Archive for the 'false flag' Category



Why Haqqani

About a week ago I came across  this article on ICH.

Extract:

America’s “worst enemy”

The Latest Orchestrated Threat and The End of History

By Paul Craig Roberts

September 27, 2011
Information Clearing House— Have you ever before heard of the Haqqanis? I didn’t think so. Like Al Qaeda, about which no one had ever heard prior to 9/11, the “Haqqani Network” has popped up in time of need to justify America’s next war–Pakistan.

PCR seems to have been right. There’s Haqqani here, Haqqani ther, here a Haqqani, there a Haqqani, everywhere a Haqqani.

Perhaps their Al-CIAda organisation reached its sell-by date. The terror lost it’s fear factor.

The imminent attacks couldn’t muster the necessary terror quotient, despite the CIA/FBI busting their own group on occasion. But I’m wondering could there be a new reason for this new ‘terror’ group? 9-11 defines OBL, and the USUKs coalition of the killing has managed to pin the Taiban to 9-11 too, in certain quarters they pinned Irad and Saddam to 9-11 also. So what’s gonna end up defining Haqqani? Is it going to be “Look! we were soft on terror [we only bombed about 10 countries and killed almost 2 million – not that we care – we don’t do body counts] this is what happens when we are soft on terror”Is the breadcrum trail going to lead to Somalia/Iran/Yemen/Syria?

One begins to wonder what the next terror group will be called. Chances are it’ll sound foreign with the ‘throaty’ sounds that so terrify English speakers.

One wonders how many sleeper cells Haqqani has. What false flag it’ll be blamed for. What Muslim charity group will be closed down and have it’s accounts frozen. What happens to those frozen accounts anyway?

No doubt these Q’s will be answered in the fullness of time.

Advertisements

AJE mind games?

Is Al Jazeera English (AJE) deliberately using the wording “pull” to normalise or numbify peoples minds against this ‘9-11 loaded’ word’? – i.e. the pull word used in the infamous Larry Silverstein interview in which he mentioned watching WTC7’s collapse?

The AJE article in question says “Israel pulls envoy after embassy attack “. Isn’t the usual way to report these things like this: ABC withdraws envoy/ambassador? Isn’t AJE’s title an unusual one? I think what AJE says is grammatically incorrect. The article was written by “Al Jazeera and sources ” – Well, at least the “Last Modified: 10 Sep 2011 07:45” version is.

A friend of mine said Silversteins famous “pull” comment was similarly grammatically incorrect either (in context of getting firemen out of WTC7)

WTC 7 – Pull It By Larry Silverstein

by the way, the alledged comment to firemen was challenged by a “We Are Change” activist:

Larry Silverstein no response to WTC 7 lies

“…the slang in those terms is related the a certain aspect of English, its an adjective. You do not say “pull it ” to bring out people”

If my friend is correct, it is even more pucluar that AJE are also doing it. So I’m even more suspicious of AJE. And dear AJE fans, don’t bother writing in to me to tell me how AJE is good on XYZ and tht reporter PQR is what a journalist should be. I’m NOT talking about individuals here, I’m taking about the whole ethos of AJ and AJE.

Well the mainstream media have done an absolutely pathetic job at bringing up many – or perhaps more accurately: ANY questionalbe points of the events of 9-11.

How far down the inescapable hole have we gone I wonder? Just what are we going to find at the very bottom of it I wonder.

Source:
Al Jazeera and sources

7-7 Researcher Tom Secker – On the Edge

I’ve had some free time to catch up on some videos downloaded some time ago, and I’ve just finished watching a program called On the Edge with guest Tom Secker.

http://www.   youtube   .com/watch?v=ql59RPRL4v0

Tom, creator of the claimed 7/7: Seeds of Deconstruction, was recommended to the program by J7T, i.e. the July 7 truth campaign. J7T are a small group of people – and they can get extremely agitated when shitty Israyhell gets a mention, they have poo-pooed “Zionist” connections not so long after 7/7 despite today J7T claiming We don’t have a clue what happened that day – but if you’ll excuse the liberty: We are pretty sure Zionist Israyhell is not involved . It’s not that surprising that Tom was recommended by them because Tom pushes the same ambiguity that J7T do, but in a reasoned and respectable way devoid of non-sequiturs, diversions and/or false accusations.

