steps

See the original for full hyperlinks.

by Paul Joseph Watson

Ten Step Method To Staging a Terrorist Attack

1) Hire a Crisis Management firm to set up an exercise that parallels the terrorist attack you are going to carry out. Have them run the exercise at the precise locations and at the very same time as the attack. If at any stage of the attack your Arabs get caught, tell the police it was part of an exercise.

2) Hire four Arabs and tell them they're taking part in an important exercise to help defend London from terrorist attacks. Strap them with rucksacks filled with deadly explosives. Tell the Arabs the rucksacks are dummy explosives and wouldn't harm a fly.

3) Tell four Arabs to meet up at London Underground and disperse, each getting on a different train. Make sure Arabs meet in a location where you can get a good mug shot of them all on CCTV which you can later endlessly repeat to drooling masses on television.

4) While four Arabs are in London, plant explosives in their houses in Leeds. Plant some explosives in one of their cars in Luton for the police to later discover. Remember that Qu'ran and flight manual in the hijackers' car? Ha ha, they fell for that one hook, line and sinker. No need to change tactics on this one.

5) Before the bombings take place, make sure you warn any of your buddies who are scheduled to be anywhere near where the bombs go off. If this gets leaked to the press, just deny it.

6) 4th Arab goes out partying in London night before and ends up getting out of bed late. No worries, the 9/11 'hijackers' did the same thing but that didn't cause us a big problem. 4th Arab catches bus to see if other Arabs are waiting for him. 4th Arab starts hearing about explosions in the London Underground. 4th Arab comes to the realization that this he is being set up and freaks out. 4th Arab starts fiddling in his rucksack. 4th Arab sets bomb off and is blown up.

If you hired any additional Arabs and they also got wind of the set up, make sure tere are GPS locators in the rucksacks so you can have police snipers ready to kill them before they can blow the whistle.

7) After the bombs go off, put out a story for over an hour that the explosions are a simple electrical fault. This gives you cover time to make sure the lazy bus Arab is dead and any other hired Arabs who reneged are also dead. Make sure any CCTV footage that doesn't support your official story is either seized or destroyed.

8) A few hours after the bombings, have one of your boys post an 'Al-Qaeda statement' claiming responsibility. Don't worry about the whole 'misreferencing the Qu'ran' thing, these idiots don't have the attention spans to figure it out.

9) After you have made sure that all the Arabs are dead and you are managing the story accordingly, wait for four days until the police piece together the story and find the explosives you planted in Leeds and in the car in Luton. Remember that Qu'ran and flight manual in the hijackers' car? Ha ha, they fell for that one hook, line and sinker. No need to change tactics this time either. The time delay will convince the gullible public that a real investigation is taking place. Create a background of the hired Arabs being militant Muslims. The drooling masses, as was the case with the '9/11 hijackers,' will ignore stories of neighbours saying they were the quiet, educated types who liked children and playing sports.

BBC excerpt: One local resident described him as "a nice lad".

"He liked to play football, he liked to play cricket. I'm shocked."

Another resident said he was just a "normal kid" who played basketball and kicked a ball around.

10) Sit back and enjoy as Blair and his minions grandstand in front of television cameras about staying the course in the war on terror. The pay raise, extra agency funding, and power to strip more freedoms and liberties made the ten easy steps to staging a terrorist attack a worthwhile venture. The dozens of dead people were necessary collateral damage. This is a dirty war, we need to be less moral than the terrorists to defeat them.

And that's how the government staged the bombings in ten easy steps.

Granted, you can interchange different pieces of the puzzle. The bombers could be real terrorists that knew exactly what they were doing. All you would need to do is control the 'mastermind' behind the attack and make sure his boys carried out the job in the way you wanted. Voila.

Full story...

The London Bombs, The Rogue Network And Iran

by Webster G. Tarpley

Last week's London explosions carry the characteristic features of a state-sponsored, false flag, synthetic terror provocation by networks within the British intelligence services MI-5, MI-6, the Home Office, and the Metropolitan Police Special Branch who are favorable to a wider Anglo-American aggressive war in the Middle East, featuring especially an early pre-emptive attack on Iran, with a separate option on North Korea also included. With the London attacks, the Anglo-American invisible government adds another horrendous crime to its own dossier. But this time, their operations appear imperfect, especially in regard to the lack (so far) of a credible patsy group which, by virtue of its ethnicity, could direct popular anger against one of the invisible government's targets. So far, the entire attribution of the London crimes depends on what amounts to an anonymous posting in an obscure, hitherto unknown, secular Arabic-language chatrooms in the state of Maryland, USA. But, based on this wretched shred of pseudo-evidence, British Prime Minister Tony Blair who has surely heard of a group called the Irish Republican Army, which bombed London for more than a decade has not hesitated to ascribe the murders to "Islam," and seems to be flirting with total martial law under the Civil Contingencies Act. We are reminded once again of how he earned his nickname of Tony Bliar.

