READER COMMENTS ON
"WINTER PATRIOT: It's Just Too Convenient!"
(66 Responses so far...)
COMMENT #1 [Permalink]
said on 7/8/2005 @ 10:02 pm PT...
No kidding, Winter P. As if this wasn't the first thought popping into every sane brain across the planet.
BTW: Kos has banned and sanctioned ALL conspiracy theory on this subject. Absolutely promised to eradicate it at his site. What is going on here???
COMMENT #2 [Permalink]
said on 7/8/2005 @ 10:04 pm PT...
Gosh, my total-dark typing skills are poor!
COMMENT #3 [Permalink]
said on 7/8/2005 @ 10:15 pm PT...
Winter Patriot -
We have a moral crisis on our hands, as well as a physical crisis and a spiritual crisis....
We need a HUGE bullhorn!!!
COMMENT #4 [Permalink]
said on 7/8/2005 @ 10:19 pm PT...
I'm buying and distributing copies of Thom Hartmann's The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight. Please try to get this book promoted this weekend!!!
COMMENT #5 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 1:46 am PT...
Another major "convenience" of the timing of the London bombings is that they occured the day after London was chosen as the site of the 2012 Olympics. If this bombing had happened 24 hours or more before, it is very likely that Paris would have won instead.
No one has mentioned the warnings received by Netanyahu and the Israeli embassy; everyone says "There were no warnings."
Des, re: goal to "disrupt if not bankrupt" the U.S. and your comments on all the spending--that's a key point. Cui bono? Likely the international bankers who would snap up the property and assets that everyone else loses. As a former banker comments on the documentary "The Money Masters", "money never gets lost in depressions; it gets redistributed."
COMMENT #6 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 3:01 am PT...
and this kind of crap pisses me off.........
Efraim Halevi, THE JERUSALEM POST
"It will show no mercy or compassion and no appreciation for these noble values when practiced by us. This does not mean that we can or should assume the norms of our adversaries, nor that we should act indiscriminately. It does mean that the only way to ensure our safety and security will be to obtain the destruction, the complete destruction, of the enemy."
COMMENT #7 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 7:16 am PT...
Follow the money!
Even during the difficult 1980s when many people were losing their jobs and retirement funds there was a tremendous transfer of wealth to some other people. This happens quietly and without a lot of 'news' coverage.
There are far too many people (or groups) who seem to favor or find advantage from the destruction of America, perhaps even the entire "New World Order". Who are they? What is their name? Why do they favor this chaos? What is the scenario they wish to provoke? There is a lot the MSM have not investigated --- tin-foil hat conspiracy theories I suppose.
COMMENT #8 [Permalink]
Robert Lockwood Mills
said on 7/9/2005 @ 7:24 am PT...
Latest news is that the bombs were "low tech," and probably planted by local terrorists unaffiliated with any recognizable terrorist organization. In other words, it could have been anyone...including someone with an ulterior motive (justifying an invasion of Iran?).
COMMENT #9 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 8:39 am PT...
My very well-honed political instincts tell me it was another FBI or CIA operation, as I believe many of the bombings in Iraq that kill mostly Iraqui civilians and foment division have been. Indeed, one only needs to ask, "Who does this benefit the most?" and the answer is Bush/Blair and their argument for increased and extended involvement in the Middle East, the upcoming battle about re-justification of the "Patriot" act, with further pushing for FBI and Secret Police-type snooping and clandestine arrests, etc. ..Not to mention bolstering the 2 Mis-leaders' plummeting popularity through the familiar device of FEAR.
I have been right about ALL my major political instincts for over 40 years now, mostly by going on the assumption that, If YOU can imagin it, THEY have already DONE IT!
That certainly goes for the israelis as well.
It's a very deep and ugly rabbit hole indeed!
COMMENT #10 [Permalink]
James W. Roberts Jr.
said on 7/9/2005 @ 8:40 am PT...
There are more ways to profit than just money. Why cover something boring like Rove appearing to be a felon when you can cover a nice gory bombing? As observed earlier, Al Qaeda stands to lose more from this than they would gain.
Also, is somebody telling me that an administration who uses torture and holds suspects without trial, lawyers, or even rights would balk at a little bombing?
COMMENT #11 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 8:46 am PT...
The Rules Of War
(Bush-Blair In Fantasy Land)
By Ward Reilly 7-8-2005
The Rules of "War"...
