Three weeks ago today, a series of explosions on the London Underground and one on the top deck of a Number 30 bus, diverted to Tavistock Square, caused the death of over 50 people and injuries for hundreds more. The psyche of the nation has been irrevocably altered.
The press, not just the redheads, but all of the press, all of the media, have bought hook, line and sinker - every ridiculous theory put forward by the police. The media in general have reported supposition as fact, blurring the distinction between suspects and the guilty. In doing so, they have effectively labelled all Muslims, especially Pakistani Muslims, as infidels, traitors in our midst, ready to blow themselves up with a bin-Laden, bomb-laden Black’s Backpack - with nary a Yorkshire-inflected “Allahu-Akbar” to warn us before they take us all down.
Myths have been created. Even intelligent people now masquerade as suicide-bombing-psychology experts, without for a moment questioning the dangerous assumption that there is yet such a thing as suicide bombing on the mainland of Great Britain.
Many “profile pakis” I know have been subject to to racist insults since 7/7. This blows a hole in the rather patronising and glib response of many people who claim that it is “just a minority”. Thankfully, there are many enlightened “natives” (it hurts me to talk like this, for years I considered myself a native, but I know how the Jews of Nazi Germany felt now) who will speak up. I haven’t noticed anyone speak up on my behalf just yet, but I’m sure such people exist. The point is, none of this should be necessary really. And none of this helps the people who lost someone on 7/7.
The stories still don’t add up. The reports still don’t address the facts. And anybody who asks pointed and pertinent questions is conveniently dismissed as a conspiracy theorist.
- No CCTV footage of Kings Cross has been released
- Eye witnesses did not pick out any of the suspects of 7/7
- Nobody heard shouts of “Allahu-Akbar” before detonation
- Suicide bombers do not carry bombs in backpacks. They carry them on their bodies
- A seemingly lucid eye witness reports the undercarriage of the train been bent upwards, as if the bomb was underneath the train
- Nobody has addressed the smoking gun of Visor Consultants’ Peter “Patsy” Power talking about the simultaneous terror-crisis exercise which moved from “slow-time thinking” to “quick-time or real-time acting”. Nobody has addressed the point that this whole exercise, probably unbeknownst to Power, would have served as fantastic cover for a real operation.
- Jean Charles de Menezes was an innocent man, executed on a tube train for maximum effect. He was not a suspect in the investigation. The Met Chief Sir Ian Blair at first said that his death was directly connected to the terrorist activities, then he sent one of the officers who executed him on holiday with his family whilst apologising to the grieving de Menezes family for a catastrophic blunder. My suspicion in light of the increasingly conflicting stories about his murder leads me to believe that the execution was no blunder. My suspicion is that it was perhaps entirely planned that way.
- The recent “failed suicide bombings” with a “goldmine of evidence” have served as a very useful distraction ploy. In time, the authorities will use their set-up finds in this area as proof of 7/7 connection and bingo - in the tradition of the Guildford Four and the Birmingham Six, we will have our Paki 8. Even if 5 of the suspects were black, pakis are easier for racists to hate for some reason.
We must not lose sight of what’s really happening. The families of the victims of 7/7 deserve better. Muslims deserve better. Pakis deserve better. All the people of Britain deserve better. Surely, people want truth, don’t they?
The search for truth goes on.
{ 21 comments… read them below or add one }
Stef 07.28.05 at 2:32 pm
There are plenty of people out there disgusted with all of this. We just don’t own newspapers, that’s all.
and why stop your the list there?
- Why no suicide notes or explanation from the ’suicide bombers’?
- Why did the ’suicide bombers’ buy return tickets?
- Why did the ’suicide bombers’ leave bombs in a car?
- No CCTV has been released from *any* of the incidents
- Why have the police been so shifty about the type of explosives used on 7th July?
What has disgusted me most is the way that the media and ordinary people find it so easy to believe that at least three British born Muslims could do such a thing when their profile, as we know it, suggests the opposite.
And where is the voice of the British Left while all this is going on? Pussies …
Shahid 07.28.05 at 2:45 pm
Well said Stef and thanks for reminding me of those things that even I lose track of. I know I have brought up these things before in my posts - as others have - time and time again - but the storm of bullshit and “sand-in-the-eyes” distraction we face every day makes it difficult to keep up with all the obvious unanswered questions!
The character assasination sans evidence of Mohammed Siddique Khan perplexes me. The contrast of “teacher of disabled kids by day, suicide bomber by night” seems to almost titillate the press and the un-thinking public. Look, it might have been him, I’m not denying it, but with the evidence I’ve been privvy to, it seems highly unlikely as well as implausible.
