"When injustice becomes law,
resistance becomes duty."
"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can't take part; you can't even passively take part, and you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you've got to make it stop. And you've got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you're free, the machine will be prevented from working at all!" -- Mario Savio
It has to start somewhere. It has to start sometime. What better place than here? What better time than now?
Welcome to Anything that defies my sense of reason.... Class antagonism of a New World Order.
....because words will always retain their power, offer the means to meaning and, for those who'll listen, the enunciation of truth, and because being sleepwalked into fascism is not an option.
To confront ideas that radically alter our perception of the world is one of life's most unsettling yet liberating experiences.
Throw away your ambitions for membership to the socially acceptable position of wage slave.
"Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; the right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers." -- Article 19
Posts
All Comments
A Libyan diplomat reportedly seen firing a machine gun from the country's embassy in London on the day WPC Yvonne Fletcher died has been named for the first time.
An eyewitness said he saw Abdulmagid Salah Ameri shooting from the building after demonstrators opposed to the rule of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi gathered outside in April 1984.
Murder in St James"On Dispatches this week and next, back on the trail of one of the most important investigations the programme has mounted. Dramatic new evidence on the killing of policewoman Yvonne Fletcher in London's St James' Square.
Tonight: How the official version of the events behind her murder cannot be true. How she can not have been shot from the Libyan Embassy."
Investigation into the murder of WPC Yvonne Fletcher, who was shot whilst on duty during a protest outside the Libyan Embassy in 1984. The two-part documentary suggests that she was killed, not by someone inside the Embassy as originally claimed, but by a gunman in an adjacent building used by the British security services.
The film probes deeper, and finds evidence indicating that the murder was carried out by an anti-Gaddafi terrorist organisation backed by the CIA.
By killing a British police officer and blaming Gaddafi's Libya, the plan, it seems, was to start a coup in order to remove Gaddafi and install a puppet regime to seize Libya's oil.Channel 4, Dispatches, Murder in St James's - Part 1
Channel 4, Dispatches, Murder in St James's - Part 2
A lesson in how not to create jubilant crowd scenes in Photoshop
The Middle Class ProletariatThe 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.
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.
J7 PRESS RELEASE
Greetings from J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
7/7 INQUESTS BEGIN
===========================================================
Over five years on from the events of 7th July 2005 and, finally, the inquests into 52 of the deaths that occurred that day are about to commence in earnest. In a preliminary Inquest hearing on 23 June 2010 the coroner, Lady Justice Hallett, stated that she would accept submissions suggesting questions and lines of inquiry for the Inquest to consider.
J7 decided to seize the opportunity presented by Lady Justice Hallett's generous offer to accept submissions suggesting lines of inquiry to the 7 July Inquest process. The J7 submissions were sent to Martin Smith, the Solicitor to the Inquests on 23 July 2010, and subsequently to the Counsels for the bereaved and survivors.
Our submissions detail suggested lines of inquiry and questions which we believe should be proposed and considered by the Coroner in the process of the Inquests relating to 7 July 2005.
Today J7 have published our submissions so that the general public can be aware of at least some of the many unanswered questions that still exist about the events of 7/7. Our submissions were prepared in response to the publication by the 7 July Inquests of a Provisional Index of Factual Issues.
Copies of the Provisional Index of Factual Issues, along with J7's Submissions to the 7 July Inquests can be downloaded using the links below:
J7 Submissions to the 7 July InquestsorNOTES FOR EDITORS
===========================================================
- J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign was established shortly after the events of 7th July 2005, when it transpired that the unfolding story was giving rise to more questions than answers.
- J7's ongoing research efforts have twice forced the government to amend the official Home Office narrative which, on one occasion, required the then Home Secretary, Dr John Reid, to stand before parliament and announce a major factual inaccuracy to the house.
- J7 do not accept that the Inquests into 52 of the 56 deaths should stand in place of Inquests into the four men accused of perpetrating the events of 7/7.
- J7 are dismayed that the families of the accused have been refused the legal aid that would have allowed them to be represented at the current round of Inquests.
- J7 fully expect that the Inquests into the four accused should be opened and conducted publicly once the Inquests into the 52 have been completed.
- J7 are concerned that some witnesses called at the Inquests may have already been presented with the Metropolitan Police site reports from each of the four locations. We have requested that any witnesses called to give testimony at the Inquests are asked to state for the public record whether they have viewed and/or read the Metropolitan Police reports as it is highly unusual that witnesses called to give evidence in any case would be privy to such reports. J7 are deeply concerned about the impact and effects that having access to these reports prior to giving their testimonies will have on their recollections of events and the witness testimonies that will be given to the Inquests.