SCOTLAND YARD KNEW IN ADVANCE

That the British Government knew in advance that blasts would occur is not open to rational doubt. Within hours of the explosions, Israeli Army Radio was reporting that "Scotland Yard [London police headquarters] had intelligence warnings of the attacks a short time before they occurred." This report, repeated by IsraelNN.com, added that "the Israeli Embassy in London was notified in advance, resulting in Foreign Minister Binyamin Netanyahu remaining in his hotel room rather than make his way to the hotel adjacent to the site of the first explosion, a Liverpool Street train station, where he was to address an economic summit." This report is attributed to "unconfirmed reliable sources." At around the same time, the Associated Press issued a wire asserting that "British police told the Israeli Embassy in London minutes before Thursday's explosions that they had received warnings of possible terror attacks in the city," according to "a senior Israeli official." This wire specifies that "just before the blasts, Scotland Yard called the security officer at the Israeli Embassy to say that they had received warnings of possible attacks."

According to eyewitness reports from London, BBC claimed between 8:45 and some minutes after 10 AM that the incidents in the Underground were the result of an electrical power surge, or alternatively of a collision. Foreign bigwigs, presumably not just Netanyahu, were warned, while London working people continued to stream into the subway. These reports have been denied, repudiated, sanitized, and expunged from news media websites by the modern Orwellian Thought Police, but they have been archived by analysts who learned on 9/11 and other occasions that key evidence in state-sponsored terror crimes tends to filter out during the first minutes and hours, during the critical interval when the controlled media are assimilating the cover story peddled by complicit moles within the ministries. These reports are not at all damaging to Israel, but are devastating for British domestic security organs. An alternative version peddled by Stratfor.com, namely that the Israelis warned Scotland Yard, is most probably spurious but still leaves the British authorities on the hook. Which Scotland Yard official made the calls? Identify that official, and you have bagged a real live rogue network mole.

Another more general element of foreknowledge can be seen in the fact reported by Isikoff and Hosenball of Newsweek that, since about November 2004, the US FBI, but not other US agencies, has been refusing to use the London Underground.

Operations like these are generally conduited through the government bureaucracies under the cover of a drill or exercise which closely resembles the terror operation itself. So it was with Amalgam Virgo and the multiple exercises held on 9/11, as I show in my 9/11 Synthetic Terror Made in USA (Joshua Tree CA: Progressive Press, 2005). So it was with the Hinckley attempt to assassinate Ronald Reagan, when a presidential succession exercise was scheduled for the next day, as I showed in my George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography (1992; reprint by Progressive Press, 2004). An uncannily similar maneuver allows the necessary work to be done on official computers and on company time, while warding off the inquisitive glances and questions of curious co-workers at adjoining computer consoles.

THE COVER STORY TERROR DRILL

Such a parallel drill was not lacking in the London case. On the evening of July 7, BBC Five, a news and sports radio program, carried an interview with a certain former Scotland Yard official named Peter Power who related that his firm, Visor Consulting, had been doing an anti-terror-bombing drill in precisely the Underground stations and at the precise times when the real explosions went off. Peter Power and Visor had been subcontractors for the drill; Power declined to name the prime contractors. Small wonder that Blair, in his first official report to the Commons on July 11, went out of his way to rule out a board of inquiry to probe these tragic events.

Tony Blair may be eyeing the advantages of emergency rule for a discredited lame duck like himself, but the British people may have a different view. The alternative is clear: on the one hand is the American response after 9/11, marked by submissive and credulous gullibility in regard to the fantastic official story of what had happened. On the other hand is the militant and intelligent Spanish response after March 11, 2004, marked by powerful mass mobilization and righteous anger against politicians who sought to manipulate the people and sell a distorted account of events. Which way will the British people go? Straws in the wind suggest that the British response may be closer to the Spanish, although it may develop more slowly because of the lack of mass organization and related factors. If this is the case, Tony Blair, Jack Straw, and the rest of the malodorous "New Labor" crypto-Thatcherites will be out the window.

