Can you tell what it is yet? [1984 Version]

Factoring this trusty little quote from the MoD in to the equation:

The Middle Class Proletariat

The middle classes could become a revolutionary class, taking the role envisaged for the proletariat by Marx. The globalization of labour markets and reducing levels of national welfare provision and employment could reduce peoples’ attachment to particular states. The growing gap between themselves and a small number of highly visible super-rich individuals might fuel disillusion with meritocracy, while the growing urban under-classes are likely to pose an increasing threat to social order and stability, as the burden of acquired debt and the failure of pension provision begins to bite. Faced by these twin challenges, the world’s middle-classes might unite, using access to knowledge, resources and skills to shape transnational processes in their own class interest.

Who would ever suspect that the story behind a nice gentle headline such as NUS starts campaign to oust leading Lib Dems might contain a confirmation of the State's virtually tacit declaration of war on anyone with half a conscience? Probably not many - but it does.

As police face continued criticism for failing to control the march, the Observer has learned that defence firms are working closely with UK armed forces and contemplating a "militarisation" strategy to counter the threat of civil disorder.

The trade group representing the military and security industry says firms are in negotiation with senior officers over possible orders for armoured vehicles, body scanners and better surveillance equipment.

The move coincides with government-backed attempts to introduce the use of unmanned spy drones throughout UK airspace, facilitating an expansion of covert surveillance that could provide intelligence on future demonstrations.

Derek Marshall, of the trade body Aerospace, Defence and Security (ADS), said that such drones could eventually replace police helicopters.

He added that military manufacturers had discussed police procurement policies with the government, as forces look to counter an identified threat of civil disobedience from political extremists.

Meanwhile police sources say they have detected an increase in the criminal intentions of political extremists and are monitoring "extreme leftwing activity" in light of last week's student protest.

The office of the National Co-ordinator for Domestic Extremism (NCDE) said it was feeding information to Scotland Yard's National Public Order Intelligence Unit, which holds a database of protest groups. NCDE, which in turn works closely with the Confidential Intelligence Unit that monitors political groups throughout the UK, said it had already recorded a rise in politically motivated disorder.

- The Guardian

Delightful to learn that these private military corporations have identified the general public as their new targets, an added bonus that State officials think so too. More wonderful still to learn of the rapidity with which "senior officers", such as the lovely fellows of the Association of Chief Police Officers, have tendered a sympathetic ear or two.

The police even shut down a web site -- which sort of backfired somewhat, what with the Internet being the way it is for now -- but it's very important everyone remembers that censorship only takes place in China or Iran, and probably Somalia too. That'd never happen here.

Not long ago, you'd have been a 'conspiracy theorist' if you thought there was the remotest possibility of the State censoring web sites or arming itself in earnest against the people that happen to live under its jurisdication.

It might be fascism, but is it still a 'conspiracy theory'?

Another miscarriage of justice averted by brave jury: Alleged "7/7 helpers" cleared and found Not Guilty

From J7....

"Injustice upon injustice, many others in a similar position || have not been so lucky."

-- Lawyer, Imran Khan

The second trial of the so-called "7/7 helpers" reached its conclusion today. Waheed Ali, 25, Sadeer Saleem, 28, and Mohammed Shakil, 32, were all cleared of the charges of assisting in 7/7 at Kingston Crown Court. After nearly seven days of deliberation a jury of seven men and five women cleared the 3 accused of helping to plan the events of 7th July 2005.

The not guilty verdict comes as little surprise given the QC for the prosecution, Neil Flewitt, was reduced to admitting that the case centred on purely circumstantial evidence, circumstantial evidence which he alleged created a compelling picture of guilt. Aside from perhaps wondering when circumstantial evidence suddenly become "a compelling picture of guilt", the brave jury appears to have thought the "compelling picture" was far from conclusive.

The prosecution failed to do so much as produce CCTV footage which purported to show the three men on the alleged "hostile reconnaissance mission" and, furthermore, no proof, nor even any evidence, was produced to support the notion that the accused had even been on the underground during the sightseeing visit to London.

