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)
  

BBC Conspiracy Files, MI6, Milosovic, 7/7 & Jill Dando

Following yesterday's revelation about the startling similarities between the murder of Dodi Fayed and Lady Diana Spencer and a proposed methodology ascribed to an MI6 assassination plan for Serbian President Milosovic that involved "disorienting Milosovic's chauffeur using a blinding strobe light as the cavalcade passed through one of Geneva's motorway tunnels", BBC2 will shortly be screening (7pm tonight) what they refer to as a 'Conspiracy Files Special' on How Diana Died.

As the High Court jury return a verdict of unlawful killing on the death of Princess Diana, a special programme explores how the conspiracy theories into her death emerged over the past 10 years and grew ever more elaborate.

Whether tonight's Conspiracy Files is merely a re-run of last year's shameful masquerading of what was once known as 'investigative journalism' is unknown but, if nothing else, it does provide an excellent opportunity to republish the response issued to the BBC Conspiracy Files team by J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign following a somewhat underhanded approach last year.

Notably, the Conspiracy Files web site fails to mention the planned episode which purports to address the events of 7th July 2005 but, no doubt, one can expect to see the usual suspects and cast of nasties comprising at least one media and blog darling with a flair for shameless self-promotion and self-publicity, a couple of equally laughable 'experts', a smattering of 9/11 Truthling Campaigners and anyone else whose arms the BBC could twist with the promise of 15 minutes of fame.

For anyone interested in more from the source of the alleged plot to assassinate Slobodan Milosovic, 'ex' MI6er Richard Tomlinson, you may wish to download a PDF copy of his book The Big Breach - From Top Secret to Maximum Security.

Over to J7 for their rejection and rebuttal of the BBC's Conspiracy Files and its flawed, facile and formulaic methodology:

J7 refuse to participate in BBC's Conspiracy Files

Shortly after the second anniversary of 7th July 2005, J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign was contacted by Chris Alcock of the BBC who advised us of plans for a BBC documentary covering the events of 7th July 2005. No detail about the nature of the 'documentary' was provided until five months later, in December 2007, when another BBC employee, Assistant Producer Susan Prichard, advised us by email that the BBC production in question, rather than being a serious documentary effort for which the BBC was once well known, was in fact an episode of BBC2's risible Conspiracy Files series.

For anyone that missed out on the 'privilege' of watching the first four episodes of the Conspiracy Files, previous programmes have covered the events of 11th September 2001, the death of weapons inspector Dr David Kelly, the murder of Dodi Fayed and the Oklahoma bombing. Some episodes of the first Conspiracy Files series are available to view online and links are provided below:

• 10 December, 2006: How Diana Died
• 18 February, 2007: 9/11 (Watch on Google Video | Adrian Connock's rebuttal on Google Video)
• 25 February, 2007: David Kelly (Watch on Google Video)
• 4 March, 2007: Oklahoma Bomb (Watch on Google Video)

Upon learning that our assistance was being requested in connection with the production of an episode of the formulaic Conspiracy Files rather than a serious, honest, open-minded and in-depth documentary that examined the official Home Office account of events -- the original 'conspiracy theory' about what happened -- the lack of evidence to support it, the errors exposed by J7's ongoing research and the numerous anomalies and inconsistencies in the story the government has endeavoured to fob the British public off with in place of a full and independent public inquiry outside of the Inquiries Act 2005, J7 issued a response to the BBC declining to participate in the programme and outlining our reasons for reaching this decision. What follows is a full copy of the J7 response to the BBC request to participate in its Conspiracy Files series. Much of what is written below is equally applicable to other broadcast and print media:

Date:     Wed, 12 Dec 2007
From:     J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
To:       Susan Prichard
Subject:  Re: BBC Documentary

Dear Susan,

As you will be aware, earlier this year, J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign was contacted by Chris Alcock with regard to our participating in a BBC programme, although the programme in question was never identified. We cooperated fully with Chris, providing him with links to further information and avenues of investigation and Chris also took it upon himself to directly contact several of the highly respected authors and academics who have written articles for J7 that are published on our web site. In none of these communications was the nature of the programme in question mentioned, although all those contacted were primed for a possible appearance in a BBC documentary examining the events of 7th July 2005.