Let's pretend for a moment that "al Qaeda" IS responsible for the London
bombings. That is what George and Tony are claiming. So let's assume it's
true. Just for the sake of argument.
What is more disgusting than seeing Bush and Blair lament about the tragedy
of "innocent civilian victims" being killed? Nothing, that's what.
Bush said this morning "And the contrast couldn't be clearer between the
intentions and the hearts of those of US who care deeply about human rights
and human liberty, and those who kill---those who have got such evil in
their heart that they take the lives of innocent folks."
"...take the lives of innocent folks." he said. It is "evil" he said.
Earth to un-Curious George....can you say "100,000 dead Iraqi's"? All dead
because of you, since March 19th, 2003? ALL INNOCENT. Can you say 1780+ dead
U.S. troops, all of whom would be alive if it were not for your actions.
So I ask the President, which of the above described groups do you put
yourself into? Human rights, or killer of innocent folks?
And how do you think the relatives of the slaughtered Iraqi people feel
about you and your "democracy and liberation"? Imagine "London" happening
every day, day after day after day... like it DOES in Baghdad. Except take
away the electricity and water that they have in London, because in Baghdad,
that is what life has been like every day for over 800 straight days. Our
"Mission Accomplished", Capt. America?
Is there anyone out there that really thinks that attacking a wartime enemy
is unjustified? Are we at war with al Qaeda or not? We told "them" the fight
was in Iraq, and they have just begged to differ.
Is there really somebody out there that doesn't realize that when you bomb
and occupy a country, especially if the attack and occupation were
"preventive" and "imperialistic", AND illegal, that that country has a RIGHT
to do to us, exactly what we are doing to them?
The Rules of warfare apply.
It's called defending yourself. If what happened in London yesterday was
"terrorism", what exactly is the definition of what we have done in Iraq?
That is the most basic rule of war. Defend yourself. And this is guerilla
war. The only war they've got.The "war" we gave them. The "war" we forced on
Is there really somebody out there that doesn't think that the tax-paying
citizens of any country at war are also at war? I believe that we (the U.S.
and England) define the innocent dead citizens in Iraq and Afghanistan, as
"collateral damage". Never " innocent victims."
An estimated 100,000 Iraqis, all INNOCENT of any crime, have suffered the
EXACT same fate from our bombs, artillery, and bullets, as was suffered by
the British citizens that were just killed on the streets of London. And
that goes for our own troops too. They are being wasted in an un-winnable
war, in a land where nobody really wants them to be. Kicking in every door
in Iraq was NOT a good strategy, Mr. CIC. Using soldiers as a police force
is a misuse of our military.
It's called WAR. Do you really think that it is only an act of war if the
bombs are dropped in Iraq? Ask the British about the German rocket bombings
in WWII. Indiscriminant bombings all over London...they weren't called
"terrorist attacks", because every civilian that died was considered to be a
victim of the open-warfare of WWII.
And guess what? As far as the rules of war are concerned, in that WE
attacked two innocent nations, in reality, their retaliation is justified,
while the killings we have committed ARE NOT. By invading those two nations,
we have granted them permission to hit us ANYWHERE, and it is legally
justified. WE INVADED THEM ILLEGALLY, not vice-versa.
Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9-11. Remember? You told the troops "bin
Laden"....you told the troops "wmd's"....you told the troops "Saddam"....you
told the troops..."we will NOT occupy"....the troops are tired of your lies.
And again, this is just assuming that "al Qaeda" placed these latest
bombs-of-war in London. Who is it that we're fighting? bin Laden, right?....
Saddam, right?... al Sadr right?...nope...wrong again...NOW it's al
Zarqawi..."Iraq's biggest terrorist leader of al Qaeda of Iraq", or so I
hear this week.
Our tax dollars commit war-crimes by way of the policy of the "Commander In
Chief", our CIVILIAN boss of the military (even if our CIC does like to put
on his GI Joe flight suit and strut around on deck) He is a civilian, and
his policy is OUR policy, by default.
We, being the United States and England, started this mess by illegally
attacking Iraq, and now we know for a FACT that Bush and Blair started
bombing in Iraq in July of 2002, 4 months BEFORE the Congressional vote
giving them the "authority" to use military force, and until the day the
last U.S. and British occupation troops are gone from the Middle East, we
are all "fair game".
NOTHING will ever be able to justify our attack on Iraq, because of the (now
documented) actions of Bush, Cheney, Blair, etc. Nothing, never. No matter
how many times the administration changes the reason for the "war" or changs
who the enemy is.