My thesis is that the London explosions represent a form of communication on the past of the transatlantic Anglo-American financier faction with Bush, Blair, and the heads of state and government assembled at Gleneagles, Scotland for the G-8 meeting on the day of the blast. The London deaths were designed to deliver an ultimatum in favor of early war with Iran. Here a word of clarification may be necessary. The demonization of Bush by his many enemies, while understandable, risks blurring the basic realities of power in the US and UK. Since the Bay of Pigs and the Kennedy assassination (to go back no further than that), we have been aware of a secret team. During the Iran-contra era, the same phenomenon was referred to as an invisible, secret or parallel government. This is still the matrix of most large-scale terrorism. The questions arises for some: do Bush and Cheney tell the invisible government what to do, or does the invisible government treat the visible office holders as puppets and expendable assets? To ask the question is to answer it: Bush, Cheney & Co. are the expendable puppets. The explanation of terror is not Bush MIHOP, as some seem to argue, but rather invisible government MIHOP, an altogether more dire proposition.

How then does the invisible faction communicate with the public mouthpieces? Given the violence of the power relations involved, we can be sure that it is not a matter of sending out engraved invitations announcing that the honor of Bush's presence is requested at the launching of an attack on Iran. Rather, the invisible and violent rogue network communicates with Bush, Blair, and others by means coherent with their aggressive nature as they did on 9/11. Bush, of course, is a weak and passive tenant of the White House whose instinct is to do virtually nothing beyond the day-to-day routine.

We therefore need to note that the London blasts come after two months of vigorous and impatient prodding of Bush by the invisible government. On May 11, a small plane almost reached the White House before it was turned away, while the Congress, the Supreme Court, and the White House (but not the Pentagon, the Treasury, etc.) were evacuated amid scenes of panic. The White House went to red alert, but Bush was not informed until it was all over, and was riding his bicycle in the woods near Greenbelt, Maryland. Flares were dropped over the Brookland district and Takoma Park, MD. The resemblance of all this to a classic coup scenario was evident. On May 18, a live hand grenade, which turned out to be a dud, landed near Bush as he spoke at a rally in Tbilisi, Georgia.

On June 29, the approach of another small plane led to an evacuation of the Congress and the Capitol, again with scenes of panic. On the afternoon of July 2, no fewer than three small planes came close to Bush's Camp David retreat in the Catoctin Mountains of Maryland; this story was suspiciously relegated to the local news page of the Washington Post. The details of these incidents are of little interest; what counts is the objective reality of a pattern. These incidents also provide background for Bush's unbalanced behavior on July 5 at Gleneagles, when he crashed into a policeman while riding on his bicycle. Then came the London blasts on July 7.

What is it that the invisible government wants Bush and Blair to do? Scott Ritter announced last January that Bush had issued an order to prepare an attack on Iran for the month of June. According to a well-informed retired CIA analyst I spoke with on July 3, this order actually told US commanders to be ready to attack Iran by the end of June. This project of war with Iran is coherent with most of what we know about the intentions of the US-UK rogue faction, and thus provides the immediate background for the London explosions. The Bush administration and the Blair cabinet have failed to deliver decisive military action, and the invisible government is exceedingly impatient.

One way to increase the pressure on Iran would be to implicate a group of Iranian fanatic patsies in the London bombings. This would not be difficult; in fact, as I show in 9/11 Synthetic Terror, the British capital, referred to during the 1990s as Londonistan, is home to the largest concentration of Arab and Islamic patsy groups in the entire world in such infamous locations as Finsbury mosque and Brixton mosque; these groups are known to have enjoyed de facto recruiting privileges in Her Majesty's Prisons. But perhaps an Iranian patsy group would be too obvious at this time. More likely may be the sinking of a US warship in the Gulf by a third country, duly attributed to Iran.

In a recent speech, Dr. Ephraim Asculai of Tel Aviv University made two main points: first, that there is no military solution to the Iranian nuclear issue, and second, that there is no such thing as a point of no return in nuclear weapons development. Dr. Asculai showed that South Africa, Sweden, and other nations had turned away from deploying A-bombs well after having acquired the ability to produce them. Dr. Asculai is evidently arguing against widespread tendencies in the US-UK-Israeli strategic community who are whipping up hysteria around the notion that Iran is now indeed approaching exactly such a point of no return.