Andy Hayman, the former Deputy Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police -- who was forced to resign from his senior position with the police ranks after various improprieties came to light about his claiming large amounts of cash in expenses for trips abroad with a woman police sergeant -- said:

"The end of this trial probably represents the last throw of the dice for the police investigation into 7/7. It is extremely frustrating to reach this milestone knowing that people who aided and abetted the murders of 52 innocent people remain at large. || But at the end of that investigation the evidence that could be put before the court was largely circumstantial. That was the only evidence that was found because, perhaps, that was the only evidence there was to be found."

A report on the verdict by the BBC suggests that the decision "raises questions about the evidence gathered in one of the largest investigations ever run by Scotland Yard." In the almost four years that have passed since 7/7, the State has touted a factually inaccurate and twice amended Official Report issued by the Home Office, questionable investigative tactics by the police, and a prosecution brought by the Crown Prosecution Service on the basis of what was known to be purely circumstantial evidence.

Following the verdicts lawyer Imran Khan issued a statement on behalf of Sadeer Saleem, calling for an inquiry into why the prosecution was brought. J7 fully support Sadeer Saleem's call for an inquiry into why this prosecution was brought. Video below courtesy of the BBC.

J7 also fully supports the demand by the bereaved for fully open and public inquests for the victims to be held immediately, before the new Coroners and Justice bill passes through Parliament.

Reporting restrictions that were imposed on the trial have now been lifted and J7 expect further information to be revealed about the trial proceedings, the events alleged to have occurred on 7/7, and the wealth of links and interconnections between various alleged terror plots and individuals.

When considered in conjunction with the lies told in the ongoing attempts to cover up the hitherto unknown truth about various events in July 2005, including 7/7, 21/7 and the murder of Jean Charles de Menezes, today's verdict raises yet more questions about the behaviour of the government, police and 'security' services. More recently we have witnessed: The rioting police brutality tactics that led to the death of Ian Tomlinson at the London G20 protests, complete with a stream of lies from the police, the IPCC and even the coroners; and the high-profile, armed mass-arrests of 12 Pakistani students against whom the most compelling piece of evidence appeared to be a bag of sugar, all of whom were eventually released without charge and immediately threatened with deportation.

Consequently, one might begin to suspect that the UK has fallen victim to something of a dictatorial State in which any and all members of the general public are guilty, to be held accountable until they can prove themselves innocent, while provably mendacious and guilty public officials are barely even challenged, much less ever justly held to account for their actions.

For updates on the verdict as they happen, please see the J7 People's Investigation Forum thread.

J7 again reiterates its call for an independent public inquiry, to be held outside of the remit of the shameful Inquiries Act 2005, and once again calls on the government and police to Release the Evidence which they continue to claim provides "a compelling picture of guilt" for those that stand accused of being responsible for the events of 7th July 2005.

Please show your support for J7's campaign for truth and justice and sign the J7 Release The Evidence petition.

Onwards.

6w:42d:1008h:60480m:3628800s

"I find it strange that people in the UK are arguing today whether it is humane to detain someone without charge beyond 28 days, e.g. up to 42 days, when I have already been detained without charge for nearly four years.

Such debates are smokescreens to hide the real injustices that are happening in Britain today."

-- Babar Ahmad,
Britain’s longest detained-without-charge detainee

David 'Double-tap' Davis caused something of a stir when he resigned his position as MP following the House of Common Criminals' vote on Secret Inquests, Inquiries and secret jury-less trials. In the cloud-cuckoo land of political, temporal and spiritual mythology, Davis is now Bailiff of Her Majesty's Three Chiltern Hundreds of Stoke, Desborough and Burnham.