- In November 2005, after repeated refusals by the government to hold an independent public inquiry into 7/7, and given the paucity of evidence presented to support the official narrative of events, J7 established its People's Investigation Forum to coordinate our ongoing research efforts and track the progress of the many Freedom of Information requests we have issued in order to try and uncover the truth.
- Over 3,200 people have signed our petition calling on the government and police to release the evidence they claim to have. J7 supports all calls for an independent public inquiry, and are the only organisation calling for a public inquiry who specifically stipulate that any inquiry should be held outside of the remit of the Inquiries Act 2005 that subjects all public inquiries to full government control.
- The fruits of J7's research, along with articles by respected writers, academics and researchers are published on our main web site at www.julyseventh.co.uk.
In solidarity, for truth and justice,J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
7/7: Seeds of DeconstructionInvestigative documentary 7/7: Seeds of Deconstruction which examines some of the questions and conspiracy theories about 7/7 the July 7th 2005 London Bombings.The first half of the film examines covert operations from three different periods - Central America 1954-63, Italy 1945-1990 and Afghanistan/Pakistan 1979-Present day. These operations are used to provide context to the second half of the film, which is a detailed analysis not only of the events of the day of 7/7, but of the intelligence and security policy of the War on Terror in which 7/7 happened.
7/7: Seeds of Deconstruction from 77Archive on Veehd.
* Please circulate widely *
Dear all,
The Justice4Jean Campaign has launched an online petition today, on the 4th anniversary of Jean's death, calling on Transport for London and London Mayor Boris Johnson to allow the Mosaic of Jean Charles de Menezes to be erected outside Stockwell Tube station as a permanent memorial.
The petition reads as follows:"We the undersigned call on Transport for London and the Mayor of London to allow the Mosaic of Jean Charles de Menezes to be erected outside Stockwell Tube station as a permanent memorial.
Jean Charles De Menezes was an innocent man who died in tragic circumstances after being shot dead by police in 2005. His story has touched people worldwide. The family and local community have maintained a temporary shrine for 4 years, outside Stockwell station, to express the huge amount of public sympathy about the manner and circumstances in which he died. We believe the mosaic, made by the family of Jean Charles with local artists, represents the best and most fitting replacement to this shrine - it celebrates his short life whilst ensuring his tragic death is never forgotten."
Please join us in signing the petition. It takes just 30 seconds, but can truly make a difference.
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/120/justice-for-jean---never-forget
Once you have signed, you can help even more by asking your friends and family to sign as well.
Thank you!
Justice4Jean Campaign
You may not have the right to silence, but you certainly have the right to "No comment." Lessons in why from America via Professor James Duane.Three posts of a kind, all about the popularly propagated myth that cannabis consumption is responsible for increased levels of psychosis, all published right here on Reason.... just weeks before the 2005The phrase coup d'etat, complete with its deliberate conflation with the term "power surge", carried a link to an article by Joseph Raso on his Resources for Political Change web site, Understanding the September 11, 2001 Attacks as a Coup D'Etat. Since then, Raso's article, which has been online since 2006, appears to have been removed along with the rest of his web site. At the time of writing the site is is still offline.coup d'etat"power surge" changed everything.....
In most cases the coup is undertaken to displace one set of rulers, typically the civilian leadership, and establish the power of an alternative group, which is often, but not necessarily, the military. What distinguishes a coup from revolutions is that they are typically carried by relatively small groups and do not involve mass political action. The second key difference is that while those who carry out the coup are seeking to change the government or ruling group, they are not usually trying to change the regime or bring about broader social change. [answers.com]Removing the initially reported cause of the underground explosions on 7/7 from its implied electrical context, the term "power surge" well describes a method by which an attempt could be made to "establish the power of an alternative group". An examination of key socio-political events since 7/7 in the U.K, and since 9/11 in the U.S., easily reveals many crucial changes in political and social life where new and more intrusive, paternalistic, fascistic methods of operation have been adopted. Worse, these policies and practices have been seamlessly integrated into the operation of State machinery with barely a challenge from within the machine. On the odd occasion where challenges have been made from inside the establishment, the State has elected to ride roughshod over them and continue unchecked in the business of establishing all the politics and technologies of political control that anyone with dictatorial designs might need, complete with a Weimar Republic economy and modern day Reichstag Fire.