For her part, Miss Rice of the State Department has now declared that it will no longer be sufficient for Iran to turn away from nuclear weapons production; the entire Iranian program for nuclear energy production will also have to be dismantled, in her view. Such maximalism makes a negotiated solution impossible as long as the current Washington group holds power.

SCO: US GET OUT OF CENTRAL ASIA

The US, UK and Israel have been on the brink of war with Iran for at least a year, and the rogue network is generally aware that time is not on its side. There is also an important new development which threatens the ability of the Anglo-Americans to wage war. On July 5, the summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which brings together China, Russia, Uzbekistan, Krygyzia, Kazakhstan, and Tajikistan plus new members India, Pakistan, and Iran, issued a call for the United States to vacate the bases seized in the autumn of 2001 under the cover of the 9/11 emergency and the looming invasion of Afghanistan. The parties to this call represent about half of the world's population. This demand was immediately rejected by the State Department, but veteran Russian Eurasian expert Yevgeny Primakov crowed that for the first time a formula had been agreed to by which the US would be ejected from this region. The US presence goes back to the Bush-Putin emergency hotwire talks of September 11, 2001, when Putin, seeing that the madmen had seized control in Washington, dropped Russian objections to a US intrusion into the former Soviet republics of central Asia. The US-UK can attack Iran from Iraq in the west, from Afghanistan in the east, and from Qatar in the south, but without the Uzbek and Kyrgyz bases, the Anglo-American ability to attack from the north as well will be severely limited. The SCO states are also concerned about US-backed "color revolutions" on the recent Georgian and Ukrainian models, traditionally known as CIA "people power" revolutions, being used to destabilize their governments. To make matters worse for Washington and London, Kazakhstan is a few months away from opening an oil pipeline to China, which will diminish the US-UK ability to use their Gulf presence to blackmail Beijing. Washington and London are also dismayed by the pro-Iranian overtures in various fields being made by their Shiite puppets in Baghdad.

And what of the report in the Washington Post of July 11, which claims that US and UK planners are now contemplating a sharp reduction in the US forces in Iraq? The most plausible explanation is that this is pure disinformation, similar to news blips issued by both Hitler and Stalin in May and June of 1941. It should also be noted that the British plan explicitly provides for most of the forces now at Basra to go to Afghanistan, where they would be positioned for operations against Iran, or into central Asia.

Generally, the invisible government appears dismayed by its loss of momentum and the constant erosion of the political position of its asset, Bush. 110,000 US factory workers lost their jobs in June, the worst total in a year and a half: auto and textiles are collapsing. The housing bubble may also be nearing its end, with the bankruptcy of Fannie Mae on the near-term agenda. World derivatives have officially reached $300 trillion, with JP Morgan Chase holding the largest single portfolio. The one virtuoso performance of July 7 was that of the Federal Reserve, Bank of England, and European Central Bank, which flooded equity and capital markets with liquidity through such vehicles as the Plunge Protection Team (PPT), turning a big Wall Street loss into a small gain.

During the recent Reopen 9/11 tour of 8 European cities, Jimmy Walter repeatedly forecast that the general predicament of the Bush regime and the US financier faction would lead to another large-scale terror attack before the end of 2005; this has now occurred, and there is no end in sight. The tide of US public opinion has now definitively turned against the Iraq war and to some degree against Bush, as all major polls demonstrate. Notable is the 42% affirmative response to the Zogby International question as to whether, if it could be proved that Bush lied to launch the Iraq war, he should be impeached. Larry Franklin of the Wolfowitz-Feith neocon apparatus has been indicted for divulging US secrets, and the American-Israeli Public Affairs Council has been raided twice; further indictments are expected. Karl Rove has now been revealed as the source of the Valerie Plame leak, making Rove and perhaps other White House officials fair game for federal indictment. The Niger yellowcake forgeries and the Chalabi state secrets cases are still pending to say nothing of two stolen elections and the 9/11 Septembergate itself. All these factors incline the rogue network to seek an improvement in their situation through a flight forward to a wider war in Iran. Those who stand to lose most by such an Iranian adventure must now mobilize to make Mr. Bush's second term as eventful as Nixon's second term turned out to be in 1974.

Full story...

London Underground Exercises and the Magically Exploding Terrorists: Important Questions

Official government story changes every minute

by Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones

Since we posted our original article about the exercises being conducted on the London Underground which targeted the exact same spots as the bombings that happened on the morning of Thursday 7th July, a firestorm of interest on the subject has swept the internet.

