/** Tools */

25 May 2007

British Oppression Downing Street protest - the usual suspects strike again

Well, well, well, or not, as the case may be. Friday 15th June appears to have a "Muslim" protest organised at which Muslims are urged to "Respond to the call of Allah and the Messenger." This, apparently, means that Muslims should protest against British Oppression outside Downing Street, although this is likely to have to be outside the fortress gates of Downing Street, rather than immediately outside the front door of number 10, if it even gets that far because Downing Street happens to be part of an exclusion zone that prevents the population of the UK from protesting against anything, much less British Oppression, anywhere near Parliament or Downing Street without first having obtained express permission for so doing. Of course, there is nothing oppressive about having to obtain express permission from the very State against whom you wish to protest, unless it happens in some far off land such as Uzbekistan. Doublethink is good for you and better for your country.

Pickled Politics, aptly named as its politics often appears somewhat pickled, picked up on the forthcoming event earlier this week, and suggested that the protest is being organised by Hizb ut-Tahrir. Curiously though, the post's author noted that there was no information available on which to base such an allegation about who is behind the event, other than circumstantial evidence. A distinct lack of information about something always piques The Antagonist's interest in much the same way as do high-profile individuals who portray themselves to be something other than they really are for profit, publishing deals, and personally and politically expedient self and State serving agendas.

Top billing on the britishoppression.com links list (most of which weren't working) is "Man made law", along with "Anti Islam" both of which subliminally convey the message that British oppression is solely a Muslim issue and that only Muslims are subject to the raft of laws to which every subject in this country is subjected and by which every subject is subjugated. This piqued The Antagonist's interest still further for an approach that portrays Muslims as the sole targets of British oppression denies the history of British imperialism such as we know it to be as well as the material conditions of existence. Yes, Muslims are suffering, and have suffered, at the hands of British and, more recently, American oppression but so too has just about every other race, colour and creed known to man, and that includes the white, working-class British people more commonly referred to as 'chavs' and 'hoodies'.

In the last few days posters for the British Oppression protest have started appearing and getting people's backs up in various parts of the UK, including London and Birmingham and it was correct of Pickled Politics' Sunny to pick up on the lack of information about the organisers, although perhaps a little misguided to postulate that the event may be organised by Hizb ut-Tahrir without first conducting some further research.

In fact, a spokesman for Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain, Dr Imran Waheed, has expressly denounced the notion that Hizb ut-Tahrir has anything to do with the protest and is quoted in the Birmingham Mail:

"We have no link whatsoever to the material that has been fly-posted in Birmingham. We believe that the posting of such material damages community relations and does nothing to create harmony between the city's residents. In Birmingham our activists work in the local community, encouraging the people of Birmingham to speak out against injustice and oppression at home or abroad through peaceful political means."

So, if Hizb ut-Tahrir are not behind the British Oppression protest, who is?

Given that the only information that exists about the organisers of the protest is the domain name on which it appears, britishoppression.com, a littler further investigation is required. A WHOIS query turns up the following:

Visit AboutUs.org for more information about BRITISHOPPRESSION.COM

Registration Service Provided By: LO-39482k
Contact: domains4@anonymousmails.org
Visit: domainsgolive.com


Registrant Contact:

Faruk Miah (faruk.miah2000@yahoo.co.uk)
+44.07745 388 220
Fax: +.
24 Little Green Terrace, White Road,
Manchester, Manchester M90 9JH

Administrative Contact:

Faruk Miah (faruk.miah2000@yahoo.co.uk)
+44.07745 388 220
Fax: +.
24 Little Green Terrace, White Road,
Manchester, Manchester M90 9JH

Technical Contact:

Faruk Miah (faruk.miah2000@yahoo.co.uk)
+44.07745 388 220
Fax: +.
24 Little Green Terrace, White Road,
Manchester, Manchester M90 9JH

Status: Locked

Name Servers:

Creation date: 17 Apr 2007 22:58:08
Expiration date: 17 Apr 2008 22:58:08

First off, the Registrant, Administrative and Technical contact details are false. There is no Little Green Terrace in Manchester, nor even a White Road. Nor does Manchester have a postcode of "M90 9JH", although there is an M90 postcode which happens to be Manchester Airport, a place that recently featured in the news as three men were arrested there, allegedly in connection with the events of 7th July 2005. The britishoppression.com site appears to be hosted by Pacific Internet in Hong Kong.

Secondly, note the date on which the domain britishopression.com was registered, 17th April 2007, because rather a lot has happened since and rather a curious lot at that. Despite the domain only being registered for five weeks, and the fact that fly-posters advertising the event have just started to spring up, in the five weeks that has transpired since the domain's registration, the white supremacist, neo-Nazi thugs who stand to benefit from the billed protest almost as much as the State itself have managed to pool their miniscule collective-brain resource in opposition and have rallied together to whip up a "No to British Oppression demonstration" petition addressed to the British Government and Metropolitan Police requesting that the day of action be stopped before it takes place, which is exactly the sort of thing you'd expect them to do.

The date on which the petition opposing the protest was established is not published on the petition but as the britishoppression.com domain was registered on 17th April 2007 it would be safe to assume that it was set-up at some point in the five week period between then and now. In that time, and at the time of writing, the petition has managed to gather a staggering 645 signatures, complete with the usual accompanying barrage of sickening and hideously racist diatribes.

