Enlightenment:
A note to the non-ravers out there: codshit is
NOT a derogatory or insulting term and bears no relation in offensiveness to its four-letter
cousin, it's a word used to describe the nonsense that people sometimes talk
when they're off their heads.
Wisdom:
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 :.
Americans have different ways of saying things. They say 'elevator', we say 'lift'...they say 'President', we say 'stupid psychopathic git'....
.: Alexi Sayle :.
If you confront the Universe with good intentions in your heart it will reflect that and reward your intent. It just doesn't always do it in the way you expect.
.: G'kar :.
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."
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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 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.
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.
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 asdrugmules 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?
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
A man has been shot dead by armed officers at Stockwell Tube station, as police hunt four would-be bombers.
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 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.
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."
