By Paul Joseph & Alex Jones 21 November05
British intelligence agencies masterminded the London bombings. The stories you have been taught about back-pack bombs, carried by Al Qaeda suicide-bomber terrorists, are also BS lies. Bombs were actually planted underneath the floors of the train, under the carriages, indicating an inside-job. In a nutshell, this is another attempt by evil neo-con war-mongers and plutocrats to scare everybody into submission and gain more support for the FAKE WAR ON TERROR, or manufactured terrorism, planned by government leaders, to justify police-state laws and continued illegal military invasions and occupations of harmless oil-rich Arab countries... (just like the fake September 11 terror attacks) 7/7 Bombings Final Word: Her Majesty's Terrorist Network
Only conspiracy theorists would believe the government wasn't involved. Infowars Network | August 7 2005
By Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
www.infowars.com www.prisonplanet.com
The wealth of evidence that has emerged in the month following the 7/7 London bombings only leads us to one clear conclusion, that the attacks had to have been orchestrated by or with help from the very highest levels of British intelligence.
The latest piece of evidence to suggest that the official story is a fraud focuses again on the contention that the bombs were placed under the trains and were not detonated by suicide bombers wearing backpacks.
The first eyewitness to report this was Bruce Lait, a victim of the Aldgate Station bombing.
He told the Cambridge Evening News,"The policeman said 'mind that hole, that's where the bomb was'. The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train. They seem to think the bomb was left in a bag, but I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag."
Now another credible source, Guardian journalist Mark Honigsbaum, talked to eyewitnesses at the Edgware Road bombing, who essentially described the same thing.
Eyewitnesses told Honigsbaum that "tiles, the covers on the floor of the train, suddenly flew up, raised up."
How could the floor of the train raise up from a bomb supposedly in the backpack of an individual seated in the carriage, above the floor?
The victims then heard "an almighty crash" as a train traveling in the opposite direction collided, clearly indicating that the train had derailed due to the bomb being placed under the carriage.
For individuals to plant bombs underneath trains and secure them in place without being caught, they would need to secure access to the trains. In this scenario, London Underground could have been told that a dummy device was to be placed underneath the train as part of an exercise to test security an alertness. When the real attacks happened some LU officials would have been alarmed but their suspicions would have dampened when it was revealed that the bombs were carried in backpacks, meaning that the drill was just a strange 'coincidence'.
The fact that the bombs were actually planted underneath the trains could have easily been buried in an avalanche of official announcements to the contrary.
On the other hand the backpack bombs could have just been the diversionary blasts to enable patsies to be framed, just like the planes flying into the towers acted as the diversionary cover for the explosives planted inside the World Trade Center.
The fact that the ID's of all the so-called suicide bombers were found in pristine condition right next to where the bombs went off strongly suggests the planting of evidence to frame patsies. The ID's would have had a very good chance of surviving if the bomb was not in the backpack with them, but underneath the train.
The drill scenario would have provided culpability cover if investigators started asking questions about objects underneath the carriage.
As we have exhaustively documented, such a drill did take place on the morning of 7/7.
A consultancy agency with government and police connections was running an exercise for an unnamed company that revolved around the London Underground being bombed at the exact same times and locations as happened in real life on the morning of July 7th.
On a BBC Radio 5 interview that aired on the evening of the 7th, the host interviewed Peter Power, Managing Director of Visor Consultants, which bills itself as a 'crisis management' advice company, better known to you and I as a PR firm.
Peter Power was a former Scotland Yard official, working at one time with the Anti Terrorist Branch.
Power told the host that at the exact same time that the London bombings were taking place, his company was running a 1,000 person strong exercise which drilled the London Underground being bombed at the exact same locations, at the exact same times, as happened in real life.
How can anyone credibly claim that this was sheer coincidence when pieced together with the rest of the evidence?
Our original article on this matter is the top link on Google when you type in 'London bombing' - above BBC, CNN and ABC News, proof of how much attention this article received.
Our suspicions were aroused just hours after the bombing when it was reported by Associated Press that Israeli Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had received a warning from the Israeli Embassy not to leave his hotel for a speech he was to give that morning. The location of the speech was right next to the site of one of the bombings.
Despite debunking attempts from much of the establishment press, Associated Press never retracted the story and later Mossad admitted that it was true.
The so-called claim of responsibility for the attack was made by a group that is known to not physically exist and which at best is one guy sitting at a computer posting messages on a forum.
And yet the establishment media still report Al-Qaeda responsibility for the attack as if it were the gospel truth.
Exactly what evidence have we seen to even agree with the contention that four men with rucksack bombs carried out this attack? Four grainy CCTV pictures of dark skinned men with rucksacks? Should we not question this evidence especially when verified witnesses on two of the three trains that were bombed said that the bombs were underneath the train and that they saw no men with rucksacks even in the area?
