Thursday, July 21, 2005

When is a Line a Cross?

Go listen to this report from Guardian reporter Duncan Campbell on All Things Considered (a radio news program here in the U.S.)

Here's what I heard him say when I listened to this interview. (Please listen to the story and write me back in the comments section if I heard it wrong. I can't get the link to work due to technical difficulties.)

1. The two London bombing attacks are similar because, as in the first bombing, there was one bomb in the north, one in the south, one in the east and one in the west.

2. The intent, as put forward by an "Al Qaeda related website," was to place a fiery cross in the heart of London.

I was a little stunned when I heard this. Had I not had enough coffee today?

Can YOU guess, why I'm stunned? Oh, reader, you are SO VERY clever.

That's right, the original bombs went off in a straight line (actually, points out a reader, a rather flat triangle with two bombs at the apex). One in the east, two in the middle and one in the west. What an odd oversight. Did the NPR reporter interviewing Mr. Campbell ask about this little discrepancy? Do I have to answer that question? Are rhetorical questions annoying?

As for the fiery cross, the only "Al Qaeda postings" I know about is the bogus and error filled "claim of responsibility". Well, I'm sorry, there's no mention of a "fiery cross" in the heart of London. Read it yourself here. It does say this:

Britain is now burning with fear, terror and panic in its northern, southern, eastern, and western quarters.
Does that sound like a fiery cross to you? I think you MIGHT be able to argue that they meant the bombs went off in these quarters, though they didn't mention that...they simply said there was fear in those quarters. Please post, in comments, any alleged Al Qaeda claims of making this "fiery cross". I could simply not have seen it and I don't find it by googling.

Conveniently, these bombings were also on three trains and a bus. This shows that the original bomb that was detonated on the bus was MEANT to be detonated on the bus. No mistake here. The first bus was a little odd, mind you, because the driver got lost and had to ask for directions, but still, it was all part of their EVIL PLAN. This second bombing proves it.

But here's a little riddle. What's missing from this round of bombings? Well, one thing that's missing, thank Goddess, is bodies. No one was killed. In fact, it appears that only the detonators went off. On ALL FOUR BOMBS. Clearly, the more skilled bomber from the first round of bombings was on vacation.

But because there are no bodies, what would you imagine the police would have at least one of? Yep, BOMBERS! They did not manage to catch a single one of them. Not one. Darn their luck! First the video camera didn't work on the bus during the first bombing and now this! Where's Clouseau when you need him?

Campbell says there are reports that one of the bombers was "black" and the other possibly "asian." I don't think that's going to get them far. Surely the camera on THIS bus didn't fail, though. In fact, Campbell says they will be releasing the video tonight or tomorrow. I eagerly await this video footage.

So what are we to make of this blatant lie that the orginal bombings went off in a cross pattern? Did he simply misspeak? Is there some message they want everyone to be sure to take from these bombings (other than pass the Patriot Act renewal bill, which was being debated here in the U.S. AS THE BOMBS WENT OFF. England is considering similar such measures.)

I'm not sure. But this is the most blatant piece of disinformation I have ever heard. I give it a 9.5 (with a 2.3 degree of difficulty for so blatantly contradicting known facts.) Do let NPR know about this little SNAFU, won't you?

Saturday, July 16, 2005

Famous Detective Aids Scotland Yard in Bombing Investigation!

Reader's of Dream's End are the first to be informed that Scotland Yard is leaving no stone unturned in order to solve the recent case of "Terror in the Tube"! As part of this effort, they've turned for help to a famous detective, who, unfortunately, must remain anonymous for purposes of this sensitive work. All we can tell you is that he is Belgian, somewhat portly and extremely well dressed. We got a chance to speak with him right after he was briefed on the case. We met at a restaurant in an undisclosed (but very posh) hotel.

DE: It is an honor to meet you.

Famous Detective (FD): Mais non, the pleasure is mine.

DE: Tell us, why were you brought in on this case? It's obvious that Al Qaeda was behind this attack.

FD: Yes, mon ami, I think maybe a bit too obvious.

DE: Well, what do you mean by that?

FD: Tell me. What would the motivation for these bombings be?

DE: Clearly, Al Qaeda wants to intimidate Great Britain into pulling their troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan.

FD: Vraiment, and tell me, how do the British people feel about this war?

DE: Well, it's quite unpopular actually.

FD: And this bombing, it increases or decreases the public support for the so-called "War on Terror"?

DE: Well, it seems for now to be increasing support. Many of the Prime Minister's critics are backing off, at least for now.