The founder of petition, one Beverley Kerry (beverley.kerry@talk21.com) of Ilkeston, Derbyshire, has a bit of a thing for overtly racist petitions and is also running an "End religion sanctioned animal torture" petition to Asda and Walmart (443 signatures) which cleverly ignores animal torture by the global pharma, cosmetics and traditional animal slaughter industries, as well as an "End Halal" petition to Safeway supermarket (880 signatories). So, it would appear, Mrs Beverley Kerry aka odinsgal88 aka OG -- alleged to have links to the far-right group Combat 18 -- has a considerable problem with Muslims in general. Furthermore, given the similarities between the processes by which both Halal meat and Kosher meat is produced -- a method that involves the draining of animal's blood -- both petitions are, by logical extension, not only anti-Islamic but also anti-Jewish which, again, is precisely the sort of ignorant, blanket, racist nonsense the likes of which only the deficient brains of reactionary, xenophobic, neo-Nazis are capable.

Interestingly, the anti-British Oppression petition suggests that, "this [British Oppression] proposed day of action could lead to re-occurences [sic] of the devastation we saw in the northern towns of England in the summer of 2001 in which countless Muslims were involved in damage and rioting leaving a trail of devastation and a huge bill in their wake." For those with short memories, the rioting referred to was termed the Bradford Riot, a reference to the events that took place on 7th July that year, the Bradford Riot being on 7/7/2001, unlike the other devastation allegedly caused by Muslims, the London bombings, which happened four years later on 7/7/2005. Some coincidence, eh?

While all of this is interesting in and of itself, it doesn't tell us who is behind the British Oppression web site. However, Faisal Haque, writing in his Telegraph blog, A Journey Through British Islam, does and -- surprise, surprise, if you hadn't guessed already -- it's the usual suspects again, namely: Omar Bakri Mohammad, Al-Muhajiroun, Al-Ghurabaa, the Saved Sect and the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah, to whom Trevor Abu Omar Brooks Izzadeen also belongs. Based on his findings Haque, quite correct in his analysis, writes:

I believe that this demo is being organised by agent provocateurs who will fuel the Government’s propaganda that the Muslim community is full of ‘radicalised’ hotheads. It will damage community relations and will be used to justify further erosion of the civil liberties of ordinary Muslims and non-Muslims. Judging by the inflammatory postings on the petition website, it is clear that the mere advertising of this demonstration is causing a wave of Islamophobia.

The question that must be asked is how the organisers have managed to secure permission for the demonstration at Downing Street, inside the exclusion zone? I hate to be sceptical, but I wonder whether the Government does not mind such events from taking place, as they can be capitalised on later, as has been seen in the past.

I certainly won’t be attending the demo and would advise my brothers and sisters to completely boycott it.

Not only must the question be asked about how the organisers have managed to secure permission for the demonstration at Downing Street, inside the exclusion zone, the question must also be asked about how racist, neo-nazi groupings have managed to rally 645 people against something that could only have been known about by anyone other than the organisers just five weeks ago, well in advance of the event receiving any publicity, long before the site contained anything more than the front page and a couple of PDFs, and long before Muslims -- in whose name the protest is allegedly being organised -- knew of its existence.

The British Oppression demonstration organised for 15th June 2007 outside Downing Street appears to be a rather clever set-up by those who seek to gain from setting up antagonisms between ordinary human beings on the basis of superficial differences. More correctly it would be a very clever set-up if the people upon whom such confidence tricks are consistently being played weren't already wise to the true nature of the tactics that comprise the State's war on people, tactics which include the State having at its disposal a handful of radical whoevers -- in this case "Muslims" -- whose core business is cropping up and making a lot of noise when it best serves the interests of the State for them to do so.

The British Oppression event and the separatist basis for its organisation is a misdirection of the highest order. Muslims would do well to steer clear of it, as they would do well to steer clear of any other event whose founding premises are based on the same divisive, divide and conquer tactics that seek to segregate people from each other and which only ever serve the interests of the State and never the best interests of the people.

Luckily for the population at large, those elements of the State tasked with pulling off such high profile media stunts have blown almost all of the radical "Muslim" resources at their disposal -- hence the resurgence of Omar Bakri Mohammad and associated groupings and hence why Herr Doktor John Reid is happy to call a State of Emergency that would annihilate everyone's human rights -- as the State endeavours to manufacture from Islam "a threat bigger than Hitler", a threat the magnitude of which only the State itself could ever represent, just as it was Hitler's own fascist state that presented the greatest threat the German people ever faced.

Update: The Cult of the Amateur strikes again as Inayat Bunglawala regurgitates some stuff he read on the Internet, strips it of analysis and meaning and puts it out as the opinion of an 'expert' two weeks after the fact - a form of professional journalism better known as plagiarism. Nor is he the first 'writer' to do so. What a truly septic isle on which we live.

21 May 2007

7/7: Ludicrous Diversion, Ludicrous Charges

It's tough to beat such headlines as, "Military studies in the Jihad against the Tyrants - get your copy and join Kalid Khaliq in the slammer," so The Antagonist won't even try. Not even on the new-look Anything that defies my sense of reason....

The media, in the true nature of the hysteria that is their core business, are proclaiming such things as "Terror suspect charged over 7/7 bombings," when in fact that's not quite the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

What has happened, however, is that Beeston resident Khalid Kaliq, 34, one of the four people rounded for questioning about the events of 7/7 almost two years after it happened has today been charged with, possessing "a document or record, namely the al-Qaida training manual, containing information of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism" on July 17 2005, according to Scotland Yard.