The moment that Bush/Cheney/Blair say "cease fire", will be the moment our
citizen-soldiers and Iraqi citizens will stop being slaughtered. Until then,
it doesn't really matter who puts bombs in the subway, because we started a
war against "them". They have the RIGHT to defend themselves against an
Civilians die in war, not just soldiers, except in "John Wayne land"...and
there is no "John Wayne land", except in George's head and George's bible.
Ask the Iraqi's about "innocent victims".
Cease Fire NOW Mr. CIC. Stop the "war" NOW, Mr."Last Throes" CIC wanna-be.
Repair the damage done in Iraq and Afghanistan with CIVILIANS and money, if
we have any money left, and apologize for your horrifying war crimes, NOW.
The bombings will stop shortly thereafter, IF we are lucky, and the Islamic
world forgives us our crimes.
Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9-11, folks, so please, once and for all, put
that propaganda BS away forever. We have attacked two innocent nations,
giving birth to a whole new generation of hate. George did it. Dick did it.
Tony did it, and the bombings yesterday are THEIR FAULT, and our fault,
until WE THE PEOPLE stop them. Period.
Again, this is assuming that "al Qaeda" placed the bombs, and that is a
pretty wide assumption. But that is the immediate "official line" of George
and Tony. So guess what? It's ALL of our fault. I did it. You did it. Every
citizen of the USA and England did it.
The Rules of War apply here.
Bring on the war-crimes tribunal NOW! Only then will we be forgiven for the
Bush war-crimes, and only then will "insurgents" stop killing us. You can
not invade an innocent nation without justification, ever. We did. Now we
are paying the price for Bush's crimes.
The rules of war apply to us, too. It's not impeachment time. It's Nuremberg time.
COMMENT #12 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 8:50 am PT...
While Anthony Wade is perceptive and articulate, I am
inclined to believe the timing is in alignment with the
announcement of the Olympic Games and the bombing is the
result of long term planning. From here on out, the Olympics
will be a very dicey plum. I can understand the outrage of
people upset by civilian deaths and torture in Iraq and
Afghanistan at the endorsement of the UK represented by
awarding the Olympic games to London.
By prematurely jumping to "conspiracy theories" about
London we discredit the courageous and painstaking work of
those who are trying to bring to light 9/11's much more
obvious benefits to the Bushites.
DES's point #5 about the economic damage to the US is an
important one. Bush's behavior in looting the public treasury
is is alignment with conservative "starve the beast" theory
which aims to bankrupt the federal government so liberal
social programs are impossible.
COMMENT #13 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 9:07 am PT...
BIA #11 brings up an important point: we can't know who does
the car bombings in Iraq, and every one justifies continued US
presence there. Remember the big bomb that convinced the
UN to withdraw? Cui bono there?
The focus on the London deaths is racist when fifty people can
die in Iraq with little comment. 500,000 Iraqi children died under
the sanctions imposed by a UK and US dominated UN, and
Madeleine Albright said it was worth it!
COMMENT #14 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 9:11 am PT...
Please visit The Brad Store which is NOW OPEN!!, and spend a few dollars protecting what's left of your democracy!!
Or ... Make A Donation via PayPal if you do't feel like buying anything!!
Either way it costs you a few bucks, but we think it's worth it --- and that's why we're here!
COMMENT #15 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 9:18 am PT...
Please visit The Brad Store which is NOW OPEN!!, and spend a few dollars protecting what's left of your democracy!!
Or ... Make A Donation via PayPal if you do't feel like buying anything!!
Either way it costs you a few bucks, but we think it's worth it --- and that's why we're here!
COMMENT #16 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 9:19 am PT...
Hey! It's MY thread and I can SPAM it if I WANT TO!!
COMMENT #17 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 9:44 am PT...
Y'know... for me..
thought #1... it's going to get blamed on Iran so that Bush and Blair can go to war with Iran over it... the UK have already stated they are going to be redeploying the troops they pull out of Iraq.. into Afghanistan.. conveniently covering the east-border of Iran.
thought #2... CIA.. Mossad... was there assistance or alterior motives for this attack?
thought #3... Tony Blair calls these hand-delivering, high-risk-taking bombers.. "cowards"... but when he orders young troops to risk their lives dropping much more powerful bombs on people (flying past at hundreds of miles per hour)... for reasons that are no more than lies... he's a fucking "hero"... "brave"... or whatever.
thought #4.... WTF are the media and politicians talking about... "They won't win"... that's not their aim... their aim is payback.,, it's just Tony Blair is too much of a coward (the real kind) to admit that. The only people who win are those who can milk the tragedy for all it's worth to their advantage... and those people are polticians.