In the customary method of political theatrics the Commons Criminals' Counter Terrorism Bill 2008 vote was dressed up as a vote on the benefits, to the State people, of locking people up for 42 days without charge. (Actually, that's slightly incorrect. The State has no plans to lock "people" up, only "terrorists". "Terrorists" aren't "people". Don't ever forget that.) "Terrorists" against whom, the imposition of 42 days detention without charge would suggest, there is no evidence sufficient for the State to bring a successful prosecution, even under the ever more inclusive "anti-terror" laws and increasingly lax evidential demands. Ergo, the requirement to detain people "terrorists" without charge for six weeks. The irony is lost on no one that the "anti-terror" laws are passed by those who preside over all the nuclear technologies, explosives, bombs, machine guns, pistols, chemicals, black pepper, armies, navies, air forces, police, incarceration centres, and so on. Never mind the instruments of imperial global fascism, beware brown-skinned people with CDs they've never looked at, containing information published by the U.S. government.

The practice of locking people up without charge was once known as internment.

"It is no exaggeration to say that at the time of the arrest there was not one shred of admissible evidence against Barot. The arrest was perfectly lawful - there were more than sufficient grounds, but in terms of evidence to put before a court, there was nothing. There then began the race against time to retrieve evidence from the mass of computers and other IT equipment that we seized. It was only at the very end of the permitted period of detention that sufficient evidence was found to justify charges. I know that some in the media were sharpening their pencils, and that if we had been unable to bring charges in that case, there would have been a wave of criticism about the arrests. Barot himself of course eventually pleaded guilty last year and received a 40-year sentence."

– DAC Peter Clarke

Historically, the need for internment has been justified as a means by which the State can pretend to protect its citizens from whichever human or sub-human threats it tells everyone it faces. In recent times internment in its many guises has saved us all from Communists, Anarchists, Jews, Nazis, Italians, blacks and the Irish. More recently, now that its forerunners have served their propagandistic purpose been neutralised, we need internment detention without charge to save us from the impending Muslim caliphate. History contains numerous examples demonstrating the liberal use of internment by States fearing for their legitimacy, credibility, authority, and ultimately their survival. However it is dressed internment is the ideal solution for the purposes of suppressing dissent and grass-roots political opposition organised against ruling class barbarism. Of the first world war Historian Margery West noted about Britain's policy of internment that by 1916, 'the Isle of Man' had become one huge enemy prison camp' and internment arguably seems to the method of choice by which States protect themselves from the consequences of their own actions, with large numbers of people 'disappeared' from circulation in the servitude of ruling class political interests.

During the 'great war' little attempt was made to distinguish civilian from military prisoners. In the great 'war on terror' -- ironically the single biggest coordinated and ongoing series of acts of mass terror ever witnessed, whose self-justifying proof of 'success' is a death toll fast approaching that achieved by the Nazis, there is no distinction between civilian and military prisoners. In the 'war on terror' all captives are military prisoners and Guantanamo has set the Mengeleian standard, a standard that has yet to be destroyed like the cancer that it is.

David Davis, raised by a single-mother on a council estate, as legend has it, may well have been sincere about his stance on 42 days, but it didn't stop him voting for 28 days detention without charge. Nor did it inspire him to do much about the steady creep of fascism during his tenure, except riding the tired old terror ticket gravy train along with just about everyone else. In fact, scratch the newly revealed 'liberal' 'libertarian' David Davis and, lo and behold, you find a traditional Conservative authoritarian fatherless paternalist who would happily lock up your children. For their own good, you understand.

Davis' stunt has resulted in follow your establishment-leader demagogue turning into a follow your establishment-dissenter demagogue, whether it be David Davis, Home Office lawyer Director of Liberty Shami Chakrabarti or any other figure that jumps on the Fast Moving Consumer Good that is the David Davis for Freedom cross-media marketing PR bandwagon.

Of course, everyone would rather have a small part of them which believes that there is a degree of humanity entrenched somewhere in a system that seeks to preserve itself above all else. While the notion of a benevolent 'Nanny State' might save everyone having to think about organising any alternatives for themselves and everyone else, considerable evidence consistently indicates that the contrary is nearer the truth.