On July 17th 2005? For one day only? It sounds a little like this one-day-only possession of the CIA Al Qaeda training document, "Military studies in the Jihad against the Tyrants" may have come about during one of the many police raids that took place in Beeston after 7/7, possibly when an agent of the State handed over a copy of the aforementioned "Military studies in the Jihad against the Tyrants" while uttering the words, "Here, son, have you ever seen this before?" A sure-fire way to guarantee possession, fingerprints and DNA evidence proving ownership -- even if for one day only -- of such a document.

Military Studies in the Jihad Against the Tyrants
The 180-page volume, seized from the Manchester, England home of a bin Laden disciple, offers jihad members guidance on subjects such as assassination, forging documents, and preparing poisons in its 18 chapters. The terrorism manual was placed into evidence last year by prosecutors during the federal trial of four men accused of involvement in the 1998 bombing of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania (the below English translation was also placed in evidence). All four defendants were convicted and sentenced to life in prison.
The document is published widely in America, of all places, and in English, of all languages, and all 18 chapters are available online at The Smoking Gun and Cryptome for all to read. Free entry to HMG's Belmarsh and possibly even Guantanamo Gulag almost guaranteed.

Update: Khaliq's solicitor Nadeem Afzal denied the offence in court and Khaliq has been released on bail. District Judge Caroline Tubbs adjourned the case to July 2, just so a lot of fuss can be made in the run-up to the second anniversary of 7/7.

19 May 2007

Home Office Official 7/7 Account "not fit for purpose"

On 14th December 2005, after once again denying everyone the right to a public inquiry, even under the flawed legislative framework of the Inquiries Act 2005 -- a piece of legislation which, handily for the State, came into force on 7th June 2005, exactly one month before the day that was to launch a thousand calls for a public inquiry -- Prime Minister Tony Blair said of the London bombings:
“I do accept that people want to know exactly what happened, and we will make sure that they do.... We will bring together all the evidence that we have and publish it, so that people —the victims and others— can see exactly what happened..... we will publish a full account of all the information that we have.”

On 11th May 2006, the Home Office published an anonymously penned document entitled, "Report of the Official Account of the Bombings London on 7th July 2005" which, apparently, was the Government's publication of "all the evidence" so "that people-the victims and others- can see exactly what happened". In other words, "a full account of all the information" the government had.

Within two months the report was discredited as a flawed and inaccurate version of events as the Home Secretary was forced to stand before Parliament and say:
“The official account that we provided to the House states that the train on which the bombers travelled left Luton station at 7.40 am. The police have now told us that that is incorrect—the train in fact left Luton station at 7.25 am. It did, however, arrive at Kings Cross at 8.23 am, as recorded in the official account. Although that does not appear to affect anything else in the official account, it is nevertheless an error, which is why I report it to the House. I can understand why this may be of concern to some. I have asked the police, as Members would expect, for a full report on how that discrepancy came about. I will ensure that the official account is amended and will write to the survivors and to the families of the victims on this matter.”

The information about the 7.40am Luton to King's Cross Thameslink train having been cancelled on 7th July 2005 was put into the public domain by J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign in August 2005. Now, over a year on from the publication of the flawed Home Office narrative and the official account is yet to be amended.

By the end of August 2006, after having already acknowledged one major error in the Home Office account of the events, John Reid was forced to write to those directly affected by the events of 7/7 acknowledging another equally egregious error:
Those who attended the Edgware Road meeting believed that there was a possibility of a second error in the Official Account. They said that Mohammed Sidique Khan was by the second set of double doors in the tube carriage at the time of the attack, whereas the Official Account states that Khan was ''most likely near the standing area by the first set of double doors.''

My officials have made enquiries of the Metropolitan Police. The police have confirmed that the wording of the Official Account accurately reflects their initial conclusions following statements they took from witnesses and their early examination of the scene. This shows that the bomb probably exploded near to the first set of doors. But where exactly the bomb exploded has yet to be established. The police are currently awaiting the final report from the Forensic Explosives Laboratory. This will be vital in determining the precise location of the bomb at the time of its detonation.

The wording in the Official Account therefore accurately reflects the police's understanding of the initial examination of the scene. The preface of the Official Account makes it clear that ''the evidence is not yet the full picture'' because it was known at the time of writing that more evidence might emerge from the ongoing police investigation. To date, none of the forensic evidence suggests that the Official Account is incorrect in stating where Khan was ''most likely'' to have been located prior to the explosion. Should the police revise their initial conclusions in the light of further information, an update will be issued.

If it's "probably" indefinite articles you want, the "not fit for purpose" Home Office are "most likely" the people to call.

Needless to say, no further information appears to have come to light. Not about the location of the blast, nor the nature of the explosives used in the attack which to date have not been identified, nor have the explosives allegedly found in the cars at Luton about which the Home Office report states, "One car contained explosive devices of a different and smaller kind from those in the rucksacks." In total, that's two lots of explosives that the official conspiracy theory has thus far failed to identify, the train the accused are alleged to have caught, and the precise location of at least one of the blasts, and still the government endeavours to portray the report as a credible document rather than the insult to everyone's intelligence that it is.

In all these cases the required updates to the Official Account have not been made, nor explanations given, and in the interim John Reid has resigned quietly from his position as Home Secretary, just in case the news were to break in more than a local paper that his nephew was convicted of possessing two deadly weapons in public, but not before suggesting once more than human rights were standing in the way of the State doing whatever it pleases.