Questions about the attacks are never ending.
Why was it reported that the explosives used were military in origin but then the story changed to say they were homemade? Can explosive experts not tell the difference or was the story changed for a reason?
Why would a man with an 8-month old baby, another who was only interested in sports, and another who taught disabled children, want to kill themselves, other innocent people and cause so much carnage in the process?
Even the establishment media started speculating that the bombers were duped into killing themselves by someone else.
Why did the cameras on the targeted bus malfunction that day? Why was the bus diverted from its usual route? We personally visited the site of the bus bombing at Tavistock Place and verified that no number 30 bus travels down that road.
What are we to make of claims by Stagecoach bus employees who say that a different group of contractors inspected the CCTV cameras in the days before the bombings and that they took two entire days to carry out tasks which normally take just hours to complete.
What is the reason behind Alan Greenspan's decision to flush nearly $40 billion in liquidity into financial markets two days before the attack? Was this an attempt to preemptively head off a run on the markets? If Greenspan had information about a terror attack then why didn't the people on the trains and buses get the same warning?
Who were the individuals that profited from short-selling the British Pound in the ten days before the attack? The pound fell 6% for no particular reason. Fortunes were made after the pound dropped even further in the aftermath of the attacks. This directly mirrors short selling of United and American Airline stocks in the days before 9/11. These suspicious transactions led directly to the CIA.
Why was an innocent man, Jean Charles de Menezes, shot in the head eight times at Stockwell tube station? Why did the police change their story, from saying Menezes was wearing a heavy jacket to admitting it was a lightweight denim jacket? Why did the media initially report that Menezes was shot in the stomach but then change the story when it was pointed out that it would be stupid to shoot suspected suicide bombers in the very place that the bomb would be.
Was Menezes shot because he knew something about the drills? Menezes was an electrician by trade. Did he have damaging knowledge of why the bombings were reported as an electrical surge for over an hour?
Why did Tony Blair immediately reject a public inquiry into how and why the bombings took place? In Britain, there is a public inquiry for every event, no matter how insignificant, and yet after Britain's biggest tragedy since the blitz, Blair shuts the door. What is he frightened of?
The final nail in the coffin regarding inside involvement emerged when it was admitted that the so-called mastermind of both the 7/7 and 7/21 attacks, Haroon Rashid Aswat, is a British Intelligence Asset.
Terror expert John Loftus told Fox News, "Back in 1999 he came to America. The Justice Department wanted to indict him in Seattle because him and his buddy were trying to set up a terrorist training school in Oregon... we've just learned that the headquarters of the US Justice Department ordered the Seattle prosecutors not to touch Aswat... , apparently Aswat was working for British intelligence."
The mastermind of the London bombings was under the direction and protection of MI6. How much more obvious does it need to be that criminal elements of the intelligence agencies were involved in this attack.
_______________________________________________________
END OF STORY
For more information on the manufactured terrorism going on around the world, visit:
www.infowars.com
www.prisonplanet.com
www.911review.com
http://www.serendipity.li
The fake terrorist attacks we see almost every day on the news, including all the daily bombings in Iraq (by supposed "insurgents" who happened to have huge stockpiles of explosives for the past 2 years straight), including the Bali bombings and the London bombings, are all lame efforts to scare everyone into submission into supporting the fake "War on Terror" (used to disguise and justify seizing and controlling oil-rich middle-eastern land and to develop hatred against Muslims and Arab-looking people so that people will be more willing to join the army and kill such innocent people).
By Geoffrey Leans posted 21 November 05
Global disaster will follow if the ice cap on Greenland melts. Now scientists say it is vanishing far faster than even they expected
Greenland's glaciers have begun to race towards the ocean, leading scientists to predict that the vast island's ice cap is approaching irreversible meltdown, The Independent on Sunday can reveal.
Research to be published in a few days' time shows how glaciers that have been stable for centuries have started to shrink dramatically as temperatures in the Arctic have soared with global warming. On top of this, record amounts of the ice cap's surface turned to water this summer.
The two developments - the most alarming manifestations of climate change to date - suggest that the ice cap is melting far more rapidly than scientists had thought, with immense consequences for civilisation and the planet. Its complete disappearance would raise the levels of the world's seas by 20 feet, spelling inundation for London and other coastal cities around the globe, along with much of low-lying countries such as Bangladesh.
More immediately, the vast amount of fresh water discharged into the ocean as the ice melts threatens to shut down the Gulf Stream, which protects Britain and the rest of northern Europe from a freezing climate like that of Labrador.
The revelations, which follow the announcement that the melting of sea ice in the Arctic also reached record levels this summer, come as the world's governments are about to embark on new negotiations about how to combat global warming.