April 2006
Understanding the September 11, 2001 Attacks as a Coup D'Etat
by Joseph Raso
"The fetters imposed on liberty at home have ever been forged out of the weapons provided for defence against real, pretended, or imaginary dangers from abroad."-- James Madison
On the morning of Tuesday, September 11, 2001, the world witnessed a coup d'etat unfold in the United States of America. Although the U.S. government and compliant media have presented 9/11 as a surprise assault perpetrated by Islamic militants acting in a conspiracy under the direction of Osama bin Laden, the terrorist attacks in New York and at the Pentagon should be viewed very differently given the results of the investigations conducted by many researchers which indicate U.S. government complicity. Analyzing 9/11 as a coup is appropriate whether government officials possessed foreknowledge and allowed these atrocities to occur, or if, as the available evidence suggests, 9/11 was a covert operation akin to Operation Northwoods, a false-flag attack orchestrated by elements within and associated with the U.S. state.(1) In terms of loss of life, deception, and global implications, it would be accurate to characterize it as the most audacious coup in history.
Coups: North and South
A coup is best defined as a sudden extraconstitutional seizure of power, often violent in nature, by individuals within the state apparatus. It is commonly identified with the classic military intervention, but coups may assume other forms. They are associated with politics in the 'Third World'/global South, where these events have typically occurred without pretense. One of the most infamous cases in the South was the coup in Chile, supported by the Nixon administration and facilitated by a CIA campaign, on the morning of Tuesday, September 11, 1973.(2) It resulted in seventeen years of military rule, the murder of more than 3,000 Chileans and some foreigners by the Pinochet regime, and countless victims of torture in a country previously respected for its history of constitutional democracy.(3)
In the West/global North, dramatic extraconstitutional seizures of power also occur, albeit less frequently. Certainly the most significant coup in the North during the Cold War era was perpetrated by the U.S. 'national security state' on November 22, 1963. It was in the wake of the Dallas coup that 'conspiracy theory' became a term of ridicule, which, although profoundly ahistorical and intellectually bankrupt, managed to achieve the objective of diverting attention from the truth about state responsibility for the murder of President Kennedy.(4) His death, as intended, led to a policy shift favourable to the interests of the 'military-industrial complex' of which President Eisenhower had famously warned the country in his farewell address less than three years earlier. In fact, all coups in the North are policy coups, designed to force a change in foreign and/or domestic policies, which has not always been the case with coups in the South. Evidence in the kidnapping and murder of Italian Prime Minister Aldo Moro in 1978 follows this pattern and strongly suggests the involvement of a clandestine NATO network linked to terrorism.(5)
9/11: Global Coup
9/11 was both a domestic and international coup. When a coup occurs in the world's hegemonic power, it will necessarily have vast implications on a global level. The events of 9/11 can be viewed as a violent takeover by neoconservative fascist elements in the 'national security' apparatus of the state, whose extremist agenda would not have been viable without 9/11. The neocon camp includes individuals who have figured prominently in the Bush regime: Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, John Bolton, Paul Wolfowitz, Lewis Libby, Elliott Abrams, and others. Their worldview is identified with Leo Strauss, the founder of the neoconservative school and a former professor at the University of Chicago who influenced a generation of political leaders. At the core of the neocon ideology is contempt for democracy and an emphasis on the desirability of deception, conflict, and perpetual war. From this perspective, 9/11 was ideal to initiate the 'clash of civilizations' popularized by Samuel Huntington, a Harvard academic whose work has considerable influence in foreign policymaking circles.(6)
The neocon program for global domination was delineated in publications of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), a neocon think tank founded in 1997 and comprised of the key administration officials noted earlier as well as other government advisors. In respect to 9/11, the document entitled "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategies, Forces and Resources for a New Century" (September 2000) deserves scrutiny. In this blueprint for U.S. imperialism in the twenty-first century, PNAC members noted that their plan would demand global military force and thus a substantial increase in military spending, but "the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event-like a new Pearl Harbor."(7) A year later, 9/11 conveniently provided this requisite 'new Pearl Harbor' pretext for the neocon architects' imperial project.