It is difficult to express how appalled and disgusted we felt when we learnt, as we did from your email of last week, that the 'documentary' for which Chris Alcock was soliciting participants is in fact an episode of BBC2's risible Conspiracy Files series.

For the sake of clarity, it is worth establishing precisely, according to dictionary definitions, what the term ‘conspiracy theory’ means. While the definition of what a ‘theory’ is requires little or no clarification, in law, for it is under the law which alleged criminals are charged for their crimes, a conspiracy is defined as, “an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act.” Therefore, by the very definition of the term ‘conspiracy theory’ any theory about how the events of 7/7 came to be that involves two or more people making it happen, is in fact a ‘conspiracy theory’. As such, the official government narrative, which is based on four, young, British Muslim men conspiring to kill themselves and others is, technically, by the legal and dictionary definitions of a ‘conspiracy’, a ‘conspiracy theory’. As there has been no due legal process – recall the phrase “innocent until proven guilty” – by which the four accused have had their guilt established beyond reasonable doubt, nor has there been an Independent Public Inquiry held outside of the constraints of the Inquiries Act 2005, the official version of events remains precisely a 'conspiracy theory'.

The July 7th Truth Campaign has never posited an alternative theory of what happened on 7/7, ‘conspiracy theory’ or otherwise. Therefore, the July 7th Truth Campaign cannot be defined, nor dismissed, as ‘conspiracy theorists’ in the traditional, pejorative sense, nor even the legal sense, of the term for the simple reason that, unlike the ‘conspiracy theorists’ which you are no doubt seeking for your programme, we do not promote any alternative ‘conspiracy theory’ about what might have happened that fateful day. Instead, the basis of the July 7th Truth Campaign has, since its inception, been that of endeavouring to uncover real, tangible evidence about the events of 7/7 and to challenge the official government narrative in instances where evidence proves the falsehoods in this narrative.

Furthermore, there exists in the public domain absolutely no evidence to support the Home Office narrative, much less evidence which proves it beyond reasonable doubt. Rather, there is evidence in the public domain that directly contradicts the version of events outlined in the Home Office story, evidence that has twice resulted in the Home Office amending the highly flawed narrative that was ten months in the making. It is worth noting that as a result of these two amendments forced by J7’s questioning, the official Home Office narrative has become more convoluted and even less coherent than it was originally, featuring as it now does, a scenario in which the four accused allegedly don their rucksacks on two separate occasions outside Luton station, once at 0649 and then again at 0714.

The BBC is an organisation funded by the licence-fee paying British public and the State, which itself is funded by the tax-paying British public. The BBC and the State are both public service organisations and, as such, should serve the public who fund their existences. Yet, with regard to the events of 7/7, neither the government nor the BBC can be described to have served the public in any respect, unless promulgating factually inaccurate, unsubstantiated speculations is considered to be a public service. In fact quite the opposite of serving the public has occurred, and both organisations have repeatedly performed a shameful disservice.

The events of 7th July 2005 resulted in the single biggest loss of life in London since the Luftwaffe bombings of the second World War and, in the two and a half years that have passed since, the behemoth that is the BBC has never yet found within itself the resources, time or inclination to address -- with the level of detail, gravitas and import that such an event deserves – precisely what happened on 7th July 2005, how it happened, or who was responsible for making it happen. Further, the BBC has never endeavoured to tackle the many unanswered questions, anomalies and inconsistencies in the official version of events outlined in the Home Office report dealing with the subject, despite the plight of the bereaved families whose questions about their loved ones have yet to be satisfactorily answered, and despite the continued efforts of the July 7th Truth Campaign to analyse the validity, or otherwise as is more often the case, of the official version of events. Where is the BBC programme championing the cause of the bereaved families and assisting them to obtain the truth from the authorities about how their loved ones died? As one bereaved family member summed up when they contacted us by email, “Yes, we do need the truth to come out (personally speaking I don't believe it has yet) but truth is what it has to be for proper closure.” Indeed, the father of 18 year old Hasib Hussain, accused of perpetrating the explosion on the number 30 bus, when doorstepped by a BBC journalist and TV crew, despaired at having never been shown any evidence of his son’s involvement or guilt.