COMMENT #18 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 12:07 pm PT...
Thanks Winter, and this is very interesting read.:)
COMMENT #19 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 12:13 pm PT...
Here we are, live blogging again!
Where to start? Where to start?
how about #6 where Charlie made what appears to be a veiled reference to this report: Netanyahu Changed Plans Due to Warning ...
It always gets difficult whenever Israel is involved to discuss anything without being accused of racism and if possible I'd like to decouple a few things here ...
What if it wasn't a prominent Israeli? What if it was a prominent Belgian? What if Jacques Brugge changed his travel plans because he got advance warning of a bomb that was about to go off in the tube station nearest his hotel? Would we be accused of racism if we mentioned that? I don't think so, and I don't think racism plays any part in this either ... for whatever that's worth ...
but it SURE is INTERESTING that ANY prominent political figure FROM ANY COUNTRY had advance notice of what this supposedly hiterto unknown terrorist group was up to ... is it not?
COMMENT #20 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 12:15 pm PT...
in response to andy wade's question, "who benefits?"... i have a question:
didn't we essentially bankrupt the Soviet Union by forcing a massive increase in defense spending, causing it to collapse under its own weight? (i was fairly young and oblivious then, so those of you with a better historical perspective, please correct me if i'm wrong.) and didn't the intractable "freedom fighters" of Afghanistan, those guys who eventually became the Taliban, have a hand in that, as well?
drawing out the US and the UK into an over-reaching and bloody military confontation of dubious legality has proven to be a solid recruiting tool for Islamic terrorist groups.
Bush took the bait dangled in front of him; he is an opportunist, and all he needed was an excuse to jump into the sand trap. of course we're never leaving Iraq; Bush is going to establish permanent military bases smack dab in the middle of the Middle East. it's military "strategery" 101. (and then the terrorists will realllllly love us...)
thus and so, it is conceivable that the goal is to seriously disrupt, if not bankrupt, the U.S. we've spent a lot of money on security after the 9/11 attacks, spent a lot of money on wars in two countries, we're still having trouble getting out of that pesky recession..... and now we're saddled with the largest deficit in the nation's history. for this insanity to continue, one would need to ensure that Bush and Co. get re-elected. a few well-timed videos and bombs....
oh, yeah --- we're also reviled the world over, and even our friends don't like us much.
maybe it is just me, but if the goal is to bring down the Great Satan, these seem like pretty good ways to start.
COMMENT #21 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 12:17 pm PT...
There could be another take on this --- and I've heard it being said during the lead-up to the Iraq war.
Maybe OBL (if he's still alive)(or, whoever it is)(if there is indeed a highly organized group called Al Qaeda) sees Iraq for what it is.
A huge breeding & training ground for terrorism.
Continued war in Iraq, therefore, is preferrable --- it is to be encouraged. If the London attacks were the work of Al Qaeda, it makes perfect sense in this context.
Just a thought.
COMMENT #22 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 12:19 pm PT...
But while you're at it, explain these facts about 9/11:
The middle-easterners dancing and filming the WTC collapse were Israeli's. It actually made FOX News and then vanished, at the time.
Several eyewitnesses in the WTC said they heard explosions BEFORE the planes hit the WTC. None of their testimony was in the 9-11 Commission Report.
Why did WTC-7 collapse demolition style, when it wasn't hit by one of the planes? And why wasn't this mentioned at all in the 9-11 Commission Report?
Several experts conducted tests on steel and jet fuel, and reached the conlusion that the highest degree that burning jet fuel reaches, is not even close to the degree to melt steel. Also, a designer of the WTC said it was built to withstand a jumbo jetairliner crashing into it. And one of Bush's former cabinet members recently said the official government story can't possibly be true (Morgan Reynolds, Ph.D., a former member of the Bush team).
Why was molten steel found at the base of each WTC?
Why were independent sizemic readings record quake-like sizemic readings at the base of each WTC tower seconds before each plane hit?
Why did an Israeli moving company move out of the WTC a week before 9/11, and pay a $50,000.00 fine for breaking the lease?
Why did FEMA cart off the WTC steel, and melt it down, before it could be examined as crime scene evidence? That's no accident, they're not stupid. Are we to believe these people are stupid?