Disgustingly, the very implausibility of such a contrast is what turns all Muslims into such potential monsters in the eyes of many non-Muslim Brits.
All that’s left of the British left is “Red Ken” who is about as left-wing as Emile Heskey.
Stef 07.28.05 at 3:08 pm
For a brief moment back at the start of this I was with Livingstone. In his speech after the attack his words echoed the thoughts of Gandhi and MLK ‘no matter how many of us you kill you will fail’. That was the right thing to say. In the same way that a million people coming onto the streets of Madrid to face-off their bombers was the right thing to do.
Livingstone’s blown it since; justifying shoot to kill; even after an innocent man was executed, and saying that ‘this is a struggle that will last for decades’. What a tool, in more than once sense of the word
And, yeah, I’m still finding the concept of a suicide special needs teacher with a young family at home a bit hard to swallow. Not 100% impossible, just very hard. I wonder what his wife has to say about all of this?
lordmlard 07.28.05 at 3:14 pm
My sympathies are with all the people who have suffered over these recent weeks - particularly those who were injured and who lost loved ones.
One of the core things I take from your blog is the increase in racism and the ease with which people (helped along by the media and sound bites) generalise and stigmatise. I pity & despise people who act like that (The “got any bombs” chap for example) I wish I knew a way to make a real difference.
But, I don’t see the conspiracy or cover up:
- You say “ridiculous theory” put forward by the police. I’ve heard very little in the way of theories / speculation from the police. Plenty from the media, little/none from the police. The media speculating can be wildly irresponsible. But with the police is would be deeply deeply worrying. On what I have seen & heard its limited to the media being irresponsible.
- Why would the police release CCTV footage? If they were doing their job correctly, wouldn’t they just release information to enable suspects to be identified and any criminal cases brought?
- Which eyewitnesses would be able to pick them out? If you assume its as the police say, then those nearest would be dead or suffered a serious trauma. Of course the police may have witness identifications that they aren’t releasing (why should they release them?)
- I can’t recall any witness saying they heard “Allahu-Akbar” on 7/7 (but maybe the above deals with that). I don’t recall any witness saying they heard it on 21/7. I don’t know how significant this is, but certainly should give people who think muslims are suicide bombers pause for thought (alas, however, I doubt they think much at all….)
- Perhaps rucksacks fit in better in London? Perhaps the police / authorities are primed for what a bomb belt might look like? Surely a bomber would use whatever was most appropriate for the situation.
- One witness said about the undercarriage bent upwards. Wasn’t the situation reported by all witnesses: an explosion, dust everywhere, bits of bodies scattered, and people trying to get out and away. If lots of witnesses were saying the same thing, and describing the inside of the carriage (rather than, say, the blast blew through the floor and push parts of the underside up and out the sides) then it would be credible, but one report from perhaps thousands, especially given the stresses of the day, doesn’t seem a reliable basis for thinking there is some kind of cover-up.
- I thought about the Visor bloke on the radio. But then I looked at a tube map. If I were doing an exercise, I would assume that people would hit: Paddington, Kings Cross, Liverpool Street and maybe Waterloo - which is strikingly similar to what was hit. I’d assume at rush hour - check. So, how many of these training operations are held? One a month? One a week? Daily with some set of people?
- Ian Blair did say it was directly related to the investigation of the bombings. They had the flats under surveillance as a direct result, then followed someone. So I think, at the time Ian Blair was right, and was maybe thinking they’d stopped a suicide bomber. Its absolutely terrible what actually happened. But ask yourself, if there *are* suicide bombers and the armed police *did* identify them about to board a train, what would you want them to do? For me, its shoot them in the head repeatedly for the purpose of killing them before they can detonate. Maybe the police made their mind up far too early that he was a suicide bomber so gave him no chance. Maybe he ran for a reason that seemed reasonable to him, but to the police confirmed he was a suicide bomber. It’s a terribly high price to pay for everyone to learn that if the police say “stopâ€, you stop – and terribly high for the police to re-evaluate how they deal with these situations. I hope the inquiry is an independent and honest one…
The truth. I think the people who examined the 7/7 bomb sites, all the CCTV, interviewed witnesses, and reviewed all other evidence will know, irrefutably and without any doubt, whether they were bombs attached to these people. They say there were. I have absolutely no confidence in such a large organisation, with so many people in the know, to have the slightest chance of covering it up for a day, let alone 3 weeks, or forever as an act like this would demand.
So, my conclusion is: Those identified were the bombers and they did die during the explosions. I find it implausible that they didn’t know they were carrying bombs. Their motives are impossible to know, and difficult to guess, but world events point in a direction.