It is beyond comprehension that the BBC is not endeavouring to hold the State to account – a state which is already proven to be mendacious, to have lied about Iraq’s WMD, and that has been complicit in the slaughter of over a million Iraqi civilians -- for its production of a speculative, unsubstantiated and entirely evidence-free 'narrative' that is little more than an egregious insult to the victims, their bereaved relatives, and those who survived the event. That the BBC's approach appears instead to be one that will endeavour to portray the July 7th Truth Campaign, or anyone with perfectly legitimate and unanswered questions to which we all deserve answers, as 'Conspiracy Theorists' is still less comprehensible. This approach is as distasteful as it is abhorrent.

We also noted with extreme interest the following line in your email with regard to your proposed episode of the Conspiracy Files:

"Throughout our focus will be on establishing the evidence and building up as definitive an account as possible of what happened."

To the best of our knowledge, "building up as definitive an account as possible of what happened" on 7/7 is not the function of the BBC, for the task of piecing together the story behind what Sir Ian Blair termed, “the largest criminal inquiry in English history”, is the job of the State in the form of the government and police. If you are indeed interested in building up such an account we can only suggest that you, the bereaved families, the survivors who have been all but forgotten as far as the media is concerned and your viewing public would be far better served by an episode of the Conspiracy Files which features representatives from the government and police who have access to information that has hitherto not been made public. After all, it was the Home Office branch of government that produced the official ‘conspiracy theory’ about what happened on 7th July 2005 in the form of a 'narrative' – a story -- that the July 7th Truth Campaign has proven to be based on information that was neither factual nor truthful.

The July Truth Campaign has been consistently appalled by the fact that, with regard to coverage of anything 7/7 related, the efforts of the BBC have been disingenuous, deceitful and downright dishonest and that no effort has been made to rectify this. There are countless examples where the BBC has, either wittingly or unwittingly, placed misinformation into the public domain, whether this be in ‘news’ items or ‘documentary’ programmes. We outline below a few of the more blatant examples of the BBC’s wilful ignorance of the few facts that are known, or dubious tactics employed:

• Just one week after 7/7, the BBC broadcast an episode of Real Story with Fiona Bruce which gave considerable time to the eye-witness testimony of Richard Jones, an individual who has given many and varied versions of what he claims to have seen aboard the number 30 bus which means that, at best, he is an extremely unreliable witness. Furthermore, none of his accounts bear any relation to Hasib Hussain. The BBC has never revisited the testimony of Richard Jones.
  


• On the afternoon of 7th July 2005 information came to light via BBC Radio Five Live’s Drivetime programme about a private company running a terror rehearsal operation at the time that real explosions were reported to have occurred on the London transport network. This information was revealed by the Managing Director of Visor Consultants, Peter Power who, in his own words, was rehearsing, “simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened.” Since the day of 7/7, the BBC has used Peter Power as an ‘independent’ security consultant with monotonous regularity across its entire broadcast media yet, curiously, he has never been questioned about his activities on the day of 7/7 while strenuously making the case for 90 days internment and how the British people must live in fear of another attack as part of what he calls ‘new normal’. Mr Power has also revealed ‘mock broadcasts’ were used as part of his operation and that, “there was a few seconds when the audience didn't realise whether it was real or not.”. Mr Power also featured in a Panorama programme broadcast in May 2004 in which a fictional attack on the London Underground took place, with three explosions occurring on underground trains, followed by another explosion above ground about an hour later. It was the BBC that put together ‘mock broadcasts’ featuring a bona-fide newsreader, Kirsty Lang, who, no doubt coincidentally, just happened to be the ‘relief presenter’ for BBC World on the day of 7/7. This is an irregularity on a par with the efforts of another BBC World presenter, Jane Standley, who announced on 11th September 2001 that WTC Building 7 had collapsed despite it not being hit by a plane, yet the building could be seen standing proudly in the background of her report before the feed fizzled out. WTC7 Building 7 went on to collapse 23 minutes after Jane Standley’s premonitory collapse report announcing it had already done so. Standley and BBC World’s amazing, prophetic foresight was never mentioned during the 9/11 Conspiracy Files and would have made for far more relevant and compelling viewing than the interview with a writer of the X-Files.
  