As the second anniversary of 7/7 fast approaches, the next Home Secretary is also going to have their work cut out in connection with the government's alleged publication of "all the information that [they] have" about the London bombings.

Quoting from the Home Office Report of the Official Account of the London Bombings on 7th July 2005 which now contains at least two officially acknowledged errors:
There was at the time of the attacks, reports of a “5th bomber”. It was thought, because of witness statements and CCTV, that there was a “5th man” with the group travelling down from Luton. Inquiries showed the individual was a regular commuter and he was eliminated from the inquiry. Also in the period immediately following the attacks, one man was arrested in connection with the investigation but he was released without charge. In subsequent weeks, a further man who had claimed to be the “5th bomber” was also arrested and later charged with wasting police time. There is no intelligence to indicate that there was a fifth or further bombers.

According to the government's official conspiracy of how 7/7 came to be there was no "5th bomber", nor a "5th man" involved, save for Naveed Fiaz (the "one man [who] was arrested") who was arrested shortly after 7/7 when his brother, Ejaz Fiaz (the man originally blamed for the Piccadilly Line incident, something we're all meant to have forgotten by now) was nowhere to be found. Naveed Fiaz was subsequently released without charge and remained the only person to be arrested in connection with 7/7 until Thursday 22nd March 2007. Meanwhile, another "5th bomber" who had been foisted upon the world by the self-proclaimed News of the World was charged with wasting police time in much the same way as the News of the World wastes everyone else's time. The resounding message from all of this is clear, there was no "5th bomber".

So, if there was indeed no "5th bomber" or "5th man" as the official conspiracy theory of 7/7 would have us believe, one might then be tempted to ask what the police are doing rounding up Mohammed Sidique Khan's extended and well-respected family almost two years after 7th July 2005 and repeatedly accusing at least one of them of being the "5th bomber".

Today's Guardian has an Ian Cobain interview with Imran Motala who was recently arrested in a blaze of publicity along with Mohammed Sidique Khan's wife and Motala's cousin, Hasina Patel, and her brother Arshad Patel. All three were released without charge after seven days of questioning about 7/7 while the fourth person arrested during the high-profile early morning raids, Khalid Kaliq, remains in custody.

A few quotes from Ian Cobain's Guardian interview with Imran Motala:

"If I had been the 'fifth bomber', I could have set off an explosion in August 2005,"
"They didn't just think I had with-held information about the bombings, they thought I was involved, that I was to have been the fifth bomber," he said. "They asked me: 'Are you the fifth bomber? Were you meant to be the fifth bomber? Did you bottle out in the end?'"

Mr Motala says police also suspect he was the unidentified male who bought the rucksacks which contained the bombs from a Millets store in Leeds six days before the bombings.
While in custody he learned that he had been under surveillance for a year: he and members of his family had been followed, all of his previous employers had been interviewed, and he strongly suspects that his family home in the Lozells area of Birmingham was bugged when West Midlands police raided the property last year, ostensibly looking for firearms. Despite the lengthy surveillance operation, no evidence was found that would justify charges against him.

When asked about 7/7, Motala replied:
"I said it was a cowardly act, that it did nobody any good, that it ruined many people's lives. I said that my way of fighting against the Iraq war was to join the march which was held in London. Suddenly there were a million and one questions about the war and why I opposed it."

Peaceful protest and terrorism, if you thought there was a difference, you were wrong. Hitting the ground running in his new role as Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, Sir Ian Blair pointed out to early morning TV viewers on Sunday 6th February 2005 that, "I don't think people should distinguish Crime and Terrorism too easily." If the crime is that of having a conscience, the peaceful protest that ensues from having a conscience and acting upon that conscience becomes both a crime and terrorism in one fell swoop. With the suspension of habeus corpus, the presumption of innocence all but annihilated and replaced with trial-by-media, and the almost complete lack of legal recourse to remedy any of this, the likes of the Queen, Tony Blair and all other representatives of the State, whose existence depends on trivialities and cowardly acts like butchering a million Iraqi civilians, Afghanis, and anyone else who happens to be sitting on some black gold, along with bringing prosecutions in this country that could never have been without the State being complicit in entrapment and torturing false confessions from the defendants, aren't kidding when they proclaim that everyone should know "that they will not change our way of life."

Before long Mr Motala was being given sleeping pills each night

When was mandatory drugging of innocent suspects added to the extensive list of crimes perpetrated by the State against the population of the UK? While Mr Motala was being fed sleeping pills during his extended period of detention and questioning, the public have been doped-up for a far longer time on placebos and some considerably more potent tranquilisers.

Luckily for all of us, the effects of all the sedatives are rapidly and irreversably wearing off and a long dormant public is waking up to the extensive list of deceptions and confidence tricks that have been played upon them, as well as all the legal measures and technologies of political control that the State has been putting in place to save itself from the consequences of its own fascistic actions.

Don't despair, sign the petition and organise!

17 May 2007

Brown-NWOsing the Confederation of British Industry

On 15th May 2007 the democratically elected default new President Minister of United KKKingdom PLC, Gordon Brown, gave a speech to the Confederation of British Industry in which he said nothing that had any meaning in the conventional sense of the word.

What he did do however was send a small pernicious and incestuous bunch of criminals a not-very-subtle message of, "Don't worry now that Blair's gone folks, I pledge to serve the same masters."