Tom is asked about the report of the supposed shootings at Canary Wharf (CW).  He avoids discussion on that. Well, actually, he does and he doesn’t avoid discussion of that issue. He ‘discusses’ it in so far as he mentions it in terms of other non-CW events.

In the interview, (28:48 start) Tom is asked about “the question of who was shot at Canary Wharf ” Note: The host “alex:g” should have added “media reports of…”.

Tom says

28:59

“One of the various things that came out in the reporting on the day of 7/7, was this notion that there had been some kind of police operation at CW, and there was even this rumour that suicide bombers had been shot there by police marksman.” Now that may or may not have happened.”

29:19

“I’m dubious [about the reports] to be honest…”

“…there’s a lot of different rumours going around on 7/7…”

“..Again, it’s a possibility [the shootings], but it’s something we have to have more solid evidence to go on than simply a few media reports saying this way or that”.

Was that a discussion of the possible shootings?

It didn’t look like it to me. It appeared that Tom was trying to ascribe the ‘CW shootings’ to rumour. Fine, but there is no way he can say for certain the reports were actually a rumour. And immediately after this, the discussion moves onto the return tickets. Tom himself says there’s a contradiction here mentioning the governments narrative binging up ONE report in The Mirror about the ‘return tickets’. He then goes on to elaborate on the ‘problem’ talking about the tickets as factual. Now as far as I remember, I’ve read people claiming the CW ‘shootings’ were mentioned on TV and they appeared in one or more newspapers. Tom discusses this one lone report as if it is factual giving credence to The Mirror’s return tickets, but unevenly didn’t apply this to the more reported CW shootings.

You know what?

It doesn’t really matter. Tom’s an individual. He is free to make his own judgements on what he thinks is strong evidence and what he thinks is something to be avoided. He exercises this liberty here regarding the CW ‘shootings, and makes the personal call that it’s something he finds not productive to discuss. OK. That’s a reasonable position to adopt. People shouldn’t throw horrible slander and lies against him if he says something others don’t happen to agree with.

34:44

“Obviously I have a suspicion that 7/7 was some kind of black-op. Otherwise I wouldn’t have made that film”

Here we see J7T being uneven. They recommended Tom who openly admits he has suspicions (see also 2:31 later) , but J7T fiercely attack and repeatedly libel other who have suspicions, one summised because they are suspicions+Israyhell.

Tom goes on to warn (in an advisory capacity) that independently formulated alternative narratives ‘need to know what covert-op looks like’. This is curious. Who has proposed an alternative conspiratorial narrative and doesn’t know the history of black-ops? It seems likely to me that anyone concluding 7/7 is a black-op/false-flag, then they would almost certainly have read up on other things like the Reichstag fire, Gulf of Tonkin incident, Nero’s Rome etc. I have extreme doubts someone would compose a narrative of 7/7 with only knowledge of 7/7. Perhaps Tom was alluding to something else, because what he said here isn’t particularly logical.

Tom mentions ‘people have pushed the connection between 9/11 and 7/7 for  various reasons’ (???)… ” I wonder what reasons Tom knows of ?, anyway…

36:02

“…Particularly with the 7/7 story, what’s so obvious to me, is the number of red herrings there are {I’ve seen that line almost verbatim elsewhere}..Number of things that just been taken down a particular path and it’s then turned out to be untrue.

Well Tom, I seriously doubt you know of any ‘red-herrings in progress’ but it would be nice of you would share them. A other ‘truthers’ have asserted this red herring thing but of course don’t know of any red herrings in progress or have zero proof (other than a reasonable sense of suspicion). But it makes them look smart by pretending they do KNOW these red herrings. What’s more, by asserting red-herrings are part of the 7/7 narrative, Tom is really strengthening his own suspicions that 7/7 was a black-op’ as red-herrings are deliberate acts. And that’s ok. As a thinking human being, he has the perfect right to have those feelings. It would be wise to wonder who, why and how all ‘those’ red herrings are put in place.