• BBC news stories about the events of 7th July 2005 have regularly and shamefully been presented with a backdrop that deceitfully shows footage of three of the accused taken from 28th June 2005, some 9 days before 7/7. The severity of this deception is further amplified by the fact that this footage has often appeared in edited form so that the actual time and date stamps are not visible. The lack of any CCTV footage from the day of 7/7 has never been questioned by the BBC, nor has the fact that, in the one CCTV image allegedly showing all four perpetrators outside Luton station, three of the faces are completely unidentifiable.
  


• On 27 October 2005, a BBC Horizon programme aired, “The 7/7 Bombers – A Psychological Investigation: What makes someone want to blow themselves – and others - up?", featuring forensic psychiatrist Marc Sageman and Dr Andrew Silke, which claimed to offer a psychological profile of the suicide bombers. The programme stated that the accused caught the 0748 train from Luton to King's Cross and that they arrived at King’s Cross at 0826. This was not the case and yet no amendment or apology for the inaccurate version of events outlined in that programme has ever been issued by the BBC. In response to a complaint about these factual inaccuracies, the laughable explanation was that while “re-tracing the journey of the 4 bombers, he [Silke] was not re-enacting it so there are some bits of his journey that do differ from the journey of the bombers.” Quite what the point of re-tracing steps that obviously weren’t taken by the accused remains a mystery. That the train times had been supplied to the programme makers by the Metropolitan Police Specialist Operations office was also worthy of comment and investigation.
  


• There are several documented examples demonstrating the BBC’s guilt in editing stories on the BBC News web site where phrases implying details about the alleged bomber’s journey, such as, “Passengers on the 0748 Thameslink from Luton to King's Cross”, have been edited out, yet the ‘last edited’ date and time has, rather disingenuously, not been updated to reflect these amendments. This is in direct contravention of the Press Complaints Commission guidelines which specify, “A significant inaccuracy, mis-leading statement or distortion once recognised must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence, and - where appropriate - an apology published.”
  


• The BBC, along with the Metropolitan Police, claimed that the explosion on the Piccadilly Line train occurred by the first set of double doors on carriage one. The BBC web page containing this information was accompanied by a graphic showing this as the alleged seat of the explosion. Without any explanation, the BBC then changed this information to say that the explosion occurred by the second set of double doors and the graphic was updated accordingly. Curiously the Metropolitan Police – whom one might think would be the source for such information – have never amended or updated their account of the explosion being by the first set of double doors.
  

While the following information will serve little or no use in the production of an episode of the Conspiracy Files dealing with 7/7, as ‘researchers’ and/or ‘journalists’ you may be interested to note that, while the July 7th Truth Campaign is the only organisation that has been openly and publicly challenging the government on their flawed and inaccurate story of 7/7 since the day the incidents occurred, the government is also being privately challenged by families of the bereaved and survivors with regard to the accuracy of the report. In particular, the government has been taken to task over discrepancies in the alleged locations of the blasts on the underground trains. Another fact that the BBC has failed to investigate is that in August 2006, the then Home Secretary, Dr John Reid, responded that, over a year after the events occurred, a final forensics report had not yet been received.

More recently, after Coroner Dr Andrew Reid sent, unsolicited and without warning in early December, post-mortem reports to the bereaved, at least one family member has noted that there were "fundamental" differences between what they saw when they viewed their son's body and what the post mortem report said. This too has received no further comment or investigation from the BBC.

By way of conclusion to this communication, the magnitude and importance of the events of 7/7 and the repercussions of those events must not be underestimated. The official yet unsubstantiated story has been seared into the public consciousness as the 'first suicide-bombings' on British soil, a concept only trumped by the fact that this also qualifies the official story of 7/7 as the first 'suicide bombings' in the whole of Western Europe. The Home Office narrative of 7/7 is repeatedly used as unquestionable justification by the State and its corporate advisor apparatchiks to institute increasingly repressive legislation, including the widely abused 28 days detention without charge while the authorities struggle to uncover the evidence required to bring charges in a court of law. It wasn’t that long ago evidence was required before arrests were made.