If Davis' dissent is fickle fakery - which it is, little more than an apolitical, single issue, populist stunt in which Davis spat the proverbial dummy - then the follow up is precisely what has been delivered: A cross-party coalition of apolitical nothings who think the 'ex' SAS serviceman Basher is a rather nice, freedom-loving chap. Nothing changes but everyone gets a glimmer of the light at the end of the tunnel. Unfortunately, the glimmer being seen is from a light that was turned off a long time ago, owing to financial considerations. Illuminations never come from the crowned.

"All the world is a stage, and all the men and women merely players. They have their exits and entrances; each man in his time plays many parts."

Shakespeare hit the nail firmly on the head and nowhere is it more applicable than the bread and circuses of the political theatre.

If you ignore the socio-political class roots of the origins of the apparent dissent, then Davis has struck a blow for freedom. Which he hasn't.

If there were to be a serious political backlash, it would have to come from the organised masses of the general public in the form of mass-strikes, civil disobedience and inventive ways of surviving despite the best efforts of the State to suppress the backlash. However, if there were to be a serious political backlash from the general public, well, the "anti-terror laws" are all in place to deal with that "grave exceptional terrorist threat" and precedents have been set that allow the State to extra-judicially execute everyone from foreign nationals to nice middle-class legal types. That's what you call "covering all the bases".

So, Davis / Chakrabarti / hysterical world-and-his-hysterical-wife / fight for freedom theatrics aside, the alleged 42-day detention vote has left us with:

• Secret inquests
• Secret inquiries
• Secret jury-less trials
• Lest we forget - 42 days detention without trial, even though Babar Ahmad has been locked up for four years without charge and Harry Roberts is now in his twelfth year of detention without charge, despite having already served a 30-year life-sentence for his crime.

Quoting from the brief Antagonista Manifesto at the top left of this blog:

"When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty."

For anyone to expect that duty of resistance to be presented in any legitimate way from within the system is, at best, naive.

Weekend spot the difference competition

Compare:

7/7 accused 'joined weapons camp'

....

"Zubair [Mr Shakil] fired the Ak-47 and the light machine gun," said [Mohammed Junaid] Babar.

Guilty! String him up! Contrast:

Schoolchildren to be offered weapons training

....

Children at comprehensive schools will be asked to sign up for military drills and weapons training under new plans to improve classroom discipline.

And the moral of the story is?

Abu Izzadeen & Co. convicted

Trevor Brooks, also known as Omar Brooks, but perhaps better known by his 'radical' 'Islamist' handle of Abu Izzadeen, has been found guilty of funding and inciting terrorism at the end of a three and a half month trial. His conviction could see him facing life in prison for daring to speak in a 'free' country that is now more repressive than your average third world dictatorship.

Izzadeen faced trial alongside six other defendants, all of whom were charged with fund-raising contrary to Section 15 (1) of the Terrorism Act 2000. His co-defendants included:

• Abdul Rehman Saleem, 32, convicted of inciting terrorism overseas but cleared of fundraising for terrorists,
• Omar Zaheer, 28, cleared, no verdict reached,
• Abdul Muhid, 24, convicted of the fundraising count
• Shah Jalal Hussain, 25, convicted of fund-raising in absentia having done a bunk, warrant out for arrest,
• Rajib Khan, 29, cleared, no verdict reached, and
• Simon 'Suleaman' Keeler, 36 - Another in the long list of white, British converts to Islam who manages to find their way to the top of the radical Islamist list. Keeler was convicted of the same two charges as Izzadeen and today became the first white British 'Muslim' to be convicted of a 'terrorist' offence. Compare and contrast with Iqra bookshop worker and ex-SBS serviceman Martin 'Abullah' McDaid and James 'Mohammed Yacoub/Yaqub' McLintock, better known as the Tartan Taliban.