FD: And would this not be the expected result of such an atrocity?

DE: I suppose so.

FD: I, as well, mon ami. A country pulls together in times tragiques. Which is why I must begin this investigation by wondering: who benefits from this atrocity? Par exemple, there are many rather extreme measures being proposed in order to combat Les Terroristes in London, non? And some of these measures were rather unpopular? And now, voila, everyone wants these harsher measures?

DE: I suppose so. Actually, a recent poll I read says exactly that, so I suppose you must be correct.

FD: And in America, likewise support for this war is fading and likewise concerns are growing about security measures domestique?

DE: Yes, but surely you don't suppose that the British or American governments are behind this attack?

FD: Quel horreur, mon ami! I never "suppose"! To suppose is to guess, and (Famous Detective) never guesses! Garçon!

(At this point, our detective began motioning for the waiter and I had to implore him to remain a few moments longer.)

DE: I'm sorry, I didn't mean to offend's just such an outrageous possiblity.

FD: It is my job to follow the facts, whether "inrageous" or "outrageous"! Now, let's look at this crime. The background of the men whose bodies were found and who are being blamed for this attack, it was filled with hate-filled politics and angry denunciations of their country?

DE: Well, actually, no. They seemed to be quite ordinary folks, as far as that goes. (Note: for some background info on the bombers, try here.)

FD: I see. And were notes found explaining their actions? Were there letters to their loved ones and children?

DE: No, again, I'm afraid.

FD: In fact, two of these young men had wives who were pregnant, non?

DE: Correct again.

FD: (He smiled at this point as he looked at his reflection on a silver cream dispenser and adjusted one stray hair oin his otherwise immaculate coiffure.) Oui, you see, (Famous Detective) deals in facts, not "supposes". Now, these bombs, three of them went off precisely at the same time, which led Scotland Yard to suggest they were detonated by some kind of timing device.

DE: Yes, I believe so.

FD: These men, they purchased return train tickets for their suicide journey, did they not?

DE: Yes, the Yard now suggests maybe they were not expecting the bombs to go off as soon as the timers started and never intended to commit suicide in the explosions.

FD: Well, they have to say something, as their initial "supposes" were clearly ridiculous. Men who make the journey to their suicides do not purchase the return tickets! So now they suppose that the men started the timers, expecting the explosion to be delayed.

DE: That's the current idea, yes.

FD: I see. And I "suppose" they thought that after the explosions, the trains would still be running so their return tickets would be of help. (At this point he muttered something under his breath I couldn't sounded like "...not even Inspector Japp..." but I can't be sure. He then sighed rather dramatically.)

All right, nevermind that. Let us get back to this matter of the timing of the bombs. It is a matter most curious. You have said that the police "supposed" that the bombs must have been detonated by the timing devices because the explosions were simultaneous, oui?

DE: Yes, we've established that.

FD: But they also suggest that the men started the timers while on the trains, and were expecting the explosions to be delayed?

DE: Yes...I'm sorry, Poi...I mean monsieur...but we've covered this.

FD: What does this mean, "covered this"? Nevermind. Try to follow along, mon ami. So this means that the men must have started their timers at the same moment exactement. In other words, you now have the bombers doing that very thing that the police said could not be done with such precision. (He smiled again, and nodded at the waiter who was bringing more tea.) Merci.

DE: AHA! But you are overlooking one crucial fact! The timers could have been set to go off at a particular time of day rather than a specific amount of time after the bombers started them.

FD: Bon, mon ami, tres bon! Now you are thinking like the detective. But tell me, the fourth bomb, did it go off at the same time as the other three?

DE: (sheepishly) Well, no.

FD: So it could not be the case that the timers were set for a particular time of day. Let me make it plain for you. These men showed no signs of being les terroristes. They left no plans or communications for the families they left behind and they purchased return tickets. Clearly, they expected to return from this journey. And then we have the timing most curious, so precise that it could not have been, according to the police, carried out manually, but had to have been a result of some sort of mechanical timing device. And yet, these men started the timing devices at exactly the same moment. Are we to suppose they had a timing device to begin the timing device? Ridiculous!

DE: Perhaps they started them while they were still all together...

FD: Then all of the devices would have exploded at the same time. This also assumes timers that actually functioned as opposed to blowing up immédiatement. If the timers functioned, the bombers would have known when to leave the scene.

DE: Well they had to set them off somehow!