To understand a little more about the wider context of 7/7 and everything that has happened since, one need only look to the words and wisdom of the Ministry of Defence who, on page 81 of a March 2007 report entitled, "The DCDC Global Strategic Trends Programme 2007-2036 (Third Edition)", noted what the State considers to be a core threat in the foreseeable future:

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.

The official story of 7/7 has been used to demonise and dehumanise the Muslim community, in much the same way that the Jewish community was demonised in 1930s Nazi Germany following a similarly questionable and catalysing event, the Reichstag fire, and has proved to be the enabling factor for the rapid and unchallenged institution of more Draconian laws that impose unprecedented restrictions on the civil liberties of everyone. It is worth remembering that the far-reaching scope of the law, "anti-terrorist" or otherwise, is applicable not just to the Muslim community but to each and every one of us and the State has no qualms about using its laws against anyone and everyone from whom it perceives a threat to what State actors refer to as, “our way of life”.

These factors are testimony to just how seriously 7/7 requires honest, principled and open-minded investigation to get to the facts and the truth about what happened. Only the truth will stand up to rigorous investigation and questioning yet, to date, this questioning and investigation has fallen to ordinary members of the public who have taken it upon themselves to do so, ordinary members of the public like J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign.

The July 7th Truth Campaign would be more than happy to participate in any serious programme that honestly examines 7/7 in its correct historical and political context, the government narrative, the lack of evidence to support it, the nonsensical amendments that have been made to the narrative, and the ever increasing list of unanswered questions that engulf the events of 7/7.

However, we do not feel that the Conspiracy Files is the vehicle that will facilitate this, nor will it treat the event or issues arising from it with the level of seriousness that they demand, and nor will it further the cause of the July 7th Truth Campaign’s quest for the truth about what happened on 7th July 2005. As such, the July 7th Truth Campaign has no intention of participating in the proposed episode of the Conspiracy Files and can only hope you will take on board the points we have raised in this communication in consideration of your public service duty to the people of Britain, a people that includes at least 56 families whom, through your continued refusal to honestly address the events of 7/7, you have hitherto failed abysmally.

For truth and justice,
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign

J7 Exclusive: Peter Power's CV Fakery

According to recent figures, approximately half of jobseekers tell lies on their CVs and the figure is up 10% on the results of a similar survey last year. So prevalent is the problem of CV lies that, in January, Channel 4 dumped their TV nanny, Claire Verity - previously accused by viewers of child cruelty, after she failed to prove that she hadn't faked her qualifications.

Following the events in New York on 11th September 2001, one woman, Tania Head, emerged from the debris with a distinctive tale of woe. Ms Head claimed to be on the 96th floor of the south tower when the first 'plane' struck. Her husband, Dave, was apparently on the 100th floor of the north tower. Head claims that the impact of the second 'plane' rendered her unconscious and badly burnt. Her account made her one of only 19 survivors who had been at or above the point of impact when the planes hit. In time, Head became no less than President of the World Trade Centre Survivors' Network.

Shortly after the 6th anniversary of the day that has come to be known as 9/11, the Telegraph announced that Tania Head, like half of all jobseekers, had lied on her CV:

"[For] it emerged yesterday that the big, bubbly lady with the brave smile and the most heart-rending of tales may have invented the entire story. Consciously or unconsciously, disaster victims will sometimes confuse a few details but the enormous question mark hanging over Head is whether she was ever in the Twin Towers at all when the planes struck.

Multiple inconsistencies in her story emerged after the New York Times said it tried to interview her in recent weeks about her experiences to coincide with the sixth anniversary of the attack."

When pressed, a lawyer hired by Ms Head said, "With regard to the veracity of my client's story, neither my client, nor I, have any comment", and the Telegraph article further noted:

"What became clear yesterday was that no one has ever bothered to verify the key details of Head's remarkable WTC story or asked her to elaborate on others...."