Brooks, Saleem, Keeler, Khan and Ibrahim Abdullah Hassan, 25 were also charged with inciting terrorism overseas, contrary to Section 59 (1) (2) (a) of the Terrorism Act 2000. Izzadeen faced a further charge of encouragement of terrorism contrary to Section 1 of the Terrorism Act 2006 on July 2, 2006.

Izzadeen is perhaps most famous for describing the events of 7th July 2005 as "mujahideen activity" which would make people "wake up and smell the coffee." He is also reported as saying that American and UK troops would rape and murder in Iraq which, as we all now know, is in fact the case and adds another two crimes to the long list of war crimes perpetrated in Iraq for which Tony Blair and the State's gang of war criminals -- actual terrorists by deed as opposed to terrorists whose only crime is having a big mouth, or possessing an item of literature -- have yet to be tried.

Izzadeen is widely reported as having 'shot to fame' in September 2006 when he heckled the then Home Secretary Herr Doktor John Reid, right on cue, at an invite-only State propaganda event held at a top secret location in East London. Darcus Howe, writing about Trevor Abu Omar Brooks Izzadeen and the Reid 'incident' in the New Statesman, noted:

“[the] clash was staged by Reid and his cohorts at the Home Office. They organised the meeting, Abu Izzadeen was invited in advance - his performance guaranteed - and the press was alerted to film and report the confrontation.”

Below is a video of the 'altercation' which you are advised to watch closely, specifically noting the protracted (in)actions of the 'security' operatives in red shirts, as well as the actions of the tall, suited, open-shirted man holding a radio who stands by the windows alongside the world's smallest policeman.

For further detail about this incident, Izzadeen and 7/7 as "mujahideen activity" see: If links back to UK or US sources are revealed.

Shortly after Reid and Izzadeen's highly amateur dramatics, ‘Gorgeous’ George Galloway — he who most vocally will not countenance the notion of any ‘theory’ that doth possess the remotest whiff of ‘conspiracy’ — wrote an open letter to the Home Secretary about what had happened alleging that, “There are only two conceivable explanations as to how this man, at this sensitive time, was allowed to hijack your Potemkin Village performance today.”

Dear Home Secretary,

I have been watching open-mouthed the altercation you have provoked in East London with your ill-judged, patronising and provocative foray into territory you clearly barely understand. There is much that will be said about the child-like - Patricia Hewittesque! - performance you gave your audience. I want to concentrate on the altercation.

The man who harangued you - Abu Izzadine - is a well-known and violent extremist from an organisation your own government has proscribed. Yet he was allowed within punching distance of the British Home Secretary. How ? Why ?

This is the same man who led a group of fanatic thugs in the brief “hostage-taking” of myself and my daughter and several innocent members of the public during a general election meeting last year. This is well known to the Special Branch and senior police officers in East London - the very people in charge of your security today.

This man has appeared on many occasions on television and in the press as a dangerous extremist who has praised the terrorist attacks on July 7th and 9/11. His comments were amongst those adduced in your own government’s case for the proscription of the Al Ghuraba organisation.

There are only two conceivable explanations as to how this man, at this sensitive time, was allowed to hijack your Potemkin Village performance today.

Either our police and security services are so fantastically incompetent that Bin Laden himself might have slipped in to beard you at your podium. Or someone somewhere wanted to engineer precisely this confrontation to show you in a certain light and to portray the Muslims of Britain in the most aggressive violent and extreme way possible, as a justification for the utterly counter-productive policies you are following.

Which is it ?

Because, as you know, I am not a believer in conspiracy theories I am leaning towards the first explanation. If I am right then yet again the Metropolitan Police have proved almost comically incompetent. The sight of a small, slight, helmeted police officer being dwarfed by a giant ranting fanatical thug - talk about a thin blue line! - as all that stood between you and a violent attack will certainly have provided food for thought and encouragement to the country’s enemies. Yet again the justification for continuing in office of Sir Ian Blair must be called into question.

But if I am wrong, and this all turns out to have been some Nixonian “dirty tricks” operation..then of course the questions raised are much more profound and dangerous

I await your response with interest.

