You need evidence to claim al-Qaeda
is behind the sloppy and wholly
amateurish work in London yesterday
That hasn't stopped the mass media
and the fearmonger hacks jumping to conclusions
Thus subjecting the public to
yet more anti-Islam propaganda
Police search a street around Piccadilly after the car bomb was defused
You can bet that Downing Street will be
secretly delighted with this latest 'terrorist incident'
We won't be waiting too long before further attempts are made
to restrict our liberties - a day or so at the most
Is this yet another attack from a terrorist group
which somehow is 'off the radar' of the security services?
What a coincidence and how remarkably convenient
They'll be queuing up outside the Treasury
to demand more cash even now
THE LONDON CAR BOMB AND THE NEED FOR INTELLIGENT SKEPTICISMAbsurd London “Bomb Plot” Inaugurates “Control Freak” Brown's Premiership
We should all exercise a healthy skepticism regarding the story of the car bomb just found in London.
There are powerful reasons for this.
The grant of an appeal to the Libyan convicted of the Lockerbie bombing.
There is powerful evidence that key evidence in his trial was tampered with or manufactured by the CIA.
The U.S. wanted this matter off its plate, the families of the dead being a constant irritation. And who better to pin it on than the then much-disliked Libyans?
Actually, nothing is easier to fake than an amateur device like this. It takes little sophistication, and there is low risk of discovery.
The CIA has just released papers it terms the 'family jewels' which concern many dark matters from decades ago.
While these papers are carefully selected to make the CIA look more ineffectual than it is and to give it a public-relations boost in light of its torture and kidnapping activities today, they still document a perfect willingness to engage in the most unethical behavior.
Mr. Brown has just taken office, and expectations are high that he will distance himself from Blair's foreign policy, a policy many thoughtful people regard as foolish, destructive, and rather servile.
In the United States, paranoid games have been regularly played - such as phony terror alerts and ridiculous arrests - concerning threats to keep fears fired up.
Peter Clarke, the Met's anti-terrorism point man, gave a press conference claiming he was not going to speculate, but then doing everything he could to indicate it was an Islamic plot.
He referred to other recent cases, including the Barot case, in which night clubs were mentioned as targets, and the use of gas canisters in cars discussed.
The one bit of modus operandi pointing another way - the fact it wasn't a suicide bomber - he was at pains to explain away by speculating that the driver had lost his nerve.
But whoever did this, the only people who can possibly benefit are the vast and ever-burgeoning security industry of all kinds, and those who want discord between the Islamic World and the West.
Unfortunately, the extremists on all sides are strengthened by this incident.
Brown had already made plain he supports further anti-civil liberties legislation. This produces just the kind of febrile atmosphere in which that can be done. The television news is already pushing 90 day detention without charge again.
Unlike the lapdog British media, we should not leap to the conclusion it was Islamic fundamentalists. It could be, or it could be other extremists, or interests, who benefit from the War on Terror. The Cui Bono test throws up a number of possibilities.
The description of 'gas cylinders, petrol, and nails' could be the inside of any tradesman's van or many of the old cars (I hesitate to say 'bangers') used by jobbing builders as their transport to and from their work.
What does Clarke know of the man (person?) driving this vehicle? What does he know of his state of mind? How can he offer a 'loss of nerve' as an explanation for this behaviour?
Then there are other factors. The driver apparently crashes the car very early one morning and then runs away. How many drunk drivers have done this after suffering from a 'loss of nerve'?
And there were reports that the vehicle was actually parked, rather than just abandoned at the point of collision. Smoke is apparently seen inside the vehicle - how many vehicle fires are there every day?
There's much more information needed before people should start to speculate and it would be more sensible of Clarke to shut up until he has real facts. But then again, it probably suits his book to keep the public fears stoked up.
And you can bet that Downing Street will be secretly delighted with this latest 'terrorist incident'. We won't be waiting too long before further attempts are made to restrict our liberties - a day or so at the most.
Is this yet another attack from a terrorist group which somehow is 'off the radar' of the security services? What a coincidence and how remarkably convenient. They'll be queuing up outside the Treasury to demand more cash even now.
“British police Friday thwarted a car-bomb attack that would have brought carnage to the streets of London just days before the second anniversary of the July 7, 2005, bombings that claimed 52 lives,” writes Nile Gardiner for the neocon house organ, the National Review Online.
“The car was packed with nails, gas canisters and petrol containers, and left outside a nightclub near Piccadilly Circus. This latest attempt to kill and maim hundreds of civilians is most likely the work of al Qaeda or one of its numerous British-based affiliates.
"It was timed to coincide with the departure of Tony Blair, and the entrance of new Prime Minister Gordon Brown. It also coincided with Blair’s appointment as the Quartet’s new Middle East envoy in the face of strong opposition in the Arab world.”
Gardiner has no evidence “al-Qaeda,” the database, is involved in this absurdly incompetent plot, and even Scotland Yard has said it is far too early to determine who is behind the “foiled attack".
But now that the corporate media is hysterically braying “al-Qaeda, al-Qaeda,” it makes little difference who is responsible.
Gardiner believes, or wants us to believe, the plot was “timed to coincide with … the entrance of new Prime Minister Gordon Brown,” and in fact Gardiner may be correct, although not for the reason he states.
Brown was selected to lord over the British people because he is a darling of the Bank of England, a former chancellor of the Exchequer, a medieval English institution for the collection of royal revenues, that is to say the fleecing of subjects.
As well, Brown was selected because he is regarded as a “control freak” and “totally uncollegiate,” according to Charles Clarke, the former home secretary.
In short, he unflinchingly runs roughshod over his victims, the sort of psychological makeup considered a prerequisite for a principate, especially one taking orders from bankers and the globalist coterie.
It stands to reason Tony Blair’s “appointment as the Quartet’s new Middle East envoy” faces “strong opposition in the Arab world,” as Blair is a war criminal.
He was informed by the Foreign Office that an attack on Iraq was illegal under international law and he met with Bush in Crawford April 2002 and vowed his support for the invasion.
That is to say he promised to donate the lives of Brits in the effort to slaughter Iraqis, an effort that has paid off handsomely (more than 750,000 killed to date), that is if you’re a psychopath, as Blair obviously is.
Arabs who know anything about Blair realize he is a pathological liar, as he said up until the eve of the invasion attacking Iraq was not inevitable when in fact he secretly agreed with the neocons to attack Iraq all along.
In addition to sending out the message Gordon Brown is the “war on terrorism” prime minister, the fake would-be attack, likely staged by MI5, serves as yet another object lesson for British commoners, who, according to the New York Times, “shrugged stoically at the July 7 bombings two years ago”.
They “seemed less than troubled here today after police announced that they had defused an explosive mixture of gasoline, nails and gas canisters in a car abandoned outside the Tiger Tiger on a thoroughfare called Haymarket.”
Staged terrorism and repeatedly foiled plots carried out by terrorists apparently unable to tie their shoes in the morning without assistance is “something you get used to, living in London,” according to a lawyer quoted by the Times.
“And given the stance our government made on the war in Iraq and elsewhere, I think we are just getting used to being a target. It’s something we have to live with.”
No doubt, as well, Brits will need get “used to” the fact their country is “sinking into a police state,” as George Churchill-Coleman, who headed Scotland Yard’s anti-IRA squad, told the Guardian two years ago.
“We live in a democracy and we should police on those standards…. I have serious worries and concerns about these ideas on both ethical and practical terms.
"You cannot lock people up just because someone says they are terrorists. Internment didn’t work in Northern Ireland, it won’t work now. You need evidence.”
Of course, you need evidence to claim “al-Qaeda” is behind the sloppy and wholly amateurish work in London yesterday, but that has not stopped the corporate media or the fear-monger hacks with an agenda—i.e., slaughtering Muslims and divvying up the Middle East—from leading to conclusions and thus subjecting the public to non-stop propaganda. Kurt Nimmo