When an event of such significance occurs, the verification of key details is of the utmost importance. Yet, as the case of Tania Head amply demonstrates, this verification is not something that mainstream news and media organisations can be trusted to perform, not even with an event often billed as 'the day the world changed'. Consequently, a liar can become the president of a prominent survivors group, despite their story never having been verified by anyone, and with no questions being asked for a good number of years.

On 7th July 2005, London's transport network was rocked by what were reported to be a series of up to seven explosions staggered over the space of an hour. In time the number of explosions was reduced to four, three Underground (as opposed to six) and one on a bus (as opposed to the reports of three exploded buses) and the staggered Underground blast timings became, "almost simultaneous". It was a full two days before the story of staggered blast timings on the Underground morphed into "almost simultaneous" blasts.

Oddly, on the day of 7/7, two men were to introduce bouts of jarring cognitive dissonance into the proceedings.

One of these men was the ex-Chief of Mossad, Efraim Halevi, who published an article on 7th July 2005 in the Jerusalem Post which spoke of, "the multiple, simultaneous explosions that took place today on the London transportation system" with "near pefect execution". How Halevi knew of "multiple, simultaneous explosions" two days before the Metropolitan Police and the companies charged with running London's transportation network is still a mystery. Quite how he knew of the "near perfect execution" is also a mystery.

Another bout of cognitive dissonance came when another man announced on BBC Radio Five Live (MP3) that, at the time of the explosions, he was, "running an exercise" for "a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning". He later confirmed somewhat dismissively of his exercise, "it was based on bombs going off, to the time, the locations, all this sort of stuff." The source of these quotes was Peter Power, the Managing Director of a private 'crisis management' firm, Visor Consultants, and a former Metropolitan policeman for 19 years.

It now transpires that Mr Power has, like half of job applicants and the president of a prominent terrorist attack survivor group, been a little creative with the facts that constitute the truth of the matter. In the public domain there exists an overview of Mr Power's working history which goes a little like the one promulgated by the BBC as part of their London Under Attack Panorama programme:

PETER POWER
Crisis management specialist & government adviser
Visor consulting 1995- present
Director BET Group Security 1992-1994
Senior Officer Metropolitan Police 1971-1992

However, the sterling cooperative research efforts of the July 7th Truth Campaign have uncovered quite an anomaly in what would otherwise be a fairly standard CV for a senior Metropolitan Policeman.

The problem with the version of Mr Power's history is that between 1990 and 1993 Peter Power was working neither for the Metropolitan Police, nor for BET, but instead for the Dorset Police.

Ignoring for a moment the apparent sideways and backwards step to a rural police force from a prominent role with the Metropolitan Police, but pausing for a moment to reflect on why such a step may have occurred, one can only wonder why someone with a bent for shameless self-promotion might be so reticent about the three years of his career with the Dorset Police.

Perhaps it has something to do with the circumstances in which he left Dorset Police? After all, if your career history included you being suspended from your job as a policeman, for a period of six months, before you retired on the grounds and pension of "ill health" after a file about you, compiled during an 'internal investigation', had been sent to the Director of Public Prosecutions, maybe you wouldn't want to make a song and dance about it either.

J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign have the full details of Peter Power's CV Fakery here and here.

Additional commentary here and here.

---

Update: Some post-Valentine's Day love regarding the Peter Power Wikipedia WikiWar™ here. Watch real live Internet sock puppets, as opposed to the tired, old and worn very thin sock puppets in the press and on TV, on Peter Power's Wikipedia page.

Note: The New York Times says:

This digital-age deception has a name, “sock-puppeting,” and a precise definition — the act of creating a fake online identity to praise, defend or create the illusion of support for one’s self, allies or company.

Funny that. Fake history, fake survivors and fake online identities, all in one story, all at the same time.

J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign January 2008 Update

J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign have issued a January 2008 update. If you read nothing else linked from the email, the J7 response to the BBC is a must read:

J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign January 2008 Update

Greetings from J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign,

It’s the start of the New Year and time for a long overdue J7 update. We would like to take this opportunity to thank you all for your continued support and to wish all J7 supporters a very happy Gregorian Calendar New Year and all the best for 2008.