Yours sincerely
George Galloway MP

Quite what the outcome of this communication was, is unknown. However, as William Ehrman, Director General (Defence & Intelligence) of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office memorably proclaimed:

"Dealing with Islamist extremism, the messages are more complex, the constituencies we would aim at are more difficult to identify, and greater damage could be done to the overall effort if links back to UK or US sources were revealed."

Without doubt those links back to UK or US sources are being steadily and ever more rapidly revealed for anyone that cares to look, not only in the UK but in Canada, Australia and the U.S. UK instances are being revealed on an almost daily basis, especially for anyone keeping an eye of Spring/Summer 2008 terror season court reports relating to ongoing alleged 'terror' trials.

The Canadian equivalent of 'Islamist extremism', as designed and directed by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and not Muslims, is amply revealed in this excellent video documentary.

For the US equivalent of 'Islamist extremism' in which "links back to UK or US sources were revealed", the latest reference point is the case of the Miami / Liberty City Seven where charges were brought in relation to an alleged plot to attack Chicago's Sears Tower. It transpired that:

The entire situation was concocted by the government. The warehouse was paid for by the FBI, and the defendants moved their operations there at the suggestion of an undercover informant who was also paid by the FBI. The swearing-in ceremony was led by the informant — who at another point also suggested a plan to bomb FBI offices in Miami.

"The case was written, produced and directed by the FBI," defense attorney Albert Levin said in his closing arguments.

Source: Time Magazine

Ehrman and the FCO's much-feared revealing of "links back to UK or US sources" aren't reported directly. There is, however, more than enough publicly available information contained in the world's news reports for anyone with a desire to make sense of the nonsense to start joining the dots and discovering for themselves the hidden hand involvement of State and security services.

Do your own research.

Spring/Summer 2008 Terror Season is Open - Updated!

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.

The group, all from Beeston, Leeds, deny the single charge under the Explosive Substances Act 1883.

Cleverly, the inclusion of the expression "others unknown" leaves the State with a free reign to bring similar ludicrous charges in future.

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 genocidal inception, ongoing apartheid, collective punishment achievements.

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 the
Pentagon might look like after it was hit by a missile plane.
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 demolotion

Update: 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)
  

J7 interviewed on Channel 4 News

"These views can't be dismissed as belonging to a minority fringe of extremists or fantasists."

- Darshna Soni, Channel 4 News

For those that missed it when it aired, J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign recently featured on Channnel 4 news in a report about a specially commissioned Channel 4 survey which showed that 59% of Muslims don't believe the government has told the whole truth about 7/7. The survey of 500 British Muslims, carried out by GFK NOP, found that nearly a quarter don't believe the four men identified as the London bombers were responsible for the attacks and 52% believe that the British security services have "made up" evidence to convict terrorist suspects.

Note: The CCTV footage shown in the video above, which shows three of the alleged perpetrators of 7/7 outside Luton Station, is in fact taken from 28th June 2005, not from the day of 7/7, as shown by the date-stamp in the top left hand corner of the CCTV footage. This footage has repeatedly and rather disingenuously been used by the media in coverage of stories about 7/7 so, as we approach the second anniversary of 7/7, watch out for this little visual deception in the stories that will no doubt materialise in the forthcoming weeks. No CCTV footage from 7/7 has ever been released, nor have any CCTV images showing all four of the accused actually in London on 7/7. In fact, in the only CCTV image ever released that purports to be from 7/7, three of the faces of the individuals in the CCTV frame are completely unidentifiable. See 7/7: The CCTV 'Evidence' deconstructed for further details.

You can read more about the Terror Exercise that was running on 7/7, as mentioned in the Channel 4 News report, here.

While the Channel 4 News survey focused on beliefs among the Muslim community, the J7 group of independent public researchers is comprised almost entirely of non-Muslims and includes people of all races, colours and creeds indicating that conducting such research among the non-Muslim community would be likely to yield similar results.