FD: Non, mon ami, they did not. It is my contention that the men could not have known they were carrying explosives. Otherwise their actions and the timings of the explosions simply make no sense!

DE: Well, then, who do you think committed this crime?

FD: Bien. You expect the solution très rapidement, n'est-ce pas?

DE: I realize you only just arrived...

FD: Well, I cannot tell you exactly who comitted this criminal act most insidious, but I can tell you who knows the answer!

DE: Really? So soon?

FD: Oui! Ask, s'il vous plait, Monsieur Peter Power, and he will tell you!

DE: Who is he?

FD: He is the gentleman who works for the security company that was conducting the exercises to practice for just such an attack. The exercise was planned for exactly the same time as the actual attacks and the bombs exploded in the very stations targeted by the exercise! (Note, you can read an interview with Mr. Power here.)

DE: But he says it was a coincidence. And why would he have announced this "coincidence" if he had been part of a criminal plot.

FD: Mais non, mon ami, I did not say Mr. Power was to blame. I said he could tell you who was the planner of this crime most diabolique! Ask Mr. Power who employed his company to carry out this so-called drill, and you will be well on your way to solving this case! And now, you will excuse me, I hope. (Our Famous Detective rose to his feet as I rose along with him. He carefully brushed a crumb or two from his lapel and, satisfied that all was tidy, gave me a polite bow. He left me with these parting words:)

FD: Never forget, mon ami, that you must follow the evidence wherever it leads. You cannot let your little grey cells be distracted with preconceptions and prejudice. There is evil in this world, mon ami, but it does not always conform so conveniently to your expectations. Evil is not so accomodating, I'm afraid. Now, if you will excuse me, I've been called to America by a young Congresswoman to look into those events most tragic of eleven September. Adieu.

Monday, July 11, 2005

You are BANNED

Evidently, some guy named Kos who has a mainstream Democratic site called, Daily Kos, has gotten the gonads to start banning posters who dare question the official view of 9/11 or 7/7. You can read his post explaining his actions here.

And I say, "Good for you, Kos." It's your blog and you don't want any of this crap on there. You go, girl. I might have ONE little suggestion, though. I wouldn't go about banning people because they are not of what you called the "reality based community." See, that term was used by one of Emperor Bush's people to explain that most of us just live in what we think is reality but is really just a construct created by our rulers. Here's the quote, and I'm sure you were aware of it (I pulled this from Buzzflash, but it's originally from NYT, I think):

The aide said that guys like me were ''in what we call the reality-based community,'' which he defined as people who ''believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.'' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. ''That's not the way the world really works anymore,'' he continued. ''We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.''

See, that suggests that you and your followers are not only deluded, but, evidently, by using the term, you are PROUDLY deluded. Still, it takes guts to ban a chunk of your readers. Especially since you have advertising on you site and that's how you fund your website. So I will bravely follow your example. From now on:

  • If anyone of you readers post that the three World Trade Center towers all came down in a neat implosion purely from fire, despite the fact that this has never happened in such fires before or since...YOU ARE BANNED
  • Anyone who suggests that the US would not intentionally involve themselves in terrorist activities or supporting terrorist activities in order to further a political agenda...YOU ARE BANNED. By the way, did you see the article by Robin Cook in the Guardian? He says "Al-Qaida, literally "the database", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians..." Cook is a former MP and Leader of the House of Parliament who resigned over the British participation in the Iraq war.
  • Anyone who suggests that the US does not intentionally conspire to overthrow governments in places such as, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Cuba, Guatemala, Chile, Iran, Iraq, Nicaragua, Panama, Haiti...well, just anywhere, really, YOU ARE BANNED.
  • Anyone who suggests that there is no way the 7/7 bombings might have been planned and carried out by the British government and that the fact that the exercises, being carried out at that exact moment by a private security firm, simulating bombs going off in those exact locations at almost that exact time was nothing but a coincidence...YOU ARE BANNED. (I link to Rigorous Intuition because the CBC link to this story may not be permanent. They have a partial transcript.)
  • Anyone who suggests that the 2004 elections were squeaky clean models of democratic practice....YOU ARE BANNED.
  • Anyone who suggests that's it's not unusual for people go commit suicide by TWO shots to the head...YOU ARE BANNED.

That's just a partial list. I'm just getting started. Don't MESS WITH ME! I will ban anyone who does any of the above. Well, okay, I don't actually believe in banning...but if you violate these precepts, I shall severely taunt you. And if you continue, I will have no choice but to TAUNT YOU A SECOND TIME. Don't test me on this people.