In the J7 New Year round-up: J7 turns down the offer of a BBC ‘documentary’; Gordon Brown again refuses a public inquiry into 7/7; Peter Power breaks his silence; J7 reject and dismiss a new 7/7 film by someone who claims to be the new messiah; a review of Daniel Oba Chike’s book and J7 launch an updated and redesigned flyer.


J7 & BBC2’s CONSPIRACY FILES
=================================================================
Shortly after the second anniversary of 7/7, the July 7th Truth Campaign was approached by representatives of the BBC and asked to participate in a forthcoming 7/7 documentary. Nearly six months later, the BBC revealed that the ‘documentary’ in question was an episode of the BBC’s risible Conspiracy Files series. Having seen each of the previous four episodes of the formulaic Conspiracy Files, J7ers were unanimously against participating in the show. J7 put together a detailed response to the BBC declining to participate in the programme and explaining our reasons why. Much of the response, while specifically addressed to the BBC, is equally applicable to all broadcast and print media. Read the full J7 response to the BBC here:

http://julyseventh.co.uk/j7-refuse-bbc-conspiracy-files-offer.html


THE STATE REFUSES 7/7 PUBLIC INQUIRY – YET AGAIN
=================================================================
A year long petition on the Downing Street web site calling for a 7/7 Public Inquiry has closed and received a response from the government that has, once again, refused an inquiry. J7 has always stated that any public inquiry must be held outside of the Inquiries Act 2005 and, despite the inquiry petition making no mention of the Inquiries Act, the demands of the petition were, unsurprisingly, still refused. The inquiry petition was widely publicised online and in various mainstream media outlets, yet was only signed by a paltry 525 people, clearly demonstrating the British public’s complete lack of faith in a state-run public inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005.

The now-closed inquiry petition can be viewed here:
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Bombings/?ref=bombings

The government’s response to the petition is here:
http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page14132.asp

Meanwhile, the J7 RELEASE THE EVIDENCE petition continues to go from strength to strength and has been signed by almost 1900 people. If you haven’t signed the J7 petition yet, please do so here:

http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth/


7/7 TERROR REHEARSAL MAN PETER POWER BREAKS HIS SILENCE
=================================================================
For only the second time in two and half a years the Managing Director of Visor Consultants, Peter Power, has broken his silence about the exercise he was running the day of 7th July 2005. The latest comment comes after Peter Power was briefly confronted in a hotel lobby by a group called We Are Change and, for some hitherto unknown reason, rather than contacting We Are Change directly, Peter Power chose instead to leave a comment on the J7 web site. You can read the updated Terror Rehearsal article, which includes a link to the We Are Change video and Peter Power’s latest comment here:

http://julyseventh.co.uk/july-7-terror-rehearsal.html


J7 REBUT AND REJECT NEW FILM – 7/7 RIPPLE EFFECT
=================================================================
A video was released on 5th November 2007 entitled '7/7 Ripple Effect' which appeared via a website called JforJustice. Both the video and website are authored by Muad'Dib (the name of a fictional character from Frank Herbert's Dune) who believes he is the Sheffield-born messiah and demands 'that he be acknowledged as the Rightful British-Israel King.' He also appears to hold rather offensive, anti-Muslim views and the film is littered with unsubstantiated speculation in a manner not entirely dissimilar to the official Home Office narrative. Find out more:

http://julyseventh.co.uk/j-for-justice-77-ripple-effect.html


J7 BOOK REVIEW: THE 4TH BOMB
=================================================================
A number of books have been released by people connected, or claiming to be connected with the events of 7/7, and J7 will be reviewing as many of these as possible. The first review has gone live on the main J7 web site and is a review of Daniel Oba Chike’s book, The 4th Bomb. Read the review here:

http://julyseventh.co.uk/j7-book-review-daniel-obachike-the-fourth-bomb.html


J7 FLYER UPDATED AND REDESIGNED
=================================================================
The July 7th Truth Campaign flyer has been updated, redesigned (by a proper designer!) and re-published and printed copies are available on request for anyone that wishes to distribute them at meetings, protests and gatherings. As ever, copies of the new flyer can be viewed online and print-quality PDFs can also be downloaded.