Important questions need to be asked of both Peter Power and Visor Consultants, the agency who were running the drill.

In both the ITN TV interview and the BBC radio interview Peter Power makes it clear that the team of crisis managers who were overseeing the drill quickly switched from exercise planning to real time management of the actual bombing itself.

"We had to suddenly switch an exercise from fictional to real," stated Power in his TV interview.

The company that Visor were running the exercise for is not named by Power. If Visor switched to real time management of the bombings, who else could the company be but London Underground or one of their affiliates?

If this were a strategy session for a completely unaffiliated company to London Underground, the meeting would have been cancelled and the participants would have gone home as soon as they were aware of the fact that a real attack was taking place.

Only if the exercise was being conducted for London Underground or a group responsible for part of a command structure in the aftermath of the attack would 'real time crisis management' of the event take place.

So why does Power make mention of the company being close to a property occupied by Jewish businessmen? He then makes reference to American banks. If the exercise was being coordinated on behalf of a bank then why was there a need for Visor Consultants to actively 'manage' the bombings after they had taken place and what were they managing precisely?

Visor Consultants is a PR firm. Were they responsible for telling the media that the bombings were in fact a simple power surge for over an hour? An explanation that was obviously ridiculous but gave the government time to manage the release of information about the attack.

Power has been hired by the government before and he is always used to release information after terrorist incidents in London.

Two previous examples of this are the March 2001 BBC television center bombing and the September 2000 rocket attack on the MI6 building.

Was Powers again used by the government as a conduit for information that would support their official version of events?

Today we are told that the bombers were all killed in the act of carrying out the bombing. Just like the Madrid bombers blew themselves up during a raid (pictured below).

How very convenient that all of the suspected patsies should have been blown up in their own attacks even though the last word was that the attacks were not suicide bombings, but synchronized, timed bombings. This is pure media-manipulation sleight of hand. Its designed to distract from the revelation that exercises that precisely mirrored the bombings were happening in the Tube as the bombs were going off around London. Its the same trick used in Madrid - first the government tried to blame ETA and when that wouldn't stick, it turned to the old standby of Islamic Extremists. When investigators tracked the patsies to an apartment in Leganés, the so-called terrorists supposedly blew themselves up in the stand-off. Suspects dead, case closed the government said. They are trying to play the same tired hand in London.

The BBC is reporting that only one of the bombers definitely blew himself up. Which is it? All four bombers or just one? There is an attempt to muddy the waters so people will switch off and just buy whatever the government tells them, even though the government story keeps contradicting itself.

Full story...

The suicide bomb squad from Leeds

How stupid do those bunch of neo-fascists in Westminster think we are anyway? I do NOT believe for a SECOND than any man with an eight month old baby would commit suicide for any reason whatsoever. To do so would go against every single parenting instinct that a man has. We are hardwired to protect children and to love our kids! This story and these arrests are part of the false flag and some poor bastard has been framed for something he didn't do. Either that or there is some sort of manipulation going on here. I know that suicide bombers have families, as pointed out by one naive commenter, BUT I would challenge you to name me one suicide bomber from Israel or anywhere else that had an 8 month old baby when he decided to go out and blow himself up. That does not track. I don't care what "evidence" the police think they've found this stinks of more rotting fish than a North Sea Trawler who's fridges aren't working!

I'm seeing pictures of them with rucksacks on, why weren't they wearing those suicide belts I've seen them showing on TV? I was suprised by the rucksacks, something about it doesn't make sense, surely the belt thingy is a lot easier, less conspicuous and less hassle on the underground first thing in the morning? I know if I was planning something like that I'd choose the vest simply for convenience. BUT, what if the poor guy was just told to take the bag to somewhere and drop it off, doing a favour for someone, the thing's on a pre-set timer, little padlock on it so patsy can't get into the bag to see the explosives and BOOM! Perfect "suicide" boming and the bomber is a normal Muslim guy that no-one would remotely suspect of being a bomber. Perfect setup.

These men were not extremists, they were ordinary British guys, some of Pakistani origin and now I hear on News24 a Jamaican?!?!?!? Ok, that makes a lot of sense! NOT! Anyway, Bob Marley aside, they don't sound devoutly Muslim and by the sound of it they had no reason whatsoever to kill themselves. But instead of screaming RAT, the whole world is taking this as a sign of how insipid the Muslim threat has become - now it could be anyone so we should all be really scared and cc. Tony in on all our email. Don't you see what they're doing? Don't you see that it all plays into their hands? Fear, fear, fear, fear, that's what this is about. If the bombers had really wanted to kill a lot of people then they could have killed a lot more than they did. None of this makes any sense.