Tom continues:

“and the CCTV is a great example of that. You mentioned the conspiracy files and what you there is they got Nick Kollerstrom (NK) who is one of the people who thinks 7/7 was an inside job, was a covert op, and he’d spent three years basically going around saying there is no CCTV from London…”

Excuse me Tom. While I’m not that up to speed with what exactly NK did in those three years, I suspect it was a lot more than ‘just going around saying’ words which perhaps conjure up some homeless man making wild suggestions. Perhaps this would be a bit more accurate(?): “He’d spent three years personally researching, interviewing, gathering evidence and wirting on the subject in the belief there was no CCTV from London – which given none was released for years, wasn’t such an unreasonable thing to do.”  – or “going around saying there is no CCTV from London” If you want to stick to Toms description.

“…those four guys weren’t even in london that day, and claiming that one frame we’d seen from Lution was a fake. So what did they do? They roll out CCTV from Luton showing a nice long stretch of action so, kind of proving that it’s authentic, I mean I suppose the whole thing could be faked, but taking it at face value, and then they show him CCTV of these four guys walking through Kings Cross and he’s flabbergasted, ‘cos he’s been rolled down a cerain path only for them to cut him off.”

Kind of proving it’s authentic? huh? Is it authentic or not? Tom himself later allows for the possiblity that it wasn’t authentic. So Tom, you should really have said perhaps “suggesting the the audience that it was authentic”. Tom again is taking something at face value, which is what NK did before the footage was released – i.e. at face value there wasn’t going to be any footage. And Tom does say various people had requested that exact footage. Tom is impaling himself on his own sword somewhat. To the best of my recollection, the Luton video DOES NOT show the alleged ‘4 bombers’. If you can make them out to me and prove the tape is genuine, then ok, your words make sense.

As for the single frame, MANY people inc some in J7 made statements suggesting the single still frame outside Luton train station was fake, what with bars going through bodies and strange leg dirextions and no distinguishable faces, or if you prefer Toms description again “[NK] claimed the photos were fake” – which by the way there isn’t any proof that they are not fakes!

Maybe Nick did make a boob on the CCTV in London thing. Like any serious investigation, the leading model can then under improvement to fit the known evidence. But of course to those ‘loving liberal’ truthers who hate NK and wouldn’t hesitate to fling muck at him [Nick suspects Israyhelli connections] would use that to dismiss everything NK has ever done or said re 7/7.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing isn’t it Tom. It’s not beyond the realm of possibility that what you find ‘strange’ will eventually be given a palusible explaination. Don’t worry, I’m sure J7T won’t hate you, after all, you don’t mention the “I” word. So readers will have to excuse me for thinking that it wasn’t unreasonable to think there was going to be no CCTV footage. I’d hazard a guess that this crossed almost everyone’s mind at some stage. (c.f. 9/11, pentagon, hotel camera)

The ambiguous approach does have it’s merits, but as I’ve pointed out a couple of times before, it itself is limiting. An alternative narrative based on the facts is inherently closer to the real truth than some amorphous ‘blurr all’ ambiguity. Of course, alternative narratives (subject to human prejudice and biases) can fall foul of information in the hands of people(government) who themselves have an interest in trying to de-rail truth seekers, should the govt be involved with the deliberate killing of civilians. That said, it is mightily peculiar that those in possession of such material (which independent researchers can only scratch and scrape for) can only deliver a narrative that is less plausible than those independent researchers.

It tirns out that Nick probably made a mistake going on a BBC program intent to scorn independent narratives (while glossing over the govt’s Swiss cheese narrative) and J7 didn’t do this to their credit (one wonders why the BBC didn’t take the liberty of picking up on J7’s alternative narratives anyhow). My guess is Nick though he could publicise the problems with the govt’s narrative and show people there was an alternate explanation. But still, we all make mistakes.

Note: If someone proposing a ‘shitty Israyhell’ connection of 7/7 had a name like “alex:g” I can imagine the stinking ridicule that would flow their way from some quarters. Such an “Israyhell’s involved” researcher would also have suspicions flung at him for appearing on the mainstream media.

This interview shows clearly the rank hypocrisy amongst some who call for the truth, oops, I mean the truth(which doesn’t involve Israyhell).

2:31

“When 7/7 happened I instantly felt that this was something that didn’t really didn’t add up, that what what we were being told probably wasn’t true.”

Well done Tom for being honest and humanly flawed like the rest of us and acting on feelings.  It matters not what points I make here. Your effort to advance the truth emerging from that day is applauded.