View the flyer online:
http://julyseventh.co.uk/july-7-truth-campaign-flyer.html

Download Black & White PDF:
http://julyseventh.co.uk/pdf/j7.flyer-v4.0-bw.pdf

Download Red & Black PDF:
http://julyseventh.co.uk/pdf/j7.flyer-v4.0-rw.pdf


J7 EXPRESSION OF SUPPORT AND SOLIDARITY
=================================================================
Today, 7th January 2007, would have been the 30th birthday of Jean Charles de Menezes, who was extra-judicially executed by two unnamed State marksmen in July 2005. Our thoughts are with the de Menezes family and J7 supports the quest for justice of the Jean Charles de Menezes family campaign (http://justice4jean.com). J7 also supports the cause of the National Campaign Against Anti Terror Powers.


That’s about all for now. J7 will be in touch again soon and, if all goes according to plan, 2008 will be the year that sees the start of more regular updates from the J7 team.

In solidarity, for truth and justice,
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign Team
--
Web: http://julyseventh.co.uk/
Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth
Email: julyseventh@fastmail.net

---===[ Message Ends ]==---

Peter Power spills the beans on his 7/7 terror rehearsal

On the afternoon of 7th July 2005, information came to light about a private company running a terror rehearsal operation, featuring 'mock broadcasts', in London at the same time that real explosions were reported to have occurred on the transport network.

These revelations came not from an anonymous source but instead from the Managing Director of the private firm running the terror rehearsal operation. The private firm is Visor Consultants and the Managing Director in question is ex-Metropolitan Police man, Peter Power. The client for whom the terror rehearsal was being organised is, thus far, unknown.

In an interview broadcast on the afternoon of 7th July 2005, as part of BBC Radio Five Live's Drivetime programme, Peter Power said:

...at half-past nine this morning we were actually running an exercise for, er, over, a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning, so I still have the hairs on the back of my neck standing upright!

It is worth noting that it was two full days before the Metropolitan Police advised the world about 'almost simultaneous' explosions on the Underground, a 'fact' which they announced on 9th July 2005. Only ex-Mossad chief, Efraim Halevi -- an old schoolboy network Clove Club chum of Lord Levy of Cashpoint, Gongs and Ks -- who wrote in the Jerusalem Post on 7th July 2005 of "the multiple, simultaneous explosions that took place today on the London transportation system" with "near pefect execution" was able to demonstrate the same level of 'insight' as Power. Halevi is now Special Advisor to private security firm, Quest, where he sits alongside the Chairman, ex-Metropolitan Police Commisioner Lord Sir John Stevens of Kirkwhelpton. Stevens also happened to oversee Operation Crevice during his watch and was the first person to announce to the world, via the News of the World on 10th July 2005, the notion of 'home grown' Islamic terrorists. Spectacular how far ahead of the game of the police all these ex-Met folk are, especially when considering the fact that, only two days earlier, Sir Ian Blair had said at a press conference, "I'm not saying there are four bombers."

When quizzed about his activities on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation's Sunday Night programme a few days later, Power said:

It's a coincidence, and it's a spooky coincidence. Our scenario was very similar - it wasn't totally identical, but it was based on bombs going off, to the time, the locations, all this sort of stuff.

Since 7th July 2005 Power has had lots to say about a lot of things, mainly via the BBC State broadcasting corporation's radio and television media, inlcuding BBC Radio Five Live, Newsnight, News 24, BBC World and a few others. He is happy to wax lyrical at every opportunity about the official story of 7/7 and the repeatedly discredited Home Office narrative, the execution of Jean Charles de Menezes and 90 days internment, the latter of which he will advocate at great length as long as the targets for internment happen to be anyone that isn't a white-haired old lady from Tunbridge Wells.

At last, after two and a half years, Peter Power has broken his silence about his 7/7 terror rehearsal activities which were, "based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened".

You can watch the full We Are Change interview with Peter Power below.

Quite an impressive response from the UK's Mr Terror Rentaquote, who usually has plenty to say about anything that is likely to increase the profits of private security firms like his very own Visor Consultants.

You can read a detailed compilation of information about Peter Power and his activities on, before and after 7th July 2005 here on the web site of J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign.

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.