The population here is in shock for the most part and they are believing the authorities because at the end of the day Blair is supposed to be keeping people safe. So the System presents lots of "concrete" evidence and the media spins a good yarn and people buy it and go about their daily lives, shaken but not stirred. These bombings are the perfect psy-op, I bet they will put this in some dark textbook of dirty tricks in future years. Probably as an addition to same the manual as the Birmingham Six story and all the others where the British government was caught blowing up its own people to frame the IRA! Same shit, different day.

Agree with me, or don't. It's up to you.

Four friends from northern England have changed the face of terrorism by carrying out the suicide bombings that brought carnage to London last week.

It emerged last night that, for the first time in Western Europe, suicide bombers have been recruited for attacks. Security forces are coming to terms with the realisation that young Britons are prepared to die for their militant cause.

Three of the men lived in Leeds and the immediate fear is that members of a terrorist cell linked to the city are planning further strikes. The mastermind behind the attacks and the bombmaker are both still thought to be at large.

The man who planted the bomb at Edgware Road was named last night as Mohammed Sidique Khan, 30, the married father of an eight-month-old baby, who is believed to have come from the Leeds area.

Two other terrorists were Hasib Hussain, 19, who bombed the bus in Tavistock Square, of Colenso Mount, Leeds, and Shehzad Tanweer, 22, the Aldgate bomber, who lived at Colwyn Road, Leeds.

Police are still trying to identify the fourth, whose remains are believed to be in the bombed Tube train carriage on the Piccadilly Line. It is thought that he comes from Luton.

Armed police raided six addresses in West Yorkshire yesterday, including the homes of three of the men, who they now know travelled to Luton in a hired car last Wednesday to join the fourth man. They boarded the 7.40 Thameslink train to King’s Cross the next day, each armed with a 10lb rucksack bomb.

Full story...

Just Who Is Lord Stevens of Kirkwhelpington?

by Trowbridge H. Ford

Whenever anything of a high-profile criminal nature occurs in the United Kingdom, the public, press, and police immediately look to Lord Stevens of Kirkwhelpington for solutions. Whether it be alleged British collusion in sectarian killings in Northern Ireland, terrorist actions further afield, or who now caused the deadly explosions in London, the former Deputy Constable of Cambridgeshire, who conducted three inquiries into the dirtiest part of Ulster's dirty war, is the man everyone expects definitive answers from. As the Chief Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police until last January, it was hardly surprising that before the dust and smoke had really settled from the underground and bus bombings in Central London on July 7th that he was immediately queried about the culprits.

And Stevens did not disappoint, blaming it upon domestic Muslims in the hundreds who had been trained by the thousands by Osama bin Laden's Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan to commit acts of terrorism in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. "I'm afraid there are a sufficient number of people in this country," he stated on a television news program over the weekend, "willing to be Islamic terrorists that (others) don't have to be drafted in from abroad." In explaining that the terrorists were likely to be "British born and bred", Steven blamed the culprits he thought to be behind the Madrid train bombings last year in March - Syrian-born Mustafa Nasan, and Moroccan-born Mohammed Guerbouzi - for their existence. "Nasa(n)," David Ward added in Monday's Guardian, "now believed to be in Iraq, set up a sleeper cell of terrorists in Britain."

What Stevens claimed was hardly surprising, though, as he was just repeating what he had written back in March for the News of the World to help secure passage of a stronger Terrorism Act - what Prime Minister Blair had given him a peerage for to help promote passage of in the Lords. In explaining rubber-stamping a massive building contract to make Scotland Yard safer, Stevens wrote that there were at least 200 bin Laden-trained terrorists who "...would commit devastating terror acts against us if they could." Before leaving the Metropolitan Police, he said that he had seen reports which "...made my hair stand on end."

Stevens was particularly upset by the release of the detainees at Belmarsh Detention Centre, calling what liberals demanded, and the Law Lords had agreed to sheer "madness", though he did agree to a judge, rather than the Home Secretary, being given the power to detain a suspected terrorist in tighening up counterterrorist measures, and a "sunset clause" in the bill to require its reconsideration in six months time. People, he explained,"...haven't understood the brutal reality of the world we live in and the true horror of the terrorism we have."