Tom based his documentary on what he said was:

“the reported facts, at least what it is we’ve been told what reports say the media has said”

{Don’t forget the CW shootings folks}

Finally, that Jaguar, surely that’s a deliberate plant. Surely! I can’t believe the police(?) pouring over that CCTV and scruitinising it for month upon month, would not have ‘seen’ the issue of the Jag.

And what do you know, A car which appreas to be a Jag AMAZINGLY appears what also amazingly looks like a blue micra parked in Luton train station, in a helpful “visual aid” for readers see: J7T picture contained in the post A Nissan Micra Tardis?

Here’s some more of Tom’s words:

“When 7/7 happened I instantly [my emphasis] felt that this was something that didn’t really didn’t add up, that what what we were being told probably wwasn’t true.”

Glyphs, sigils, runes, symbols, ‘sacred’ esoteric geometry.

Strangely, I’ve never really written about this before, even though it’s something quite important to my current and predicted world view. This post is prompted/catalysed from a reply to one of my comments by  Spencer Burrows. I had posted a video by Mark Passio, an ex-satanist, once insider, which features a bit of numerology.

A few other respected commentators have posted about numerology in the past.

Here’s my view on it:

I believe there is something in numerology. Even if there is no ‘manifesting power’ dimension to it, it has the properties of being communicable so does carry a power of some kind – akin to the power of the communicated word. BUT, at the same time, I can’t help feeling uneasy about what perople assert about it, because it seems, anybody could just pick any combination of numbers they wished and perform any mathematical operation on them to get the result they desired. For example, I once read a numerology page about “Prince Charles of Wales” which claimed he was the ‘beast’ because his name, “Prince Charles of Wales” gave the numbers 666. While it is perhaps interesting that those letters came to 666, and  I checked them myself, to me, the article was just daft. His name isn’t “Prince Charles of Wales” at all, according to wikipedia, it’s “Charles Philip Arthur George Windsor” {and yes, I know the Windsor bit is debatable} and his title, again according to wikipedia, is “His Royal Highness The Prince of Wales” (at least from 1958).

Isn’t that a clear demonstration that the author of that claim simply used the letters convenient for ‘proving’ his argument, which although the result is mildly interesting, it isn’t anywhere near a ‘smoking gun’

It seems to me, those guardians of real actual numerological studies, would NOT allow these (real)potent secrets to get loose {for reasons that it could be used against them}. What I find much more credible is those Guardians (perhaps possibly gaining a base in the ancient Indus valley, via the Cain (of Cain and Able infamy)  and enduing up being captured by Cabala/Zohar ‘pseudo’ “Jews”) of this knowledge have allowed the creation of and spread of false/harmful numerology to serve their undoubtedly Satanic agenda. So there is probably something in what Mark Passio says, but (and I could be 100% wrong here)  the numerology he talks about, is probably not exactly what he thinks it is. He said ti represented thought, actions, deeds (whatever it was), and I suspect it is something related to magic or demon influencing.

Sahih International:
And they followed [instead] what the devils had recited during the reign of Solomon. It was not Solomon who disbelieved, but the devils disbelieved, teaching people magic and that which was revealed to the two angels at Babylon, Harut and Marut. But the two angels do not teach anyone unless they say, “We are a trial, so do not disbelieve [by practicing magic].” And [yet] they learn from them that by which they cause separation between a man and his wife. But they do not harm anyone through it except by permission of Allah . And the people learn what harms them and does not benefit them. But the Children of Israel certainly knew that whoever purchased the magic would not have in the Hereafter any share. And wretched is that for which they sold themselves, if they only knew.

I’m afraid until I get to the knowledge these Cabala priests have, I’m not going to be so set-minded as to the workings of numerology and it’s meaning.

Besides, do you really have to go through the dubious area of numerology to conclude 9/11 etc, were evil and Satanic acts?