Indeed the comments submitted by Channel 4 News viewers who saw the piece would seem to further support this. Darshna Soni’s follow up blog makes the point, “But dozens of you pointed out that it isn’t just British Muslims who question the official narrative.”

A few of the non-Muslim commenters who are also sceptical about the official Home Office version of what happened on 7/7 include:

• "Well done Ch4 and thanks for bringing the survey and a number of important issues to the attention of the British public. Do bear in mind many British non-Muslims also question the official version of 7/7."

• “I am white and middle class, and I also think that the government has not told us the truth about 7/7.”

• "Why don't you ask the same question of non-Muslims? i.e. 'do you trust the authorities and the government?' - you might be surprised by the result, as its not only Muslims who no longer believe the Bliar government."

• “Why only ask Muslims about this? It isn’t only Muslims who believe this.”

• "I am a white female atheist and I don't believe the government has told us the whole truth about the 7/7 bombings. I don't believe the conspiracy theories either. So, for this survey you could also have asked Muslims, Sikhs, Christians and atheists what they thought. I'd be prepared to bet that the answer to the question 'has the government told the truth about 7/7' would be broadly similar in all of those."

• “You need to carry out a survey of non-Muslims - you might get a result that is not all that different.”

• “I think you’ll find the majority of non-Muslims living in Britain would give the same answers.”

• "The government and security services lied about weapons of mass destruction, they lied about the reason for the war, and after the shooting of an innocent man on the tube, more lies were told. Is it any wonder that many Muslims do not believe the government?! So do many non-Muslims."

• "I think you have missed the point somewhat, as it is not only a view commonly held among Muslims but also among many English nationals and people around the world."

• "You will find massive support for the Muslim view, and not just from Muslims."

• “You don’t need to look only at the Muslims community to find people (a) believing in conspiracy surrounding that particular event or (b) feeling let down, manipulated and betrayed by their own government.”

Also worth looking at is the list of over 1300 signatories of the J7 RELEASE THE EVIDENCE Petition which, once again, seems to indicate quite clearly that it isn’t just Muslims who don’t believe the government has told the whole truth about 7/7. If you haven't yet signed the J7 RELEASE THE EVIDENCE petition, please do so.

In another piece on the Channel 4 web site, Darshna Soni highlights a few of the more egregious errors and inconsistencies in the official Home Office report, something that hasn’t been done since the Guardian article by Mark Honigsbaum which featured J7 (the J7 response to Mark Honigsbaum's article can be read here).

Darshna Soni's original report can be found on the Channel 4 News web site, Survey: 'government hasn't told truth about 7/7' here. Viewer comments on the piece can be read here and Darshna Soni's follow-up blog is here. See also 7/7 The Conspiracy Theories which explains some of the many anomalies in the official story and another Channel 4 News item Conspiracies and Cover-Ups.

Given the historical and widely accepted history of terrorism on the British mainland, particularly with regard to alleged instances of 'Irish terrorism', it would be unwise not to acknowledge the lessons learned from the cases of the Guildford 4, Birmingham 6, Maguire 7, Danny McNamee and Judith Ward, amongst others. All of these people were convicted of terrorist crimes for politically expedient purposes and served long prison sentences on the basis of State-manufactured evidence and the suppression by the State of evidence that proved their innocence.

The barbaric sentences handed out to five young men in the Crevice trial, based on the evidence of a Supergrass, the likely involvement of at least one intelligence services agent, as well as the use of forced confessions extracted under torture abroad are more recent examples of how similar tactics to those developed in Northern Ireland are now being used against British Muslim subjects, the perceived enemy of the day.

It will be interesting to see if and how Channel 4 follow up the piece.

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
AboutUs: BRITISHOPPRESSION.COM

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

Domain name: BRITISHOPPRESSION.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
GB

Administrative Contact:

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

Technical Contact:

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

Status: Locked

Name Servers:
dns1.name-services.com
dns2.name-services.com
dns3.name-services.com
dns4.name-services.com
dns5.name-services.com

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.