This week they will meet in Montreal for the first formal talks on whether there should be a new international treaty on cutting the pollution that causes climate change after the Kyoto protocol expires in seven years' time. Writing in The Independent yesterday, Tony Blair called the meeting "crucial", adding that it "must start to shape an inclusive global solution". But little progress is expected, largely because of continued obstruction from President George Bush.
The new evidence from Greenland, to be published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters, shows a sudden decline in the giant Helheim glacier, a river of ice that grinds down from the inland ice cap to the sea through a narrow rift in the mountain range on the island's east coast.
Professor Slawek Tulaczyk, of the Department of Earth Sciences at the University of California, Santa Cruz, told the IoS that the glacier had dropped 100 feet this summer.
Over the past four years, the research adds, the front of the glacier - which has remained in the same place since records began - has retreated four and a half miles. As it has retreated and thinned, the effects have spread inland "very fast indeed", says Professor Tulaczyk. As the centre of the Greenland ice cap is only 150 miles away, the researchers fear that it, too, will soon be affected.
Related:
By Kim Sengupta posted 21 November 05
Bombs around Baghdad killed 33 people yesterday, but out of sight is a much more shadowy conflict - one in which the US and Britain seem unable to stop death squads and disappearances.
Amid the acrid smoke and dust, the cries of the injured being dragged out of the rubble, General Adnan Thabit arrived at the Hamra hotel bomb site in sunglasses, pressed fatigues and a crimson beret.
"Well, gentlemen," he said to me and another journalist who had just been blasted out of our hotel rooms by suicide bombers, "this is what happens when terrorists carry out terrorism - a lot of people dead, a lot of people hurt. Now you can see what we are up against."
The general was savouring his moment. His special forces have been accused by the media and others of carrying out the worst human rights abuses against "suspected insurgents" in what is becoming an ever more savage and dirty war.
Behind the daily reports of suicide bombings and attacks on coalition forces is a far more shadowy struggle, one that involves tortured prisoners huddled in dungeons, death-squad victims with their hands tied behind their backs, often mutilated with knives and electric drills, and distraught families searching for relations who have been "disappeared".
This hidden struggle surfaced last week when US forces and Iraqi police raided an Interior Ministry bunker only a couple of hundred yards from where we were standing. They found 169 tortured and starving captives, who looked like Holocaust victims. The "disappeared" prisoners were being held, it is claimed, by the Shia Muslim Badr militia, which controls part of the ministry. Bayan Jabr, the Minister of the Interior, is himself a former Badr commander, but the ministry's involvement does not end there: General Adnan's commandos come under its control. So does the Wolf Brigade, which vies with the commandos for the title of most feared.
Baghdad is now a city in the shadow of gunmen. As I left the Hamra to replace what was lost in my bombed room, I had to negotiate checkpoints of the Badr militia, their Shia enemies, the Mehdi Army of the radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, and the Kurdish peshmerga. The Iraqi police and the government paramilitaries have their own roadblocks.
And there are others: the Shia Defenders of Khadamiya - set up under Hussein al-Sadr, a cousin of Muqtada, who is an ally of the former prime minister Iyad Allawi - and the government-backed Tiger and Scorpion brigades. They all have similar looks: balaclavas or wraparound sunglasses and headbands, black leather gloves with fingers cut off, and a variety of weapons. When not manning checkpoints, they hurtle through the streets in four-wheel drives, scattering the traffic by firing in the air. Out of sight they are accused of arbitrary arrests, intimidation and extrajudicial killings.
The US and Britain, which trained many of the forces involved, and which still have ultimate responsibility for them, are implicated. But the pattern of illegality is also the continuation of a process that began with the questionable justification for the invasion. American and British forces have played their own part, from the abuses of Abu Ghraib to deaths in British military custody, from the deployment of white phosphorus as a chemical weapon in the assault on Fallujah to the wild use of overwhelming American firepower, which some have called almost as indiscriminate as the killings caused by Sunni insurgents' car bombings.
But more than two years after President George Bush officially declared a victorious conclusion to the war in Iraq, the body count continues to rise. Faced with an insurgency that shows no signs of abating, the US and Iraqi government rely more and more on the paramilitaries. Donald Rumsfeld, the US Defence Secretary, has said units such as General Adnan's commandos are among "forces that are going to have the greatest leverage on suppressing and eliminating the insurgency".
Those on the receiving end of some of this "leverage", however, describe terrifying experiences. Ahmed Sadoun (not his full name) was arrested in the middle of the night at his home in Mosul by government paramilitaries accompanied by American soldiers. He was held for seven months before being released without charge and left Iraq as soon as he could.