Of course, Stevens' critics - like Crispin Black, the former intelligence briefer of the PM, and the Joint Intelligence Committee - were quick to dispute his claims, especially the number of home-grown terrorists for fear that they might trigger a wave of violence against Muslins, what has already surfaced with the murder of Pakistani visitor Kamal Raza Butt in Nottingham, a wave of hate mail against
Muslims, and firebombings of mosques throughout the kingdom. "That would simply play into the hands of the murderers," Sir Iqbal Sacranie, head of the Muslim Council of Britain, explained.

So why if Britain was creating so many British-bred ticking-bombs, to use Mossad lingo when discussing such matters, was Stevens' warning not taken more seriously? Why were not those ticking most loudly not sent to Belmarsh, or least subjected to the most intense surveillance in order to make sure that they didn't place bombs in public transport? The answer seems that 'Big John' cried "wolf" too loudly, too many times for the kingdom's counterterrorist agents, especially those at Scotland Yard and in the Police Service of Northern Ireland, to give his claims their undivided attention. Then Stevens may rarely get his man, as the Canadian Mounties say, but he always gets his way.

The Met's leader started going wrong when Britons began traveling to the Middle East to carry out suicide bombings to help the Palestinian cause. Stevens was particularly intrigued by two attacks against the Israelis, especially the suicide bombings by Asif Hanif and Omar Khan Sharif in Tel Aviv's Mike's Bar in 2003. Stevens reacted by wanting Scotland Yard to work with MI5 and GCHQ in entrapping some Muslims in false bomb plot which would be exposed before anything happened, and would alert the country, especially Muslim leaders and mosques, to the potential threat. Stevens was convinced that Al-Qaeda was completely overhauling its modus operandi, and some prophylactic act must happen to prevent it.

It all started when Scotland Yard's S0 19 Anti-Terrorist Squad in January 2003, with the help of MI5 and Manchester's police, tried to make out that a crazy asylum seeker Kamel Bourgoss from Algeria was actually running a ricin plot, intending to wreck havoc upon the kingdom. Of course, the whole idea was absurb because ricin, unlike anthrax, has to be ingested to become deadly. Still, thanks to tip offs by France's DST, the British authorities made a raid upon an alleged London ricin factory, and fanned out across the country to catch the people who were supposed to spread it, making raids in Edinburgh and Bournemouth before the fateful one in Manchester occurred. In all, 200 suspects were detained, but all that resulted was the murder of Special Branch officer Stephen Oake when the Algerian turned out to be a simple psychopath rather than a WMD master plotter.

While Stevens, the Anti-Terrorist Squad, and the Security Service Director General Eliza Manningham-Buller - along with their boss Home Secretary David Blunkett - should have had to answer many serious questions about this supreme cock-up, Prime Minister Tony Blair brushed everything under the carpet
with this typical rhetorical flourish: "It is a reminder that Britain is not immune to international terrorism.
This incident has major implications for our wider war against terror."

Given this clean bill of health, then things moved into high gear in November 2003 when Canadian Mohammad Monim Khawaja was persuaded to come to Britain, buy a big load of fertilizer which could be made into bombs, and store it in a storage bin near Heathrow. Then the security forces tried to connect a group of Muslim youths, most of them living in Crawley, running an IT store in the town, and having visited Pakistan, with the bomb plot. The key link was MI5 mole Abu Qatada, the fiery cleric, and Al-Qaeda's alleged European ambassador, who, it was hoped, would manipulate, while being held in detention, the youths into doing and saying things - 'chatter' that GCHQ would completely record - which would implicate them in criminal activites.

Stevens' plot, though, was completely upstaged by Al-Qaeda's bombings of the four commuter trains in Madrid on March 11, 2004. While GCHQ was listening for the 'chatter' between Abu Qatada and the Crawley youths, and was discounting any threats to Aznar's government, Syrian-born Edin Barakat Yarkas aka Abu Dahdah, while under similar detention, was plotting with similar youths in Spain the deadly attacks. When this happened, all British security forces could do is try to flush the English youths to flee to the country to Pakistan in the hope of bolstering their most feeble case - MI5 agent 'Gould' telling Jawad Akbar, Omar Khyam, Anthony Garcia and others that they faced immediate arrest on terrorist charges. They stayed, and the cases against them fell apart except for the most minor infractions. All the Khawaja family got for its trouble was a completely torn apart home.