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.

London 7/7: J7 goes historically contextual

For those still labouring under the misapprehension that the quest for truth about the events of 7th July 2005 is little more than a single issue campaign with single-issue politics not underpinned by real politics, the July 7th Truth Campaign have published not one, but two brand new articles dealing not with the specifics of what happened on 7/7 but instead the day itself in its historical context.

First up is, Capitalising on Terror - Who is really destroying our freedoms, an article that looks at how 7/7 has been used as the justification for the imposition of radical, reactionary and Draconian legislation that criminalises everyone as 'terrorists', yet the true story of what happened on 7/7 is still not known.

Given that there is not an official, accurate and coherent account of what happened on 7/7, how it happened and who was responsible for making it happen, only an official and highly flawed 'conspiracy theory', a fresh look needs to taken at the laws and technologies of political control that have been imposed upon an innocent and unsuspecting British public by an authoritarian regime that has legislated itself the right to indiscriminately take life, liberty, worldly goods, chattels and monies:

In less than two years the UK has descended into a police state. Taking photographs of landmarks is now classified as 'terrorist reconnaisance', being caught in possession of a map has been prosecuted as 'having information likely to be useful to a terrorist'. Protesting outside the people's Parliament is now a crime unless the state has first granted permission and you can be arrested for wearing a t-shirt a policeman doesn't like. Your DNA and fingerprints will be taken and stored indefinitely. Everyone from young children to old age pensioners are actively being targeted under anti-terrorist legislation and this legislation is being used to suppress dissent and opposition to the government, its policies and the way it enforces them. Blair has talked of implementing private police forces and police powers have been given to thousands of non-police entities including amongst others traffic wardens, landlords and council officials.

The primary justification, the driving force behind the implementation all new legislation and technologies of political control, is that 7th July 2005 happened according to the official conspiracy theory involving four young British Muslim men who conspired to kill themselves and others.

However, the government has already admitted that there are several critical flaws in the official Home Office report, flaws so crucial to the maintenance of the official story that the Home Office version of events cannot be what happened. So, if as admitted by the government, 7/7 didn't happen as per the Home Office account, there can be no justification for condemning the British public to laws and administration methods of a third-world dictatorship.

Read the full article here: Capitalising on Terror - Who is really destroying our freedoms?

The second J7 article, "The economics of 7/7 and other mysteries of capitalism explained" published today and written specially for the July 7th Truth Campaign by writer, author and journalist, William Bowles, asks the question:

"If a country like the former Soviet Union, armed to the teeth and with the massive resources of the state could not achieve the alleged objective of overthrowing capitalism after seventy-five years, it is reasonable to ask the question, why has the British state embarked on a policy of creating a de facto police state replete with laws which have more than a passing similarity to those passed by both Hitler and Mussolini?"

The article examines how, 'following the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991.... A new climate of fear had to be engineered to justify imperialist wars of conquest'. A new common enemy created behind which Western capitalism could, can and does hide.

Above all therefore, what was needed were actual deeds with corpses and culprits, and what better than four ‘Islamic fundamentalists’ who conveniently perished in the carnage of 7 July 2005.

The contradictions and unanswered questions concerning the events of 7 July, 2005 are addressed elsewhere, suffice to say, there are so many holes in the official story that it’s no wonder the government has resisted all demands for a public inquiry, although if the Hutton Report is any measure of what an inquiry under the Blair government is worth, we would learn little of consequence from one and indeed, it can be argued that ‘public inquiries’ effectively quash further investigations by creating the illusion of an ‘independent investigation’.

Read the full William Bowles article, The economics of 7/7 and other mysteries of capitalism explained, here.

For those with an interest in the detail and specifics of what happened on 7th July 2005, check out the J7 London Bombings Dossier. The 31 page J7 dossier was compiled by former National President of the MSF Union (now Amicus), David Minahan, who in his introduction to the dossier states of his findings:

"I am convinced that there has been a massive cover up and campaign of disinformation about this matter."