Speaking from Amman, Mr Sadoun, a 38-year-old engineer, said: "They kicked down our door and asked about a neighbour. When I said I did not know where the man was, they started kicking me and beating me. The soldiers had paint on their faces and did not have same uniforms as other troops. The Americans did not take part, but they saw what was happening.
"But this was nothing. When they took me to their base I was blindfolded and beaten very, very badly with metal rods. They then hung me up on hooks by my wrists until I thought they would tear off. I think that stopped because one of the Americans said something. I could hear English spoken in an angry voice. But this happened again later.
"I was in a room which was so small that not all the prisoners could even lie down properly. All night we could hear people screaming, people being hit. One day they said I could go, but after what happened to me I know they could do this to me again. So I left."
At one roadblock I met the Wolf Brigade, which was widely involved in suppressing disturbances in Mosul around the time Mr Sadoun was being held, though he does not know which paramilitaries seized him. One of them took off his balaclava and turned out to be in his late teens, belying the ferocity of the snarling wolf badges on his arms.
The young man shook his head about what happened at the Hamra. "That is bad, very bad," he said. "But you are alive, that is good - too many dead people in Baghdad." He was keen to make the point that "the people like us because we kill the people who try to kill them. Listen, mister, we are fighting bad people, you cannot treat them like normal persons."
But what about the innocent who get caught and end up being abused in detention centres? "Mister, those are just lies, you must not believe them. These people are terrorists. We are here because the police cannot do the job by themselves."
The paramilitary influence on the police is particularly overt in the British-controlled south of Iraq, where the British invited the militias to join the security forces, and then saw them take over. Nothing was done by the British authorities when police in plain clothes, along with their militia colleagues, killed Christians, claiming they sold alcohol, or Sunnis for being supposedly Baathists.
Action was only belatedly taken when a particularly menacing faction, a "force within a force" based at the Jamiat police station on the outskirts of Basra, captured two SAS soldiers who were gathering information on their mistreatment of prisoners.
British troops smashed into a police station to rescue the two soldiers and later arrested more than a dozen others. But now they more or less stay out of Basra, leaving Iraq's second city at the mercy of a police force that even its commanders say they barely control. There have been dozens of assassinations, including that of at least one foreign journalist.
Even families of fellow policemen are not exempt. Ammar Muthar, a member of the border police, knew his father, Muthar Abadi, was on the Shia militia hit list, because he had acted as a missile engineer in the war against Shia Iran. Ammar brought his father from Al-Amarah to Basra for safety. But while he was out one day, six policemen, in uniform but wearing black masks, dragged Abadi away. His body was later found, shot five times, three in the face.
"The neighbours could do nothing because it was the police who took him away," said Ammar. "They wanted to kill him, and no one could stop them."
One British officer said: "You hear about the militias infiltrating the police. But they did not have to. We invited them to join."
THE CHARGE SHEET
Endemic torture of prisoners
The discovery last week of starved and tortured prisoners in an Interior Ministry bunker emphasised that detention without due process remains endemic in Iraq, echoing the Saddam era. In Basra, militia elements in the police used cells to imprison and torture their enemies. When the Abu Ghraib abuse scandal broke, it emerged that among the prisoners being maltreated by US soldiers were "undocumented" detainees who had been kept hidden from the Red Cross. And Britain was shamed by the death of Baha Mousa, a Basra hotel clerk, in British military custody.
Use of napalm and phosphorus
Last week the Pentagon admitted using white phosporus as an offensive weapon in last year's assault on Fallujah. Its official use is to create smokescreens to shield troop movements, but if fired into trenches or foxholes it can burn victims to the bone. The legality of this use is debatable. Last year the US also admitted, after previous denials, that it had used napalm - which Britain has banned - against Iraqi forces during the invasion. There is also controversy over the deployment of cluster munitions, which Britain has said should not be used in or near civilian areas.
Extra-judicial killings
Early in the insurgency, it appeared that Sunnis loyal to Saddam were attacking defenceless Shias - an impression the coalition authorities sought to reinforce. Extra-judicial killings by Shias in the paramilitary groups operated by the Interior Ministry, or in party militias, have become increasingly open. Victims are rounded up in house-to-house raids at night and their bodies, frequently handcuffed, are found dumped later. Sunni civilians are the main target, but Shias seen as collaborators under Saddam, or connected with rival militias, have also "disappeared".
Indiscriminate 'spray and slay'
Heavy-handed tactics against the insurgency, dubbed "spray and slay", have attracted much criticism. The current American offensive in the west and north-west appears to replicate the methods used in Fallujah: the population is ordered to leave before the town is sealed off and subjected to an air and ground assault. Those killed are invariably described as insurgent fighters, even in incidents where there is strong evidence that groups of civilians, including women and children, have been caught up in airstrikes.
Related:
