Posts
The Spring/Summer 2008 terror season is officially open for business. All the old classics are back with a vengeance. The Spring/Summer 2008 terror season features such old favourites as the much loved but chemically impossible 2006 Lucozade/Tang air 'terror' plot right alongside a 7/7 'terror' trial in which the State is endeavouring to prosecute three men for a sightseeing trip to London.
As Darshna Soni's Channel 4 News piece last year and the public response to it proved, a large majority of the public does not buy the official 7 July 'conspiracy theory' touted by the State, its propagandists, Security Services and a number of private security firms, all of whom are profiting very nicely -- official 'conspiracy theory' 'misery memoir' book deals and all -- from anyone's fears, founded or otherwise. Consequently, the State now appears to be endeavouring to legitimise the illegitimate through the prosecution of three people, Mohammed Shakil, 31, Sadeer Saleem, 27 and Waheed Ali, 24, for visiting landmarks (London Eye, Natural History Museum and London Aquarium, none of which exploded on 7/7) in London.
Neil Flewitt (up the flagpole to see who would salute it) QC, regarding Shakil, Saleem and Ali in the 7/7 'terror' trial case for the prosecution, is reported to have said:
"They were not directly involved in the London bombings in the sense that they were responsible for making or transporting the bombs...."Despite this, the prosecution's case alleges a malicious conspiracy to cause explosions under the Explosive Substances Act 1883:
Prosecutors say that between November 17, 2004 and July 8, 2005, the defendants "unlawfully and maliciously" conspired with the four bombers and others unknown to cause explosions likely to endanger life or cause serious harm and injury.Cleverly, the inclusion of the expression "others unknown" leaves the State with a free reign to bring similar ludicrous charges in future.
The group, all from Beeston, Leeds, deny the single charge under the Explosive Substances Act 1883.
So desperate is the State for the propagandistic coup of a conviction of someone -- anyone -- for something, -- anything -- in some vague way related to the events of 7th July 2005, as long as they're Muslim, that the jury has been shown exclusive CCTV footage and still images from the day of 7th July 2005. This footage had previously never before been seen by the public, despite endless references to it, and despite three years of continued efforts to obtain the release of CCTV footage and other 'evidence' by J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign.
Confused? That's the idea.
--
Update: According to Associated Newspapers, the picture below is "CCTV footage of Hussain cooly buying a battery form the King's Cross WH Smith minutes before he detonated his bomb" and "CCTV footage of Hussain cooly buying a battery form the King's Cross WH Smith minutes before he detonated his bomb".
--
Update: 14/04/2008 - Day 2 of the "7/7" "terror" show-trial
Latest news from the courtroom featuring the 'magic trick' and 'sleight of hand' of the prosecution has it that the 7/7 accused -- not the people on trial -- ran gaily through packed rush-hour commuter trains as, "The bombers scattered identity and bank cards around the Tube carriages they targeted before placing their rucksacks on the floor and setting off the explosives."
Testing. Testing.
The clever ploy of scattering identification documents far and wide ensured that identification material remained intact, just in case it might ever be needed to bring a prosecution against Muslims for visiting London.
"Although they were damaged to some extent, they [personal materials and documents, such as ID cards relating to the 'bombers'] did not show the damage that would be expected if they were on the body of the bomber or in the rucksack, suggesting that in each case they had been deliberately separated by some distance from the actual explosion."No, no, don't test any longer.
"The bombers were not wearing the rucksacks at the time of the explosions, but had instead put them down on the floor of the bus and Tube trains."In summary: The explosions occurred on the floors of the trains, a detail which has been known for some time, and they occurred "some distance" from the ID which was scattered all over the place 'deliberately separated by some distance" from the explosions.
The case for the prosecution, on the face of the limited reporting that Day 2 of the showtrial received (Channel 4 News didn't touch the story, nor did Newsnight), thus far, bears more resemblance to a case for the defence. Much to look forward to in the coming days as the prosecution has lined up the 'testimony' of supergrass and American prisoner Mohammed Junaid Babar.
--
Update: 15/04/2008 - Day 3 of the "7/7" "terror" show-trial
Get your BBC Age of Terror head on, which is nothing at all to do with at least three 'terror' trials going on in British courts, or the 60th anniversary of Israel's malignant eruption in Palestine. David Miliband suggests we should celebrate Israel's
News from Kingston Crown Court is virtually non-existent today, but....
BBC - 7/7 friend 'had 9/11 photographs': "Waheed Ali, 24, had photographs of the destroyed World Trade Center and the damaged Pentagon on his hard drive".
The damaged Pentagon pictures may have looked something like this. Or any one of these. Download them at your terror trial peril.
Artists impression of what the newly reinforced wing of thePentagon might look like after it was hit by a
Ten bonus points for spotting any plane parts.
Photographs of the destroyed World Trade Center may have looked a little like this. Download it at your terror trial peril. Especially if you have the condiment of mass destruction in your kitchen, black pepper.
World Trade Center tower impersonating a controlled demolotionUpdate: 24/04/2008 - Crevice / 7/7 who's who by another name
Precious little is being reported from the first trial in three years resulting from Sir Ian Blair's "largest criminal inquiry in English history", ignoring for now the testimony from U.S. prison provided by FBI supergrass, Mohammad Junaid Babar and the conclusive proof of guilt provided by undercover surveillance footage of men walking past a kebab shop and a photo of the inside of Omar Khyam's bedsit. "Reporting restrictions" imposed by the State are the reason for the dire lack of coverage because, if the fullness of the events were to be reported, people's minds would boggle that a prosecution was even being brought.
So, instead, for research purposes and anyone following the so-called "7/7 trial", here are the handles of various people ensnared by the crack Crevice sting, many of whom feature in the "7/7 trial", even though you might not have known it until now. Courtesy of J7 and S over at Eco Postie:
- "Abdul Haleem / Halim" = Kazi Nurur Rahman
- "Abdul Rahman" = Anthony Garcia
- "Abdul Waheed" = Waheed Mahmood (Also known as Abdul, Esmail or Javed)
- "Ausman" = Omar Khyam
- "Azhar", previously referred to as 'Unidentified male 3' = Azhar Shazad Khan, the brother-in-law of "Ausman" / Omar Khyam.
- "Hamza" = Jawad Akbar (cousin of Nabeel Hussain, found not guilty)
- "Imran" = Zeeshan Siddique
- "Ibrahim" = Mohammed Siddique Khan
- "Khalid" = Salahuddin Amin (tortured in Pakistan while British authorities turned a blind eye)
19 comments:
I think these trials are staged at this specific time to try and get support for the passing of the 42 day detention.
I also think the photos weren't released because they've been manipulated. It's quite normal for government agencies to fabricate and amend evidence in trials.
Blairwatch are playing the conspira-racist card and attempting to implicate J7T with holocaust deniers. I must have touched a nerve with this comment as they replaced it with 'conspiraloonery deleted':
Ah, the good old 'guilt by association' card, NK is a 9/11er ergo J7T must be associated with his views?
If any of you would like to actually check the July 7th Truth Campaign website and forum and tell me exactly what we are supposed to distance ourselves from? Do I demand that you distance yourself from Nick Griffin or deduce you must all be rabid, right-wing racists because you agree on the causes of 7/7?:
"Obviously Islamic terrorists carried out the attacks......... a Government which took us into an illegal war in Iraq that turned us all into targets..... has allowed Islamic extremists to preach in mosques in Britain and use them to recruit people to their cause."
Thanks for a copy of the comment, Bridget, much appreciated.
It looks very much like Blairwatch are indulging in the same sort of historical revisionism that they apparently so revile.
I wouldn't be so hasty condemning commentators over at that Blairwatch site
The primary concern of people associated with a sceptical 7/7 'Truth' site really should be to spend their time denying allegations that they are associated with neo Nazis and maybe paedophiles as well - they should NOT getting in a tizz about less important stuff such as questions arising from the official 7/7 narrative and the implications for all our futures
@anon
I really don't think anyone needs to bother with editing any pictures
Given that it is possible to announce that the ID and bombs of alleged suicide bombers weren't even on their persons when the bombs went off and to convict people for possession of the most innocuous items, with hardly anyone batting an eyelid, why should anyone be arsed to doctor any photos or other evidence?
if you can control the media you have the potential to get away with murder, quite literally
I've just read over at the Blairwatch site that J7T activism is synonymous with Holocaust Denial but that all the real action takes place in private parts of the forum
Where would they be exactly and how can I get access?
I've been able to locate the sections on stalking children, cruelty to small furry animals and cannibalism but the Revisionist stuff is proving to be stubbornly elusive
It's all here: Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies.
At the same time that she is attacking holocaust deniers Rachel "North" claims the holocaust is a lie. Rachel said:
"He, and others like him are active in disseminating not only the lie of the Holocaust..."
whilst I appreciate how much an entertaining diversion ad hominems, straw men, adherence to Godwin's Law and all those other games that often pass for discussion on the Internet can be I must confess that I don't entirely understand why anyone should take give a toss about what commentator(s) on the Blairwatch site say
having said that, reading through what appears to be a parody thread where people are repeatedly accused of not answering questions, only to have their responses repeatedly deleted is quite amusing
...if I were discussing that BW thread with grown ups I'd ask them to demonstrate what intrinsic and unique link between Holocaust Denial and 7/7 activism has been proven by their scoop
because if there were it would be a valid subject for discussion and maybe even action
However, I have no doubt that as well as dabbling in 7/7 truth, some holocaust deniers probably support Arsenal, own a Celine Dion CD or drink lager
So bloody what?
of course, I would post my comments over there but there's a good chance they'd be deleted on the basis that I am Nazi filth so I truly, truly cannot be arsed
You have to love the logic behind the Blairwatch admins.
Quarsan says, "He [Nick Kollerstrom] has commented on Blairwatch, using astro3 and giving his website as... any guesses, people? Yes, Bridget Dunne's site! What's to debate?"
By the same token, this commment here has been left by someone using the name Nazi Apologist who gives their web site as.... any guesses, people? Yes, Quarsan's Blairwatch web site. Blairwatch are Nazi Apologists. What's to debate?
What worries me is the effect o the Tourist trade - probbly sufficient that they need some subsidies before the season starts.
With the US$ declining like Derby in the premiershit Div against the Euro who would want to travel over here from Washington ?
who would want to travel over here from Washington ?
Hopefully no more than already have done and commandeered public services, news agendas and the rest of it.
Just in case this comment doesn't appear on Blairwatch:
It was my mistake to trust that I could leave a comment on Blairwatch with the intention of pointing out that so-called 'holocaust deniers' exist amongst those that disbelieve and believe the Official Conspiracy Theory of what happened on 7/7. Pointing out that the left's Iraq 'blowback' explanation for 7/7 is precisely the same Iraq 'blowback' explanation of 7/7 spewed by the neo-Nazi's of Nick Griffin's BNP was no doubt an uncomfortable truth, but it is a truism that cannot be denied.
The intention behind my original comment was to prompt an open and reasoned debate about a statement made by Quarsan: “One fact that keeps cropping up is the links between these self-professed truthers and Holocaust deniers and Nazi apologists”. As the original Blairwatch article has been revised a number of times (historical revisionism, anyone?) and now includes a smear against myself and the July 7th Truth Campaign, I hope Blairwatch will allow me to make these final points on the subject:
As anyone following the story of 7/7 may know, J7 was approached last year by the BBC's Conspiracy Files and asked to participate in the making of an episode about 7/7, scheduled to be aired this summer. J7 refused to participate in the programme and published a lengthy and detailed response to the BBC for all to read. It clearly outlined why J7 as a group, nor any member of the July 7th Truth Campaign, would be participating in this programme.
Nick Kollerstrom, who seems to concern himself principally with the the story of 9/11, is working with the BBC on the same 7/7 Conspiracy Files programme that J7 refused. Perhaps it is just a curious coincidence of timing between Nick Kollerstrom's collaboration with the BBC and attempts to link either myself and J7 with holocaust deniers and Nazi apologists.