I want to know the answers to these questions, and why they weren't addressed by the 9-11 Commission.
Here's what we're supposed to believe: 19 Arabs took flight lessons (some of their teachers were interviewed, and testified they couldn't do what they did flight-wise), simultaneously hijacked 4 jumbo jets, flew around for hours (?) without NORAD protocol occurring, and knocked down the WTC towers. Never before 9-11 has a plane caused a skyscraper to fall, and not since has one, but 3 in one day happened, and one wasn't even hit by a plane. YEAH, RIGHT......................
COMMENT #23 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 12:19 pm PT...
You know ...
There could be even another take on this ---
what if Al Qaeda is a creation of the CIA ?
what if continued war in Iraq is in the best interests of people like Bush and Cheney? And Tony Blair? And the people [?] who pull THEIR strings??
how about that? do you think something like that might be remotely possible??
COMMENT #24 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 12:23 pm PT...
I think both takes are compatible with one another, don't you Winter?
COMMENT #25 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 12:23 pm PT...
COMMENT #26 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 12:29 pm PT...
It's just a shame that legitimate issues raised on this Blog will be jeopradized, sacrificed and undermined by the paranoids and anti-semites that are lending credence to the bullshit on this thread.
Brad, who is Jewish BTW, should banish them from this site, just like was done at the dailykos.
Brad, do you have the courage? Your reputation is at stake.
COMMENT #27 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 12:30 pm PT...
in comment #14, PetGoat wrote:
By prematurely jumping to "conspiracy theories" about London we discredit the courageous and painstaking work of those who are trying to bring to light 9/11's much more obvious benefits to the Bushites.
and I would like to know who he is accusing of
prematurely jumping to "conspiracy theories" about London
I would also like to know whether he has any "non-conspiracy" therories as to how four bombs could go off in one city in less than an hour without any conspiracy?
Was it ONE SUICIDE BOMBER who BLEW HIMSELF UP FOUR TIMES??
COMMENT #28 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 12:33 pm PT...
It turns out they were all explosives, each hooked up to a timer. They went off within seconds of each other.
That's the latest.
A single bomber, as a result, has not been ruled out.
COMMENT #29 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 12:34 pm PT...
COMMENT #30 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 12:39 pm PT...
I thought it was funny.... how bout them Jews getting another warning. First 9/11 them london....its like they always seem to know what is going to happen when
COMMENT #31 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 12:41 pm PT...
that's cool #28 coulda been a single bomber.
but it raises interesting issues ... like ... how did he manage to alert Scotland Yard before the blasts, in such a way that police can't figure out that it's a terrorist attack until more than an hour after the bombs started going off??
* 8.49am (GMT): An incident on the train line between Liverpool Street and Aldgate is reported to British Transport Police.
* 9.33am: Passengers told that all underground train services are being suspended because of a power fault across the network.
* 9.40am: Police say power surge incidents have occurred on Aldgate, Edgware Road, King's Cross, Old Street and Russell Square stations.
* 10.25am: The BBC's Andrew Marr, with Prime Minister Tony Blair in Scotland, says the PM is "still unsure" whether the explosions are a terrorist attack.
COMMENT #32 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 12:42 pm PT...
"The police say timings show that the Tube explosions took place at 8.50am - and the synchronisation could suggest bombs used in the attack were triggered using timing devices."
"Clearly, there are two possibilities here. Either you have people with the explosive devices who synchronised watches or whatever, and they have simultaneously detonated their devices at the same time.
"Or it could be these devices were triggered by timing devices that were co-ordinated to go off at the same time," he said.
COMMENT #33 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 12:46 pm PT...
re #25 I dunno 'bout that ... lemme think on it a while?
COMMENT #34 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 12:48 pm PT...
Hey everybody - what a wonderful Blogathon!
WP --- I think Big Dan is speaking to the bu$h administration when he posed his questions regarding 9/11.
There are good and bad people of every race, creed and nationality. If a Jewish person is involved in corruption, the recognition of such should not be considered Anti-Semite.
Are we on the same page here?
COMMENT #35 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 12:56 pm PT...
re #34 maybe you're right about Big Dan and I was only kidding about hijacking my thread --- didn't mean to come off sounding nasty or anything --- but I really don't think this is the right place to talk about 9/11/01.
I'm a lot more interested in talking about 7/7/05.
COMMENT #36 [Permalink]
Robert Lockwood Mills
said on 7/9/2005 @ 12:56 pm PT...
Some people think any criticism of Israel constitutes anti-Semitism.
COMMENT #37 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 12:58 pm PT...
Time line -
Amazing . . a bit like 9/11 isn't it?
Explosion Time Line Page
0851 Seven people die in a blast on a train 100 yards from Liverpool Street station
0856 21 people die in a blast on a train between Russell Square and King's Cross stations
0917 Five people die in blast on a train at Edgware Road station
0947 An unknown number die in a blast on a bus at Tavistock Place.
First 2 blasts are close . .but they kept the lines open . . for blast 3 to happen
almost an hour later from first blast . .the bus blows up
Later they reopen all stations. US goes on Code Orange for Mass Transit only. yah whatever . . .this is bullshit
So, within 24 hours their Transit system is open and people are encouraged to travel. The bomb sniffing dogs and investigators must have worked REAL fast huh?
And this is to 'show Al Qaeda' that they can't intimidate us?
HELL!! What about LIVES and Safety?
Even BBC bends to propaganda sometimes. It stinks to see it!
COMMENT #38 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 1:11 pm PT...
well yeah! now #37 comes along and wants to talk about 9/11 in a way that I can understand.
Yes, JP, it IS a bit like 9/11 ... too similar if you ask me ...
Hey! this is funny! I just got a phone call ... friend says "what are you doing?" ... I tell him "I'm live blogging at the Brad Blog" ... he says "what's your topic?" ... I say "It's Just Too Convenient" ... he says "what's it about?" ... I say nothing ... then he says "oh I know what it's about --- the G8 bombing, isn't it?"
COMMENT #39 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 1:13 pm PT...
"Scotland Yard said the attacks took place within 50 seconds of each other despite previously saying they had taken place over a longer time period."
COMMENT #40 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 1:14 pm PT...
S is my code-name for STOP_George, BTW.
COMMENT #41 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 1:20 pm PT...
The point is made about who benefits from this. Discovering those who benefit most is always the first goal in an investigation
The subsequent coverup activity proves there is in fact an ongoing conspiracy.
The evidence further suggests that al-Quada is not the conspirator since al-Quada has the most to lose in this series of events and aftermath. Next logical step is to learn who did it by following the leads and we can't learn by ignoring early evidence. We can't learn by dismissing conspiracy.
I say let the facts speak for themselves and knock it off with the lame efforts to play the race card. This is not a race issue at all.
COMMENT #42 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 1:21 pm PT...
Yes, JP, BBC carries its fair share of propaganda ... don't know whether it merits the word "even" as you have used it above ... of course one man's propaganda is another man's truth ... that's probably what bush meant when he said he had to crank up the propaganda ...
Speaking of propaganda, why would a former Belgian intelligence chief be so quick to call for world war in the wake of these attacks?
And in their immediate aftermath, no less? ... ahh well ... If they had time to alert Jacques Brugge, then I suppose they also had time to prepare such a florid and bellicose document, and arrange for its prompt publication in the Brussels Daily News...
COMMENT #43 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 1:22 pm PT...
I agree. The contradictions are sprouting left & right. Now Scotland Yard is saying the attacks occurred within 50 seconds of each other.
COMMENT #44 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 1:27 pm PT...
"al-Quada has the most to lose in this series of events and aftermath"
I don't agree.
As I told Winter earlier, the more the Iraq war is prolongued through the guise of "the war on terror", the better chance they have to recruit and train future terrorists.
The same goes if Iran and/or Syria is invaded.
COMMENT #45 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 1:35 pm PT...
#44 SG [that's my code word by the way]
I think we differ over interpretation of Al Qaeda's motives [if, as you say, such an organization exists at all] ...
Which do you think they would rather have :
[a] more carnage in the Middle East --- so they can recruit more terrorists??
... or ...
[b] peace and justice in the Middle East --- even if it means they go out of business ??
COMMENT #46 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 1:40 pm PT...
There are too many players to dismiss conspiracy no?
COMMENT #47 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 1:42 pm PT...
re #46 Torqued: it depends on how you count the players, yes?
COMMENT #48 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 1:46 pm PT...
Yes. I'm not buying the al-Quada crap.
COMMENT #49 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 1:52 pm PT...
I would rephrase your options differently.
If I remember correctly, OBL (if that was his letter) was practically begging George to attack Iraq before the war started.
So far, option [a] seems to be working quite well for them.
As for "justice" --- they're certainly not going to get their style of "justice", at present, by passing out olive brances. The neocon cabal will certainly see to that.
Don't get me wrong though. I am certainly open to the fact that this is all fiction (including the Al Qaeda threat) by the neocons, much like I believe the official version of 911 was of the consistency of Swiss cheese.
COMMENT #50 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 1:56 pm PT...
well, folks ... thanks for the blog!
I've got to run ... but if you have any more questions or comments, don't be shy ... I'll be back once or twice more before we're through here ... that was a great idea from Larisa and I'm not too proud to ape it ... so I'll see you all later ...
Be nice to John Amato for me, will ya?? He comes on in about an hour ... How convenient!
COMMENT #51 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 2:01 pm PT...
Thanks, as always, Winter!!!
COMMENT #52 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 2:04 pm PT...
This is an excellent thread. It's apparent that we can discuss anything here while on most of the other blogs discussion is discouraged or banned once it gets outside of certain boundaries. Other blogs don't allow discussion of the big picture, the causes, the players, or the conspiracy.
Thanks for bringing it Winter.
COMMENT #53 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 3:35 pm PT...
I think this thread has it right on. I was munching on it some. [ More . . . ]
COMMENT #54 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 3:47 pm PT...
WinPat re: your #28 and my #14--
Back off buddy, we're on the same side!
I'm sorry I was not clear. I don't see the benefit to the Bushites
from the London bombings unless it galvanizes US and UK
antiterrorist sentiment. I think the bombings represent an
indictment of Bush's failure to go after Osama.
In decrying premature conspiracy theorizing I was referring to
kneejerk "Bush Did It!" scenarios. We all know he did 9/11.
As to the nuts and bolts obviously the bombs could have been
set off with cell phone triggers and then no more than one
person need have been involved.
COMMENT #55 [Permalink]
said on 7/9/2005 @ 10:25 pm PT...
Hey Pet Goat no prob mate!
Really, what do I know?
It coulda been one guy, it coulda been twenty guys, and they might have all been left-handed for all I know! ;-0
But it sure does smell fishy, doesn't it?
COMMENT #56 [Permalink]
said on 7/10/2005 @ 4:38 am PT...
There's now an official police line of enquiry suggesting the bombers may have been white.
Of course, it's definetely not CIA/mossad/MI6 related (please ignore the fact of who has the most to gain from this!!)...
Apparently... it's much more likely that if there were white bombers... they would be "terrorist-mercenaries hired by al-queda".
Sounds like the official line of enquiry is heading into the realms of baseless-judgements and ASSumptions once again. - When will they stop spinning and just focus on the facts and data that actually exist?
This sounds like a cover story in case evidence points towards white bombers... so that people don't start thinking about western/white motives for the bombing.
Yeah... keep us focused on 'em 'queda terrorists that "hate us for our freedoms" and shit. Hmmm...
COMMENT #57 [Permalink]
said on 7/10/2005 @ 7:36 am PT...
Let's not forget that the "AlQueada terrorists" that "did" 9/11 were employed as CIA Operatives right up untill less than 2 months before the attack!
I stand by my original instincts on this:Cui Bono? The latin phrase for "Who Benefits"? is the first question any good criminal lawyer will ask, and what we, as free-thinking American citizens, should be asking ourselves about the London bombings.
With public opinion turning decisively against the Iraq war and Blair having already announced withdrawal plans for their troops, WHY would Al-Quaida want to stoke anew the fears and rhetoric that would justify continued Occupation, since their original avowed purpose has always been to get US OUT of the ME? This security failure doesn't make Blair look good, either, so shortly before elections.
Clearly, it is only Bush & Co. who benefits: Distract us from the Downing St Memo , the scandals engulfing him, and Delay, Rove, etc. Re-justify War in the Middle East, push the "Patriot" Act and the Police State further down our throats to stifle dissent, not to mention bolstering his plummeting popularity through the familiar device of FEAR.
No, my very well-honed political instincts tell me it was probably another FBI or CIA operation, as I believe many of the bombings in Iraq that kill mostly Iraqui civilians and foment division have been: providing a Raison d'etre for staying on.
Sadly, I 've been right about my political instincts for over 40 years now, mostly by going on the assumption that, If YOU can imagin it, THEY have already DONE IT!
It's a very deep and ugly rabbit hole indeed, and we'll need a very bright light to get to the bottom of it. (just don't hold your breath waiting for the "News" to do it!)
COMMENT #58 [Permalink]
said on 7/10/2005 @ 10:15 am PT...