Finally: Any intelligent person who exercises their intelligence knows that just because a criminal looks a certain way its doesn’t mean that people who look similar, or have similar sounding names, will act the same way. Racists have more in common with the bombers than they do with me.
Stef 07.28.05 at 3:40 pm
@lordmlard: this isn’t my blog so I’ll leave it to the owner to deal with the points you’ve raised. There are strong answers to all of them.
but, I can’t help myself on one of them …
Re. the police not pursuing any conspiracy theories. Ian Blair said a week after the first attacks that ’so far we haven’t found a connection to Al Qaeda but we expect to’
I think that answers that particular point
Re. sustaining conspiracies in large organisations. Yes, I agree with you and if there is a conspiracy cracks will show. Not right now though as everyone is keeping quiet because they don’t want to work against the ‘public interest’.
And it IS quite easy to keep large numbers of people in the dark, particularly if they have been persuaded into a way of thinking by years of propaganda. Even if something doesn’t seem ‘quite right’ they will rationalise it away. Only later on, when they share their concerns with others would doubts grow.
Ask any soldier who’s been in a battle for his overview of that battle and he’ll shrug his shoulders. The only part he knows about is that immediately in front of his face. Ditto for policeman in a large investigation.
Shahid 07.28.05 at 3:42 pm
Dear “lordmlard”, thanks for your intelligent, balanced and courteous writing.
I will address your points soon, but the most important one for me right now is the rather poor defence of the police action on Jean Charles de Menezes. i.e. the execution.
First, his block of flats had been under surveillance.
Second, he was not on the suspect list. I can tell from a quick glance that the guy doesn’t look anything like any suspect paki pic released so far, the police would have had telescopic sights on him and been able to verify his identity (or lack of connection to any known person) at a glance.
Third, he was pursued on foot, on a bus, then into the tube train. If he was a suicide bomber, they should have executed him sooner, at a far safer place. Why would you wait until you had pursued the target onto a tube train before killing if you had been following him for ages?
Fourth, the witness accounts are clearly contradictory, but more important, the police reports are contradictory too. If you were a policeman suspecting someone might blow themselves up, you would follow Operation Kratos to the letter, as your Israeli training would guide you, and you would aim for the head from a distance. Seven shots into the back of the head at point blank range with men on top of him? That’s not sensible, never mind good form. There were wounds in the back. If he had a bomb on his torso, it might well have gone off.
I’m not saying there’s a conspiracy for sure, but having a training exercise at exactly the same time at exactly the same stations covering exactly the same scenario has odds stacked against it, whichever way you do the maths that are as good as impossible. I’m saying that something stinks and we’re being fed a lot of bullshit, but especially by the media. I have made this clear in previous blog entries.
Shahid 07.28.05 at 3:48 pm
On your point about conspiracy. It is astonishingly easy to cover these up. Most people buy the official line. If anyone asks for the truth in the face of shit evidence, they are labelled “conspiracy theorists” and that is that.
I’ve explained the power of propaganda. That helps.
And finally, if you have an operation run at the same time, at the same places, of the same kind, it acts as a cover for which no large-scale conspiracy is needed and the legitimacy of people discovered accidentally during the real-time progress of such an exercise is covered without them ever being aware that they were part of the real thing. They will happily put the whole thing down to coincidence, even though such a coincidence beggars belief.
de 07.28.05 at 5:12 pm
One thing to take into account is that Tony Blair was publicly blaming islamic Terrorists from the safety of Gleneagles within 3 hours of the event.
What this should tell you is that the police are acting under Home Office direction to make a strong case for the war on terror.
We’ve been here before with “making a case for the existence of WMD”.
The police will shrug, release what they have to the Home Office, and let them spin as required.
PostmansKnock 07.28.05 at 11:57 pm
Look. The Police, The Gubmint, they don’t want Truth, they don’t want Justice .. they want a RESULT.
They take 29 minutes to make a split nanosecond decision then they chase the poor fucking driver into the tunnel and hold a gun to his head !
They sound like “HIGHLY trained” policemen … know what I mean.
Having killed th guy in cold blood - even as the case is under investigation they diss him big style…”He applied for leave to remain as a student, which was approved and he was granted leave to remain until 30 June 2003.
“We have no record of any further application or correspondence from Mr Menezes.
“We have seen a copy of Mr Menezes’ passport containing a stamp apparently giving him indefinite leave to remain in the UK.
“On investigation, this stamp was not one that was in use by the Immigration and Nationality Directorate on the date given.”