Regarding the misleading statements made about private areas of our forum, as a geographically diverse group we of course have member-only areas and editorial areas in which the content for our web site is developed. As I pointed out in a comment that was later to be disingenuously misquoted by Quarsan, we do not have private areas for the discussion of the holocaust, UFOs, lizards, etc. Neither do we have any control over who links to our web site or who uses our website address as a link from their username.
J7 is a serious political campaign for the truth, as evidenced by our website and the fact that our continuing research has twice forced the government to amend their insulting 'narrative'.
The latest efforts to distract from the issues at hand do not surprise me in the least. Upon invitation to check the J7 website for any mentions of holocaust denial, the response was that this was not possible due to the site having ‘hidden areas’. There are no ‘hidden areas’ on the J7 website; the author was clearly and wilfully attempting to deceive by referring to the J7 discussion forum as the J7 site. If a discussion forum exists on the internet that does not have administration/editorial areas then I’d like to hear about it, since every other internet forum I am aware of has – and makes full use of – such facilities.
To make such a rudimentary message board feature into some sinister conspiracy theory makes me wonder, to be honest, how seriously the authors of these comments expect to be taken with them. As for the suggestion that because J7 asks for openness and truthfulness from the government that has been proven to lie on countless occasions about similar issues to those about which J7 campaigns, then we should never have a private conversation amongst ourselves, ever, I am left to conclude that it must have been an attempt at a joke.
If not, the implication in such a claim is that J7 must ask in return, that if people want to use a perfectly widespread and customary feature of discussion forums to use as yet another attempt to abuse and discredit the J7 campaign, that such people should also never have private discussions either and if they want us to take them seriously, show us, for instance, the contents of their email inboxes and their deleted blog comments.
I am not interested in what people say in private, because unlike the government and its apologists; I value the privacy and civil liberties of all. This is why I am involved in a campaign for truth and justice regarding an event which has been used on numerous occasions to provide justification for the removal of such fundamental rights. I believe one of the most basic issues to address, if one is to campaign against the loss of such rights, is to discover as many facts as possible about the event which was instrumental in their removal.
When serious miscarriages of justice regarding those accused of such crimes have occurred in the past, it does make it extremely difficult to deny that there is every justification for campaigns such as J7. I have no doubt that before the Guildford Four were exonerated, for instance, campaigners for the truth regarding the Guildford bombings were treated with the same contempt and subjected to the same kind of obscenities that J7 withstand on a regular basis. I would be very surprised if they had not. When I see the increasing, almost frenzied, attempts to discredit the J7 campaign, this is what I bear in mind.
There was a time when I would have tried to ask the detractors themselves why they go to such lengths to skew the questions that J7 asks, while at the same time paradoxically dismissing us as unimportant figures of ridicule - but based on the experience of seeing to what disingenuous levels they’ve been prepared to sink, I’d clearly be wasting my energy and to be perfectly honest, have no desire to associate with such people. I doubt they can even see the irony in their approach. Strange that J7 is accused of a lack of integrity yet I can’t remember any occasion where, upon disagreeing with anyone’s view, we’d pretend it had never been expressed in the first place, or - even worse - replaced it with an abusive comment of our own. Personally, I am not so frightened of having my views challenged that I’d ever adopt the kind of tactics that derogate from Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, highlighted in the manifesto on the top left hand side of this very blog in which I am writing this comment now. This blog, whose author has always had the guts to debate his posts rather than attempt to throw them over the event horizon.
I seemed to have missed the party.
The house has been trashed, all the ganja's has been smoked, the matress is already... (lets not go there) and noone's around, yet here I come, chicken fancy dress clutching a bottle of sparking lemonade intent of passing it off as a bottle of Asti Spumani.
Oh well... Time for a hamlet.
very nicely put, and done, all
blaironholidaywatch seem to have hoisted themselves on their own revisionist petard, pity, they seemed so relevant and without limitations before that minor cock up
Oh well... Time for a hamlet
I wouldn't feel too disappointed. I suspect they'll be plenty more similar parties organised in the future
Post a Comment