You can watch Gordon Brown's speech brought to the CBI by hardly more than the three words, "New", "World", and "Order".

Gordon's come a long way since his student days when he penned, "How to scrounge off the State", which included such long-forgotten gems as:

"If you're British and can give an address, free money is available from social security, basic £5.80 per week. Social and medical benefits are your right, not charity hand-outs, so never be reticent about claiming them. For whatever the reason the so-called welfare State was brought into being, it can and must be used to its full extent."

Keep your eyes peeled for Gordon's new book, "How to fuck the British working classes and get handsomely rewarded for it."

Gordon "Watch my left hand and don't ask what the right's doing" Brown

Madeleine McCann

This Madeleine McCann find Maddie thing has caused a bit of a stir, hasn't it? Suspect Paki hits several nails squarely on the head, as does Portugal's Gazeta Digital.
Also, a Sky News special report about Madeleine’s case, broadcasted the same date [May 13, 08:00 pm], had a serious breach of basic ethical standards every journalist must respect. During that special report, Sky News gave a single example of a successful case where the British Police was able to find – alive – a child kidnapped. Immediately after that, it gave a single example of one case of a child missing in Portugal [Rui Pereira] that never was found.

Sky News journalist compared the two situations and the conclusion was that the track record of Portuguese Police was a bad one. This is sheer manipulation. Comparing two singles cases and taking conclusions like Sky News did, is going against basic principles from the Code of Practice enforced by the Press Complaints Office, like the obligation of the Press “not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information, including pictures” and the need to correct it, with due prominence.

I’ll remind you that in UK, according to the UK National Police Missing Persons Bureau, there was an average of 124 unsolved cases of missing children under 14, on the last four years. In Portugal, from the 80 cases of missing persons still open, from a legal point of view [missing for more than one year] only nine are children and one of them is Madeleine.

In 2006, the Instituto de Apoio à Criança (IAC, a government department in charge of monitoring child abuse) registered 31 cases of missing underage (-18 years) persons. 24 of them were found by the police. This is a rate of 77, 43 % of success in finding missing children. Two of them were found to be dead. So let’s put these figures very clear: Portuguese Police has a track record of finding 77, 43 % of missing children, even if 6,45 % of those children were found dead, and 22,58 % are still missing [mainly adolescents running from home]. From those 31 missing children, only 5 [6.45] were between one and five years old.

One kid missing in Portugal, big news. 124 kids missing in the UK and who'd have known if it wasn't for Gazeta Digital?

There is something very wrong with this picture as the UK exports another of its Great British values. Yet who would dare mention the complete abandonment of the McCann's parental responsibilities and the crime of neglect -- leaving toddlers home alone while parents ponce-off for a quiet dinner somewhere -- the crime without which this story and the hysteria that surrounds it would not exist.

An example should be made of both mother and father for their idiotic actions. Both should be locked-up for abandoning their children and the key should be thrown away.

Update 9.7.7: In keeping with the latest developments that appear to place Kate McCann in the frame, here's a minor revision to the above graphic.

The Internet: You've come a long way baby

Picked up at John B's gaff.

Sharing - The New Economy of Community.

13 May 2007

NIN's Trent Reznor finds no more Happiness In Slavery

Long time readers of Anything that defies my sense of reason.... will be aware of one or two instances where the The Antagonist has taken more than a little pleasure watching the music, video and media oligopolies condemn themselves slowly and painfully to the annals of history through their reluctance and outright refusal to adapt to the way the world happens to be. Only a correct analysis of and adaptation to the material conditions of existence will result in the survival of any organism and time after time media organisations have failed to evolve, even though some of the temporary solutions are obvious.

Nine Inch Nails frontman and driving force Trent Reznor today struck out at the march of the pigs, the march of the corporate capitalist media pigs, who continue to exploit music makers and music lovers still gullible enough to regard a dollar's worth of plastic to be worth paying twenty to thirty times that.

Here's Trent Reznor on the subject:
Posted on [05_13_2007]

As the climate grows more and more desperate for record labels, their answer to their mostly self-inflicted wounds seems to be to screw the consumer over even more. A couple of examples that quickly come to mind:

* The ABSURD retail pricing of Year Zero in Australia. Shame on you, UMG. Year Zero is selling for $34.99 Australian dollars ($29.10 US). No wonder people steal music. Avril Lavigne's record in the same store was $21.99 ($18.21 US).

By the way, when I asked a label rep about this his response was: "It's because we know you have a real core audience that will pay whatever it costs when you put something out - you know, true fans. It's the pop stuff we have to discount to get people to buy."

So... I guess as a reward for being a "true fan" you get ripped off.

Not good for the fans, not good for the artists, and yet another nail in the coffin of the media oligopolies that can now count both music fans and music makers on their list of enemies.

Herr Doktor John Reid's making the news in order not to make the news

After deciding that doubling (not 'splitting') Home Office resources was going to take two and half years, a defiant Herr Doktor John Reid announced at the end of January this year, 'I won't quit'. Less than four months later, last Sunday in fact, Herr Doktor Reid of the eternally 'not fit for purpose' Home Office announced that he would resign from the government within weeks, citing a bunch of traditionally lame, pat excuses for his departure.

That, superficially at least, is the beginning and end of the story. Except, as with most things behind the mendacious, mass-murdering State -- currently continuing to be led by Tony Blair, who should have been hung for his war crimes a long time ago and who still hasn't fucked off even after delivering a speech of which Adolf Hitler himself would have been proud -- there's always at least one story behind the story that makes its way into the headlines.

So what is the real story as Herr Doktor John Reid slips out of the Home Office after doubling it into the Department of Constitutional Affairs and a Ministry of Justice?

Justice, as anyone with any experience of the State's rule of law that purports to deliver it, is not something that is meted out very often, if at all. Just ask Harry Roberts (11 years in jail without charge or even knowing why he's still being held) or, if your memory doesn't stretch that far back, Dhiren Barot or the Crevice 5 who themselves have just joined the ranks of the Guildford 4, Birmingham 6, Maguire 7 amongst many, many others. See here and here. There is, however, a major difference between the alleged Irish terrorists that weren't and the alleged Muslim terrorists that weren't. Ignoring for a moment the travesties and miscarriages of justice they represent, at least with the Birmingham 6, Guildford 4, Maguire 7, and various other alleged Irish terrorists who were entirely innocent of the charges against them, crimes had been committed for which somebody had been charged. That real terrorist crimes had been committed for which innocent people were jailed should, although doesn't very often, lead to the asking of the question: If those charged, tried, convicted and jailed for real terrorist crimes that happened weren't the people responsible, where are the true perpetrators of those attacks?

Maybe someone should ask the new Head of MI5, Jonathan Evans, or maybe even Sir John Stevens under whose watch the Crevice 7 were watched and arrested and who said it was a case of "when not if" London was attacked by terrorists.

The crime of the 'new normal' is that of Thought Crime so you best all get a thinking cap on your head while its still free from 7 bullets.

But back to the point of this post which was the real story, a mini-scandal in the making, behind Herr Doktor Reid's resignation, the story that you won't read about Reid in many places, no doubt because all the dead-trees are observing voluntary D-notices about the matter. What might it be? Here's the story, in full, just in case it disappears from its source, as such things have a habit of doing:

John Reid’s nephew is fined over weapons

THE teenage nephew of Home Secretary John Reid has walked free from court after being convicted of possessing two deadly weapons in public.

John McGowan had been caught by police concealing a telescopic metal baton and a craft knife.

The 18-year-old from Airdrie, Lanarkshire, stood timidly in the dock at the town's sheriff court as he was fined a total of £400.

McGowan, an apprentice joiner, of "Kinkell", Drumbathie Road, was stopped and searched by police following an incident in Hallcraig Street, Airdrie, last month.

Fiscal Depute Agnes Meek told the court how McGowan had been attending an 18th birthday bash in the nearby Caritas Club.

The prosecutor said there had been "trouble" at the party on April 15 - which didn't involve McGowan - that was serious enough for the police to be called.

McGowan was one of several people searched by uniformed officers in Hallcraig Street and was found to be concealing the baton in his sock.

When they searched his car they found the knife, which had a blade attached.

The court also heard McGowan, whose father is a company director and one of his sisters a law student, was a first offender.

McGowan had pleaded guilty to both offences when he appeared at the custody court the day after the party.

At that appearance Sheriff Carole Cunningham had released him on bail.

But she also called for a social enquiry report, as well as a community service assessment and a restriction of liberty order assessment on the youth.

Defence lawyer Con McAfee told the court McGowan had found the baton in the car park, and that the knife was a tool for repair work he'd been doing.

He said: "He had been doing some work for his grandmother earlier in the evening, repairing her bath. He forgot he still had the knife with him."

Yesterday Sheriff John C Morris fined McGowan £300 for possession of the baton and a further £100 for possession of the craft knife. He was ordered to pay the total fine at £20 per week.

The irony that the Home Secretary, who has made one of his core businesses imposing control orders and ASBOs on ordinary members of the general public, can't even keep his own fucking family in order, is not lost on anyone.

Giuliani (Criminal) Partners LLC - honour amongst thieves and pederasts

Are some strands of the American media finally finding their balls again after the 9/11 mass-emasculation event almost six years ago?

The Washington Post today makes a token effort, posing briefly as 'terrorists' with well-founded interests in the covert activities of unnacountable private tyrannies, specifically the unaccountable private tyranny that is Giuliani (Criminal) Partners -- an interest in private enterprise which is a big no-no in the UK too thanks to 'anti-terrorist' (read: anti-anti-fascist) laws.

On Dec. 7, 2001, nearly three months after the terrorist attack that had made him a national hero and a little over three weeks before he would leave office, New York Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani took the first official step toward making himself rich.
Over the next five years, Giuliani Partners earned more than $100 million, according to a knowledgeable source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the firm's financial information is private.
Famously loyal, Giuliani chose as his partners longtime associates, including a former police commissioner later convicted of corruption, a former FBI executive who admitted taking artifacts from Ground Zero [Pasquale J. D'Amuro] and a former Roman Catholic priest accused of covering up sexual abuse in the church [Alan Placa].

Of course, that's not the sort of thing that anyone would want to publicise, so how did Giuliani -- New York's 9/11 mayor who didn't head for his specially designed emergency bunker in WTC7 on 9/11 and who just happened to find himself in London for a conference on 7/7 -- do it without incurring the wrath of New York's Conflicts of Interest Board? Easy! Set the firm up without the cast of nasties, then wheel 'em in by the back door.
His initial letter to the city's Conflicts of Interest Board asked permission to begin forming the firm in his final days as mayor with three aides he planned to take with him -- the lawyer Hess, chief counsel Dennison Young Jr. and chief of staff Anthony V. Carbonetti. Two others -- Police Commissioner Bernard B. Kerik and Fire Commissioner Thomas Von Essen -- were not mentioned but later joined the firm as senior vice presidents.
To replace Kerik, Giuliani turned to a respected former FBI executive, Pasquale J. D'Amuro, who had risen through the ranks as one of the bureau's savviest antiterrorism agents to become its third-ranking official. In 2004, a Justice Department inquiry into the controversial removal of souvenirs from the World Trade Center site disclosed that D'Amuro had asked a subordinate to gather half a dozen items from Ground Zero as mementos just weeks after the attacks, and D'Amuro later acknowledged that he kept one piece of granite that he received in June 2003. The FBI took no action against D'Amuro, and he donated his memento to the New York FBI office before retiring.
In 2003, Giuliani also brought into the firm Alan Placa, an old friend who resigned as vice chancellor of the Diocese of Rockville Centre on Long Island a week after being confronted by Newsday with allegations that former parishioners had been abused. The newspaper published portions of a 2003 Suffolk County grand jury report in which accusers said he used his position to stifle complaints of abuse by clergy

Rudi Giuliani also happens to be the very same 2008 Presidential candidate who threatened the American public with a new 9/11 should they dare to endeavour to elect Democrats.

Spin - Footage you were never supposed to see

Don't just see what's on TV, see through it.
Artist Brian Springer spent a year scouring the airwaves with a satellite dish grabbing back channel news feeds not intended for public consumption. The result of his research is SPIN, one of the most insightful films ever made about the mechanics of how television is used as a tool of social control to distort and limit the American public's perception of reality.

Take the time to watch it from beginning to end and you'll never look at TV reporting the same again. Tell your friends about it. This extraordinary film released in the early 1990s is almost completely unknown. Hopefully, the Internet will change that.

Thanks to Sinclair for flagging this up.

09 May 2007

Mrs Mohammad Siddique Khan's fall from grace

The latest news on the trail of the 7/7 London bombings is that of the arrest of Mrs Mohammad Sidique Khan, Hasina Patel.

In coordinated 7am raids by the Metropolitan Police this morning Hasina Patel, 29, of Thornhill Lees, Dewsbury, was arrested along with two West Yorkshire men, her brother 30-year old Arshad Patel and Khalid Khaliq, 34. A fourth man, 22-year-old Imran Motala, was arrested in the Selly Oak area of Birmingham as part of the coordinated raids.

In the space of just a few years the combined forces of the Khan and Patel families appear to have fallen rather a long way from grace. Or have they?

Mohammad Sidique Khan gained notoriety as the alleged ringleader of the alleged 7/7 bombers. He was formerly a teaching assistant in Leeds working for the school's headteacher Sarah Balfour, the wife of Labour MP for Hemsworth Jon Trickett, at the now defunct Hillside Primary School.

In July 2004, three months after the arrests of the Operation Crevice 'terror cell' to which it is alleged that Mohammad Sidique Khan was intimately connected, the same Operation Crevice on the periphery of which Farida Patel's home was noted while Khan was being followed driving his wife's car, Mohammed Sidique Khan was given a tour of the House of Commons by Labour MP Jon Trickett.

Also in July 2004, around the same time as Khan was being given a tour of the House of Commons, his mother-in-law Farida Patel was pictured at a Buckingham Palace garden party with her husband and their daughter Hasina Patel, in tow. The Hasina Patel at the Queen's garden party in July 2004 is the same Hasina Patel arrested this morning.

Furthermore, 2004 wasn't the first time Farida Patel had been invited to one of the Queen's tea parties. In fact, Farida Patel -- the mother of newly arrested Hasina Patel and the mother-in law of alleged 7/7 ringleader Mohammad Sidique Khan -- made a small piece of history back in 1998 by being the first Asian woman ever to attend a garden party at Buckingham Palace.

So, in July of 2004 the entire Khan family were all in London and all of them had been invited by representatives of the State. At least three of Khan's extended family were invited by the Queen with Mohammad Sidique Khan himself entertained by Labour MP Jon Trickett.

The above information was compiled by J7 researchers as part of the ongoing 7/7 investigation being conducted by J7: July 7th Truth Campaign. The information was compiled in a similarly concise format to that in which it appears above only days ago and, as if by magic, the 2004 guest of the Queen, daughter of the 1998 and 2004 guest of the Queen, and the wife of Jon Trickett's guest at the House of Commons, has just been arrested, despite it being 22 months since the events of 7th July 2005 happened.

And, of course no 'intelligence' authorities or the police knew anything about any of this even though they had followed Hasina Patel's car to Farida Patel's house when it was driven there by Mohammed Sidique Khan.

With all of these facts being a little too close to home, is it any wonder the State doesn't want an inquiry into the events of 7/7, even under the nobbled legislative framework of the Inquiries Act 2005 which legally requires all inquiries to be neither public nor independent?

Update: Thanks to Anonymous for the following information about Farida Patel's connections to the State that passed the Inquiries Act 2005 and still refuses a public inquiry into 7/7:
Her [Farida Patel] community work also led to an invitation to Downing Street, where she received an award for her work for the Inner City Religious Council at a ceremony in 1999, hosted by Tony Blair. The local newspaper says she "rubbed shoulders" on that occasion with the Queen, the Duke of Edinburgh, Prince Charles and former Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Paul Condon.


Mrs Patel, who taught at Dewsbury's Birkdale High School until two years ago and served on the local police forum, added: "I am very well known in the Asian parts of Dewsbury and police often come to my house for advice."

Update 2: ".... it has emerged that [Farida] Patel was a co-opted member of the British government's council of religious leaders from 1996 until 2000. || Patel, who is in her late fifties, was born in Germiston as the daughter of Ismail Patel, an anti-apartheid activist who died in 1973 after he had been under house arrest for 10 years."

06 May 2007

Any answers?

No answers, but certainly a lot of questions even though Jonathan Dimbleby doesn't like them, as demonstrated by his defence of well documented examples of British State terrorism in Ireland. Enter stage right, Jonathan Evans, the new head of MI5 who cut his State-terror teeth just across the water.

Thanks to Postman for picking up the call to Radio 4 that the best efforts of the BBC didn't manage to screen and prevent from airing, and to Stef for putting words and pictures together.

Tom Griffin ties it all together with a few pertinent points about the Inquiries Act 2005, State terrorism in Ireland and the renewed calls by various groups for a public inquiry into 7/7.

Meanwhile, the media consensus manipulation machine, in collusion with individuals, groups and organisations, complete with kow-towing bloggers-a-plenty -- shame on them one and all -- are still calling for a public inquiry into the events of 7th July 2005, while either ignoring, being ignorant of, or simply refusing to address, the issue of the flawed, limiting and inadequate legislative framework imposed by the Inquiries Act 2005, despite the best and continuing efforts of J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign.

Once again, under the Inquiries Act 2005, there can be no such thing as an 'independent' or 'public' inquiry so all the combined forces calling for one and who refuse to acknowledge the Inquiries Act 2005 are, without any shadow of a doubt, wasting their, and everyone else's time.

01 May 2007

Operation Crevice trial ends and the cracks are showing

Below is a transcript of Imran Khan's statement on behalf of the 5 (of 7) patsies men convicted in the Crevice trial:

I'm giving this statement on behalf of those defendants convicted today, that is Omar Khyam, Anthony Garcia, Waheed Mahmood, Jawad Akbar, and Salahuddin Amin. These are their words that they wish me to read out:

In the name of Allah the merciful, the compassionate, we bear witness there is nothing worthy of worship except Allah, and Mohammed as his messenger.

This was a prosecution driven by the security services, able to hide behind a cloak of secrecy, and eager to obtain ever greater resources and power to encroach on individual rights.

There was no limit to the money, resources and underhand strategies that were used to secure convictions in this case.

This case was brought in an atmosphere of hostility against Muslims, at home, and abroad. One stoked by this government throughout the course of this case.

This prosecution involved extensive intrusion upon personal lives, not only ours, but our families and friends.

Coached witnesses were brought forward. Forced confessions were gained through illegal detention, and torture abroad. Threats and intimidation was used to hamper the truth. All with the trial judge seemingly intent to assist the prosecution almost every step of the way.

These were just some of the means used in the desperate effort to convict. Anyone looking impartially at the evidence would realise that there was no conspiracy to cause explosions in the UK, and that we did not pose any threat to the security of this country.

It is not an offence to be young, Muslim and angry at the global injustices against Muslims.

Allah says in the Qur'an, "Oh mankind, worship your Lord who created you, and those before you, that you may become righteous."

And that's the end of the statement. Thank you.
Imran Khan, Nabeel Hussain (acquitted) & Michael Mansfield QC
An MP3 of Imran Khan's statement can be found here, courtesy of J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign.

Those who are more than a little predictably getting all het-up and excited about the revelations-that-aren't of the Crevice trial wouldn't go amiss peering a little deeper into the Crevice before calling for a Public Inquiry into the events of 7th July 2005. They would also do well to understand the -- restrictive-to-the-point-of-futility -- legislative framework the State imposed on public inquiries via the Inquiries Act 2005, a piece of legislation that was affectionately known as the "Public Inquiries Cover-up Bill" and which came into force on 7/6/2005, just in the nick of time. In summary, any Independent Public Inquiry is legally obliged to be neither 'independent', nor 'public' and the scope of its inquiry is determined by the very State into whose self-preserving interests a truly independent public inquiry would legitimately inquire. Simple enough?

As a point of fact, the July 7th Truth Campaign is the only grass-roots organisation to echo the sentiments of the Law Society of England & Wales, Amnesty International and Geraldine Finucane in calling on the judiciary to boycott any inquiry proposed under the terms of the Inquiries Act 2005. If the Inquiries Act 2005 is not fit for the purpose of investigating the killing of a Human Rights lawyer almost 20 years ago, it is most certainly not an acceptable piece of legislation under which to conduct an inquiry into the deaths of 56 people. Sign the petition.

Panorama is to be commended, for once, for venturing close to the brink of of the gaping Crevice chasm, but not for hiding the brief jaunt away among the usual old tosh that passes for investigative journalism these days. In addition to the litany of crimes referred to in Imran Khan's statement on behalf of the five men convicted of having comitted no crime, the State was forced to resort to relying on the testimony of an FBI informant, having the rules of the game of law changed and abandoning all notions of a unanimous verdict.

Desperate times, it seems, call for even more desperate measures and the precedents continue to be set. If it's 'justice' you want, you're increasingly unlikely to get it under a system of 'law'.