… First you shoot him , then you shit on him.
lordmlard 07.29.05 at 12:45 am
On a personal level: an innocent man was executed, a family grieve, and (I suggest) a policeman who thought he was doing his job, doing good, has taken an innocent life. While not equivalent, I think all of these outcomes are terrible personal tragedies.
On the situation: I seriously hoped that they would find a bomb on him. To have executed someone in this way, other than an actual suicide bomber about to blow up, is a massively dangerous and unsettling precedent. But if suicide bombers are a reality, where would I draw the line? Where would you draw the line?
I can think of scenarios where the police action was ‘reasonable’. I can think of many more where it wasn’t reasonable. I don’t think him not being on a suspect list, or him living in a block of flats under surveillance, or even them following him covertly for a period of time is significant one way or another. Even the way he was shot is consistent - perhaps a shot in the back from distance (he fell over into the carriage) and then shots in the head in case he reached for a detonator. 7 seems excessive, but 2 or 3 doesn’t, and in the scenario of sitting on someone who might explode I think I’d be cautious. Take all of this hypothetically. In this case he was completely innocent and was executed. But I suggest the police didn’t think this at the time.
Certainly, I don’t know enough (and, I suggest, neither does anyone else at this point) to make a definitive judgement.
On conspiracy: “The only part he knows about is that immediately in front of his face. Ditto for policeman in a large investigation.” It is right in front of their face if they’re photoshopping CCTV footage, or they’ve reviewed all CCTV footage and found nothing, or they’re an expert who reviewed the wreckage and found inconsistencies, or searched the car in Luton and didn’t find bombs in the back, or were a first on scene medic / firefighter who saw the damage unaltered. Too many people with first hand “in front of their face” information for there to be a cover-up.
Also, its the ramifications of this being some conspiracy that convinces me its vanishingly unlikely. If marshal law is declared and Blair becomes “prime minister for life” then my certainty will waver. Short of that its too serious, big and sprawling for there to be any hope of pulling it off.
To Stef:
I didn’t say the police weren’t pursuing conspiracy theories. By the nature of the attacks (or, if you prefer, the police presentation of the attacks) its clear that a conspiracy was involved.
I was responding to Sha’s comments re: “ridiculous theories”. In watching full news conferences I’ve found that the police have overwhelmingly been cautious and balanced.
I’ve no idea what Al-Qaeda really is, but it seems possible (certainly not ridiculous) that there is a ‘global’ element to the attack - if only limited to internet know-how on how to construct bombs.
To Postman:
I don’t think you’re kidding… that scares me.
Are you seriously suggesting that these quotes are “shitting” on him? Are they somehow suggesting it was justification for killing him, that he was a terrible person who deserved to die? Is it possible, conceivable, that these are simply statements of fact? If they said nothing, would you accuse them of a cover up?
The train driver: Perhaps he ran in a different direction to everyone else and so stood out? As scary and unpleasant as it would be to have a gun pointed at me (experienced it), they didn’t shoot him. They pointed guns at batman and robin at Buckingham palace initially, but they didn’t shoot them either.
29 minutes: Perhaps he didn’t run until armed police challenged him? Perhaps they didn’t clearly challenge him and he ran because he thought they were muggers or going to deport him? Isn’t it enough of a tragedy that an innocent man was executed by people charged with protecting us all, without inventing dangerous motives where you have no knowledge of them?
Stef 07.29.05 at 1:08 am
@lordmlard:
I was refrring to your comment ‘I’ve heard very little in the way of theories / speculation from the police’. You might not but I certainly have. Every time Ian Blair opens his mouth.
You make a fair point that much of the speculation isn’t coming from the police. True, it’s coming from unnamed sources. And then being treated as near gospel by the media and, more to the point, politicians. Try it out on yourself or someone else - see if they can distinguish between what has officialy said by the police and what is unproven BS. This system works a treat as it allows people’s opinions to be formed through ‘off the record’ briefings but doesn;t leave officials open to accusations of deceit if the stories are subsequently disproven. This has been going on for a long time now. Way before the current situation.
Re. the driver. Come on! The police chased one man into the station. They shot him. Come up with a comforting scenario that explains why they would point a gun in the face of a second man? Please. And while you’re at it come up with an explanation why the media has barely covered this story at all. I only know about if from a train drivers’ union press release
Anonymous 07.29.05 at 1:36 am
yeah and dont forget that they haven’t found any remnance of shit stained underpants at any of the bomb scenes to prove that it was suicide bombers
Anonymous 07.29.05 at 1:42 am
p.s.
Fuck you all. Go blow yourselves up in your so precious motherland you fucking infidels!
lordmlard 07.29.05 at 2:20 am
Just watched the BBC1 debate program (video’ed it… sad I know) and I think Ian Blair was extremely careful not to speculate or leap to conclusions. I suspect we’ll have to agree to disagree on this!
I agree with your media comments. I think they’re so keen to get a scoop that they’re not sufficiently bothered about the accuracy (although I don’t think *most* media sources are malicious). You’re also right that people tend to treat media speculation as fact - indeed its often much more exciting than the facts, so it becomes the dominant information. I’m not sure what the solution to this is though…
The driver: I thought Postman was talking about the Brazilian until I did a web search. Yup, not common knowledge. But then, I suspect the police point guns at loads of people and we never get to hear about it. The report I read said he ran down an underground tunnel (I’d have thought most passengers would use passenger exits). I still think this would seem sufficiently unusual behaviour for police to want to take a good ‘look’.
To Anonymous: I’m genuinely struggling to work out if you’re an ignorant racist, an ignorant terrorist or just ignorant?
Stef 07.29.05 at 4:00 am
an insomniac writes …
the significance of the train driver story is that it is clear evidence of media suppression and also suggests that the scene on that tube was a little more Wild West than they would have us believe
re. Ian Blair. We are going to have to agree to disagree. I cringe every time he opens his mouth. As I mentioned previously he was confidently predicting a link to Al Qaeda even though he admitted a link had yet to be found. He also said that dead Brazilian was ‘directly linked’ to the bombings a couple of hours after he was shot. Whilst on the subject of links to Al Qaeda - how can you find a link to something that ‘isn’t an organisation, more a way of working’ as Tony Blair described Al Qaeda as being to the Foreign Press Association…
http://tinyurl.com/8pa2f
Re. that TV show. Lot’s of interesting things came up didn’t they?
- Blair saying taser guns WOULD set off bombs (???) - somebody better tell the West Midlands Police
- The questioner who was cut off after he raised the subject of how the police let a suspected bomber into Stockwell station in the first place
- Janet Daly being bailed out as she was mumbling an answer to the question ‘How do you know what Al Qaeda’s objectives are?’ ‘Errr, well, errr, from websites …’. Ignorant cow.
Anyway, I’ve clogged up shahid’s post far too much already but Mr Anonymous seems to a) assume that eveyone writing here is a Muslim, b) Seems a little confused over what an infidel is, c) would be better off contributing to the Daily Express and d) is well, um, anonymous
Stef 07.29.05 at 4:25 am
PS If you’ve still got the tape of the program play back the bit where someone asks Blair why people in London weren’t warned in advanced about the new police policy of blowing people’s heads off. How do you rate his answer? Honest or evasive?
Or how about his answer to the question ‘Why eight shots?’. Reassuring or scary?
Anonymous 07.29.05 at 9:44 pm
Hi annonymous here. Not confused about the meaning of infidel; “non believer”. hope that clears that one up. Ignorant racist? NO
Ignorant terrorist? NO
Ignorant? NO
Racist? NO. I fucking hate everybody. Especially pakis.
Terrorist? NO. I’ll leave that to you paki cunts.
Ignorant? I don’t really care what you terrorist paki cunts think I’m that ignorant.
Believe in me for I am the real god annonymous you fucking infidels.
up yours I’m off to have a bacon sandwhich. BYE!!!!!!
lordmlard 07.29.05 at 10:02 pm
“Racist? NO. I fucking hate everybody.”
I hope you include yourself there - at least that would be deserved, don’t you think?
Shahid 07.29.05 at 10:08 pm
I think I recognise that anonymous writer. He knows how to wind me up. I think that’s a friend of mine. And I think he’s had a few pints too many. Or at least I think it’s him, or someone with a really sick sense of humour. I hope there aren’t actually people like that about, but I know my hoping has always been - and always will be in vain.
Still, you can’t win ‘em all.
Dear anonymous, have a nice weekend!
Anonymous 07.30.05 at 2:20 am
THE ALL KNOWING GOD ANONYMOUS IS BACK! HI FUCKERS.
What do you mean one of your mates you dumb fuck? Didn’t you get the message? “I HATE EVERYONE” (except me of corse. I am GOD ANONYMOUS)so that includes you cunt.
Anonymous’s thought of the evening:
ALLAH SUCKS THE PIZZLES OF PIGS!!!!!!!
So up yours paki’s
p.s.
Have a nice weekend you paki wankers
Anonymous 09.04.05 at 3:11 pm
I don’t think Khan or any of the other accused persons were bona fide terrorists.
Take a look at this item from the Observer:
http://tinyurl.com/8ylfd
The British Muslims could well have been set up as the patsies for the London bombings by means of such an operation as this one.