OOO! Very Interesting Article here: From 9/11 to 7/7: Crusade intensifies
The staged terrorist attacks are the occasions when even the most honest and sincere of us lose sight of the reality and start taking things on the face value alone. One can guess this from the statements of George Galloway and others who called it “shock and awe” in London
Galloway considers that Londoners had “paid the price” of the increased likelihood of terrorist attacks for the UK government’s role in the attacks on Iraq and Afghanistan. However sincere such comments may be, they directly support the accusations without evidence which Blair put forward within minutes of the attack.
This was not a “shock and awe" in London because it was not an attack by aggressors from outside after years of lying through their teeth to the whole world. It was just another inside job: another staged 9/11 to intensify the war on Islam. Follow the pattern to believe it.
COMMENT #59 [Permalink]
said on 7/10/2005 @ 8:33 pm PT...
Peter Power, Visor Consultants and the amazing coincidence:
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.
The transcript is as follows.
POWER: At half past nine this morning we were actually running an exercise for a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning, so I still have the hairs on the back of my neck standing up right now.
HOST: To get this quite straight, you were running an exercise to see how you would cope with this and it happened while you were running the exercise?
POWER: Precisely, and it was about half past nine this morning, we planned this for a company and for obvious reasons I don't want to reveal their name but they're listening and they'll know it. And we had a room full of crisis managers for the first time they'd met and so within five minutes we made a pretty rapid decision that this is the real one and so we went through the correct drills of activating crisis management procedures to jump from slow time to quick time thinking and so on.
Click here for a clip of this dialogue. Click here for a longer clip where the comments can be heard in their full context.
COMMENT #60 [Permalink]
said on 7/11/2005 @ 4:39 pm PT...
Thanks WP, I was feeling so jaded when the first thought in my head after hearing of the London bombings was.... How Convenient. As tragic, infuriating, and depressing as the state of things are right now, it is, none-the-less, often very difficult to not end up feeling like Jerry from "Conspiracy Theory". The only thing that keeps me going is knowing that I'm not alone out here thinking the worst about those in power. Kinda makes me wonder what you would have written about if they hadn't timed it just this way, however.
Wishing You Laughter
COMMENT #61 [Permalink]
said on 7/12/2005 @ 1:22 am PT...
re #60: Well, Quinn, I had Double Whammy ready for Saturday but nothing for Sunday, until this came up ... so if it hadn't ... I would have had another day to think about it!!
COMMENT #62 [Permalink]
said on 7/12/2005 @ 1:35 pm PT...
Nice to see I made the funny papers! Comment #38.
Isn't it time to make a big table of motivation possibilities? But then I read Elders of Zion and what is true about it is that I feel like I'm out of my league. Someone has the smarts to outwit reasoned speculation, and any of its friends, at the root.
Relentless world wide speculation and reporting fueled by blogging, however, is a new breed.
COMMENT #63 [Permalink]
said on 7/12/2005 @ 7:27 pm PT...
Ahoy there, ICGreen! Your handle is certainly very appropriate at this blog!!
COMMENT #64 [Permalink]
said on 7/13/2005 @ 12:04 pm PT...
WP, (and LARISA, if you're scanning this) it would wonderful if the likes of a Raw Story or indeed Bradblog could make contact with Mr Peter Power in order to clarify several issues that arise from his interview.
Here's a few questions for starters from the transcript.
"And one of the first things is, get that bureau number, when you have a list of people missing, tell them. And it took a long time"
1st Q: What bureau were you referring to?
2nd Q: What organizations had prior knowledge of the Visor 07/07 exercise?
Who knows, this could be a non-story, ....but!
COMMENT #65 [Permalink]
said on 7/13/2005 @ 1:31 pm PT...
You got your thinking all bollexed up.
If there is a 'threat' of a potential 'attack' by Arabs anywhere it would be very (LIKE IN VERY) unlikely that the threat would be against Belgium. Or Iceland. You figure out who would be the most likely victims----duh!
Where in your link is a mention of Belgium?
Kira #34 ---"There are good and bad people of every race, creed and nationality. If a Jewish person is involved in corruption, the recognition of such should not be considered Anti-Semite."
If a person is involved why is it necessary to state he is Jewish? And if he is why does that get extended? Are you of the opinion that AntiS does not exist?
Until #27 there were 7 to 8 posts (about 40%) in which Anti S could be shown. Charlie at #6 is classic.
COMMENT #66 [Permalink]
said on 7/13/2005 @ 11:23 pm PT...