Oh, and one more thing. If you are interested in the debate over Mike Ruppert and whether or not he has some hidden agenda for his "Peak Oil" ideas, head over to this thread at RI. I'm the Dreams End who is questioning Ruppert's agenda. It gets bogged down a bit, as much of my concerns go unanswered, but it's a good debate. Don't feel a need to post there to support my position just 'cause you like me, but if you have anything to add, please feel free.

Thursday, July 07, 2005

London: What a surprise...

The expected terrrerrst event has happened. Al Qaeda has planted bombs throughout London which detonated simultaneously killing dozens and injuring over a 1000. I know it was Al Qaeda who did it because a website claiming to be from them claimed that they did it. It's not possible, you understand, to say things that are not true on a web page. Try it:

"I am Santa Claus."

The only reason I could type this is because I put it in quotes. Had I not put in the quotes, the controllers of the web would have recognized this as an untruth and it would have appeared:

Today is Thursday.

Technology is amazing.

CNN says the website posting was by the "Secret Organization group of al Qaeda Organization in Europe". I guess they aren't that secret, but as usual, no web address is supplied, so we can't check for ourselves. CNN assures us that it is associated with Islamic extremists, so maybe it is the Exxon site or something.

Anyway, I don't mean to make light of the death and injuries. I just hope against hope that people are skeptical as they were in Madrid, which was victim to a remarkably similar bombing, allegedly coordinated with cellphones as remote controls (more on that below).

And here is His Supreme Unctiousness, Tony Blair:

"It's particularly barbaric that this has happened on a day when people are meeting to try to help the problems of proverty in Africa and the long-term problems with the environment..."

See, we're just trying to HELP. That's what the whole G8 thing is for, to HELP POOR PEOPLE. So why do they HATE us so much?

Here are a few tidbits to follow as the story "develops" (read: gets refined to actually make sense.)

1. There is at least one report that Scotland Yard had been given a warning and passed it on to Israeli PM Benyamin Netanyahu:

Report: Israel Was Warned Ahead of First Blast

Arutz Sheva | July 7 2005

( Army Radio quoting unconfirmed reliable sources reported a short time ago that Scotland Yard had intelligence warnings of the attacks a short time before they occurred.

The Israeli Embassy in London was notified in advance, resulting in Finance Minister Binyamin Netanyahu remaining in his hotel room rather than make his way to the hotel adjacent to the site of the first explosion, a Liverpool Street train station, where he was to address and economic summit.

At present, train and bus service in London have been suspended following the series of attacks. No terrorist organization has claimed responsibility at this time.

Israeli officials stress the advanced Scotland Yard warning does not in any way indicate Israel was the target in the series of apparent terror attacks.

Scotland Yard, in the most recent article on CNN says there was no warning.

2. Initial blast was blamed on a power surge? WTF? This is particularly of interest if Scotland Yard had advanced notice...why would they put out the phony story?

3. If this attack gets linked to is game over. World War 3. Have a nice day.

4. The timing on this is rather interesting, not just because of the G8 thing. Recently, the Italian government has begun issuing arrest warrants for CIA agents and members of the neo-fascist Gladio network for their role in kidnapping a man and "rendering" him to a more torture friendly country. What's of particular interest is that, in the wake of this, US special forces were being withdrawn from Spain. Wayne Madsen (I know, he has too much "insider intelligence" for my taste, especially as he promoted a military coup d'etat to "correct" irregularities in the '04 elections) posts this:

In an unexpected and possibly related move, the U.S. Defense Department announced that it was withdrawing a specal forces unit, mostly comprising Navy SEAL personnel, from the Rota Naval Station near Cadiz in southern Spain. The move came after the Pentagon announced it would move much of its Special Operations to southern Europe, particularly Spain, Italy, and Portugal and establish a new Special Operations command at Rota. Some experts on Gladio and the "stay behind networks" have cited the similarity of the March 11, 2004 Madrid train bombings and a Gladio/P-2-connected train bombing in Bologna in August 1974 and the 1978 assassination of Prime Minister Aldo Moro (after he announced he would bring Communists into the government) and the recent assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri after his negotiations with the pro-Syria and pro-Iran Hezbollah.

See? Italy busts major intelligence/fascist network in Italy and the US withdraws special forces from Spain, where there was a train bombing last year that was extremely similar to this new one in London. These guys don't even have to be original...they just keep doing the same thing over and over again.

Feel free to send links of interest before all the contradictions disappear from the mainstream sites. I'll post as I can.