The Madrid bombing did, however, get Stevens and his people thinking seriously about domestic suicide bombers attacking British targets, the only trouble was that they thought that the most likely culprits would be renegade elements within the IRA, especially because of their apparently incredible robbery of the Northern Bank in Ulster last December, though there have been no arrests, much less any
convictions of the crime. Scotland Yard believed that Shankill Road bomber Sean Kelly was behind the heist, and was possibly involved in some kind of Madrid bombing incident on the mainland. To prevent any such incident from happening, PSNI Commissioner Hugh Orde, a long-time subordinate of Stevens's, recommended successfully to Secretary of State Peter Hain that his prison release under the terms of the Good Friday Agreement (GFA) be revoked because he was resuming terrorist activities.

It was Kelly who had completely turned around Stevens when he was investigating possible British collusion in sectarian killings 15 years ago in Northern Ireland. When the nasty work of the British Army's Force Research Unit finally surfaced - resulting in the needless murder of about 29 persons
innocent of terrorist connections on the basis of Army files on them or to suit the needs of other operations - Stevens was assigned to get to the bottom of the mess that Ulster Defence Association
mole Brian Nelson had ochestrated, and loyalist and FRU assassins had carried out. A new inquiry was wanted because the previous investigation of similar actions - the Stalker one - had been frustrated by the ongoing needs of covert operations.

The victims now concerned people like alleged RUC Special Branch mole Charles McIlmurray in April 1987; bread delivery man Dermot Hackett of Drumquin, County Tyrone a month later; retired taxi driver Francisco Notarantonio the following October; mourners Kevin Brady, John Murray, and Thomas McErlean at the funeral of volunteer Mairéad Farrell, killed in the cull at Gibraltar on March 6, 1988; Ken Stronge the following July; Belfast solicitor Patrick Finucane on February 12, 1989; John Joseph Davey of Gulladuff, Magherafelt, two days later; Loughlin Maginn on August 25, 1989; Patrick McKenna of Ardoyne, Belfast a week later; and Ulster Volunteer Force histman Brian Robinson a few minutes later.

Hardly had the Stevens team started working than Nelson was persuaded to flee to England to avoid arrest, and a fire destroyed much of the evidence it had collected during the previous four months, leaving the former FRU mole to plead guilty to five charges of conspiracy to murder, and the team to settle for jailing much of the old UDA/UFF leadership. "These charges," Peter Taylor explained in The Brits: The War Against the IRA, "reflected only a fraction of Nelson's activities." (p. 294) Little wonder that Stevens then concluded that British collusion in sectarian murders was "neither widespread nor institutionalized."

In clearing out the deadwood of the loyalist paramilitaries, Stevens cleared the way for Johnny 'Mad Dog' Adair's paramilitaries to carry the loyalist fight into the Republican heartland of West Belfast - the Falls Road and the Ballymurphy and Divis estates. In the next two years, his group killed another 20 people. In retaliation, the Republicans tried to assassinated him on several occasions, the most publicized one being when Sean Kelly and Thomas Begley tried to blow him up in an office over a fishmongers store on the Shankill Road on October 23, 1993. The bomb, exploding prematurely, made a suicide bomber out of Begley, and killed nine bystanders, but Adair escaped again. Kelly received nine life sentences for his trouble, but was released under the terms of the GFA. Adair suffered similarly for taking vengeance on seven customers at a pub at Greysteel a week later, and then bragging openly about it.

While this seemingly stopped the rot about the dirty war in Northern Ireland - Stevens' primary objective - he was still obliged to engage in more damage control with new investigations in 1993 and 1999 into what the Force Research Unit really was, and what it did. Every time, he seemed to have stemmed the flow of alarming information - like a conviction of someone for Finucane's murder - something new would happen - like the assassination of another lawyer, Rosemary Nelson; the coming forward of former FRU agents like Martin Ingram and Peter Keeley as whistleblowers to tell tales on their former employer; and the continuing demand by Sinn Fein for impartial inquiries into all the murders in which British collusion was suspected.

The breaking point of this whole process occurred when former Canadian Judge Peter Cory - under the terms of the Weston Park agreement - called for inquiries into a few of the most controversial killings, especially those of Finucane and Nelson.

Stevens thought that his parting call from Scotland Yard about Kelly would solve all his problems with terrorism, but British-born Muslims, increasingly agitated by security forces' inventions, have only compounded his problems and those of his fellow subjects. His self-