However, not all of the beneficiaries of the 9/11 coup are located within the borders of the United States. A thoughtful analysis has recently been offered by General Leonid Ivashov, Chief of Staff of the Russian armed forces at the time of 9/11: "We have to look for the reasons of the attacks in the coincidence of interests of the big capital at global and transnational levels, in the circles that were not satisfied with the rhythm of the globalization process or its direction." In this sense, 9/11 served the economic interests of a transnational elite. He contends: "This means that terrorism is not something independent of world politics but simply an instrument, a means to install a unipolar world with a sole world headquarters, a pretext to erase national borders and to establish the rule of a new world elite."(8)
Machiavelli and Democratic Appearances
Undoubtedly, 9/11 was also a coup in a domestic context. The post-9/11 Patriot Act (like similar 'anti-terror' legislation in other countries) has severely undermined civil liberties while the authoritarian approach of the Bush administration, in combination with the astonishing weakness/complicity of Democrats, have allowed for the concentration of virtually unrestricted power in the executive branch, the gradual disappearance of 'checks and balances' and the dismantling of the constitution.
The writings of Florentine political philosopher Niccolo Machiavelli provide a useful guide for comprehending the neocon ruling strategy. Machiavelli explained the importance of deceiving the public in undertaking major political change. In Discourses on Livy, he argued that one "must at least retain the semblance of the old forms; so that it may seem to the people that there has been no change in the institutions, even though in fact they are entirely different from the old ones."(9) In their Machiavellian rule, the neocons have hollowed out democratic institutions of substance while retaining the structures, thus preserving the appearance of a functioning liberal democracy.
Consequences
The consequences of this grand coup extend far beyond the loss of nearly 3,000 lives that day, health problems in New York for many thousands more, and much greater loss of life in subsequent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.(10) In fact, it is difficult to exaggerate the impact of 9/11 on the world over the past several years: the persecution and dangerous dehumanization of Muslims, widespread use of torture, advanced erosion of civil liberties, brazen violation of international law, establishment of the doctrine of unilateral preventive war, the potential for nuclear conflict, and the construction of a new world order which poses the threat of global fascism.(11) All of these appalling developments are the product of 9/11. One must also consider the deterioration in the political climate and intellectual discourse.
Meanwhile, the fraudulent 'global war on terror' has deprived vital global issues of critical focus and funding. Environmental degradation, the AIDS pandemic, extreme poverty, and the massive debt burden of the South are overshadowed in the post-9/11 world. U.S. domestic concerns in health care, education, social decay, and a host of other issues are also neglected in favour of astronomical military spending. The atrocious war in Iraq, predicated on lies that were transparent prior to the invasion, only increases the country's deep indebtedness and further jeopardizes the long-term prospects of the U.S. economy.
Conclusion
9/11 was a coup against humanity. Exposing it is essential to prevent another 9/11-type event and more wars for oil and empire, which have the potential to culminate in a world war. There exists no alternative to dismantling this coup in order to steer the world away from its disastrous course. The future of everyone on this planet depends on it and we cannot afford to fail in this historic task. Consider the title of a book on public denial over the unpleasant truth of the Kennedy assassination, written by psychiatrist E. Martin Schotz: History Will Not Absolve Us.
NOTES (updated)
(1) a) David Ray Griffin and Peter Dale Scott (eds). 9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out (Volume I). Northampton, MA: Interlink Books, 2006.
b) Peter Dale Scott. The Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire, and the Future of America. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2007.
c) David Ray Griffin. Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory. Northampton, MA: Interlink Books, 2007.
d) David Ray Griffin. The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions. Northampton, MA: Interlink Books, 2005.
e) Paul Zarembka (ed). The Hidden History of 9-11-2001 (Research in Political Economy, Volume 23). Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2006.
f) Barrie Zwicker. Towers of Deception: The Media Cover-up of 9/11. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers, 2006.
g) Michel Chossudovsky. America's "War on Terrorism." Pincourt, PQ: Global Research, 2005.
h) Webster G. Tarpley. 9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA. Joshua Tree, CA: Progressive Press, 2005.
i) Michael C. Ruppert. Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers, 2004.
j) Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed. The War on Truth: 9/11, Disinformation, and the Anatomy of Terrorism. Northampton, MA: Interlink Books, 2005.
k) Steven E. Jones. "Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse?" Journal of 9/11 Studies (September 2006/Volume 3). [PDF]
l) Joseph P. Firmage. "Intersecting Facts and Theories on 9/11." Journal of 9/11 Studies (August 2006/Volume 2). [PDF]
m) Global Outlook: The Magazine of 9/11 Truth
n) Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice
(2) National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 8, "Chile and the United States: Declassified Documents Relating to the Military Coup, September 11, 1973"
(3) Report of the Chilean National Commission on Truth and Reconciliation
(4) a) Joan Mellen. A Farewell to Justice: Jim Garrison, JFK's Assassination, and the Case That Should Have Changed History. Dulles, VA: Potomac Books Inc., 2005.
b) Vincent J. Salandria. False Mystery: Essays on the Assassination of JFK. Louisville, CO: Square Deal Press, 2004.
c) E. Martin Schotz. History Will Not Absolve Us: Orwellian Control, Public Denial, and the Murder of President Kennedy. Brookline, MA: Kurtz, Ulmer & Delucia, 1996.
d) Peter Dale Scott. Deep Politics and the Death of JFK. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993.
e) Alan J. Weberman and Michael Canfield. Coup D'Etat in America: The CIA and the Assassination of John F. Kennedy. San Francisco: Quick Trading Company, 1992.
(5) a) Philip P. Willan. Puppetmasters: The Political Use of Terrorism in Italy. New York: Authors Choice Press, 2002.
b) Daniele Ganser. NATO's Secret Armies: Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe. London: Frank Cass, 2005.
c) Arthur E. Rowse. "Gladio: The Secret U.S. War to Subvert Italian Democracy." Covert Action Quarterly (No. 49: Summer 1994).
(6) Samuel P. Huntington. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1996.
(7) Project for the New American Century, "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategies, Forces and Resources for a New Century" (September 2000)
(8) Leonid Ivashov, "International terrorism does not exist"
(9) Niccolo Machiavelli. Discourses on Livy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998.
(10) Sabrina Tavernise and Donald G. McNeil Jr. "Iraqi dead may total 600,000, study says." International Herald Tribune (11 October 2006).
(11) Richard Falk, "Will the Empire be Fascist?"
N.B. This article does not preclude other perspectives on 9/11 e.g. viewing it as a psychological operation (psyop) against the general population.
Met chief faces quiz over 'SAS involvement' in Menezes death
Daily Mail - UKMetropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair is facing questions today over whether the SAS was involved in the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes. ...
Sir Ian Blair's future in doubt as political critics renew attackA somewhat tamer headline and no mention at all of any SAS involvement in the events of July 2005. The Times though was less repentant when it posed the question shortly after what Oxford Professor of Jurisprudence, John Gardner, called "the police’s Mossad-style execution of a ’suspect’ (who turned out to be a completely innocent passer-by) on Friday 22 July"
Daily Mail - UK
Sir Ian Blair faced growing questions about his future today as London politicians expressed new concerns about the way he runs the Met.
July 31, 2005
Could Stockwell 'police officer' be a soldier?
BRITISH special forces soldiers took part in the operation that led to the shoot-to-kill death of an innocent Brazilian electrician with no connection to the London bombings, defence sources said last week. Jean Charles de Menezes was tailed by a surveillance team on July 22 as he caught a bus to Stockwell Underground station in south London. He was shot eight times when he fled from his pursuers at the Tube station.
The Ministry of Defence admitted last week that the army provided “technical assistance” to the surveillance operation but insisted the soldiers concerned were “not directly involved” in the shooting.
The Guardian was also happy to confirm the use of a "New special forces unit" that apparently tailed de Menezes, highlighting the involvement of the unit descended from Northern Ireland's notorious 14 Int, the Special Reconnaissance Regiment. Would 14 Int send out surveillance teams without armed backup in their day? What about its "new normal" equivalent, the SRR, when dealing with the potential threat of alleged "suicide bombers"? It was even reported by the Sunday Herald that, "SRR personnel are also believed to have been on the tube train when he was shot".“[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.
Dear Home Secretary,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:
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
"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."
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.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.
"The case was written, produced and directed by the FBI," defense attorney Albert Levin said in his closing arguments.
"They were not directly involved in the London bombings in the sense that they were responsible for making or transporting the bombs...."Despite this, the prosecution's case alleges a malicious conspiracy to cause explosions under the Explosive Substances Act 1883:
Prosecutors say that between November 17, 2004 and July 8, 2005, the defendants "unlawfully and maliciously" conspired with the four bombers and others unknown to cause explosions likely to endanger life or cause serious harm and injury.Cleverly, the inclusion of the expression "others unknown" leaves the State with a free reign to bring similar ludicrous charges in future.
The group, all from Beeston, Leeds, deny the single charge under the Explosive Substances Act 1883.
"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.
Artists impression of what the newly reinforced wing of the
World Trade Center tower impersonating a controlled demolotionAs 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.
J7 refuse to participate in BBC's Conspiracy FilesShortly 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:
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 2007Dear Susan,
From: J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
To: Susan Prichard
Subject: Re: BBC DocumentaryAs 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:
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 ProletariatThe 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