Google: ‘Hidabroot number 7’ (some of the Hidabroot videos come with subtitles). Do you really think these YouTube ‘rabbi’s’ are telling you the real nature of these things? One Hidabroot Rabbi, Rabbi Zamir Cohen {if the subtitles were correct} is at best a distorter of the truth, and at worst an outright liar:

“These [Israyhelli] politicians don’t understand how they can surrender so much, yield so much, give so very much and yet all of this amounts to nothing. On the contrary, every concession made by Israyhell is interpreted by the Arab side as weakness and surrender rather than gesture of peace. The Arab side utilizes this perceived weakness to ask for more, to fight us more, to struggle more, to hurt more.” – source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g63dR7wOAZc

And you believe he’s telling the truth about numerology?

Here’s a juicy conspiracy theory for you.

Updated

Statement: Unless we experience personal involvement, unfortunately we are hostage to what information others decide to reveal. End statement.

The official version of 9-11 is something only a moron would believe. Yes, there are many people who believe it, but there are many who don’t.

The number of people who didn’t buy 911 was deemed unacceptable, they posed a real danger to maintaining the belief the bulk morons held.

‘Unfortunately’, it’s quite difficult to pull off a false flag (FF), because to hood-wink an increasingly aware, discontent, sceptical and WWW empowered population, you simply must make (or synthesise) credible strings-of-involvement/culpability to those you wish to blame, i.e. people who really, had nothing to do with it.

Use of patsies/stooges is perhaps the most powerful and basic way to create these strings – be the patsies aware [via Radicalisation manipulation; =difficult] of what’s going to go down or not [engage them in a oover story; =much easier] of what they were really being asked to do.

And so an ‘effect multiplier’ idea was born to try and maximise success at pulling off a FF.

As part of your FF, you deliberately incorporate questionable issues into the initial event.
This has a number of advantages, only some of which are mentioned here.

1a) It muddies the waters disguising the real event of that day.

1b) People spend large amounts of time chasing these deliberate inconsistencies – some ending stranded in a field of ambiguity.

2) It allows you to create a ‘truther’ group to gain ‘trust’ amongst other would-be dangerous ‘truthers’, people who may actually uncover your can of worms.

Through your group, you can dribble information – via official channels – according to your requirements, and whether you set up your ‘truther’ group or not, you can achieve the same effect by cleverly laying the same decoy trail of crumbs that you’re pretty sure will be picked up and followed along the path you so desire.

In relation to 2), there’s probably times when you need to silence ‘truther competitors’ out of the way. This can be achieved in a number of ways, e.g. by making fake truther competition groups simply for the purpose of being knocked down – when necessary, hence raising the stature of your chosen (owned or guided) truther group.

You can also set up people whose character is questionable, get them to parrot some line (probably along with some of the truth mixed in with it) destroy their character and the truth they were actually saying {although this is dangerous, you don’t really want any truth to come out at all} is destroyed with them in the process. Kill the messenger to kill the message.

Overall, The most successful way to get away with a FF, is, after the event takes place, to continue to drip more false trails into the mix to hook even more people, ‘truthers’, into a false trail.

Also, as time rolls on, you have the option of destroying some of these false trails simultaneously with the REAL version of events of course – better still only <i>parts</i> of the REAL story!.

Few of the (already)few would notice REAL events of the FF being thrown in the bin, obscured by the adjacent other versions/elements speeding their way into the garbage bin.

So you don’t actually ‘fix’ the narrative. A narrative is necessary, and it pacifies most of the aforementioned believers, but the narrative itself is deliberately false to allow for this incredibly empowering FF management dynamic, while using the minimum number of people to keep the whole thing under wraps.

Most in the establishment will of course follow the official narrative, no matter what crap it is. the real trick lies with the non-official ‘truthers’ and is where attention is naturally focused.

Update: Oh, and on 7/7, I have to say, it seems the ‘truth’ movement is rather split along two lines: One where mention and question of Israyhells role in 7/7 gets a good venting, and the second, pro-Israyhell camp, that launches tricks, tactics and ad hominen attacks on those probing the Israyhelli line, or indeed, anyone else who has given criticism of those who genocided and stole their way into Palestine.

It’s also quite telling that these attacks are practically a one way street, and are hardly reciprocated by those putting  attention on Israyhell.

All these instances add up, and they will do so for a reason.

I suggest pro-Israyhelli forces killed Vittorio Arrigoni

And that’s just an initial reaction. That a ‘Palestinian group’ killed him is as likely as a Zionist who fears God.

This from Lauren Booth: It was my dear friend Vik who was murdered this week in Gaza. I have written an article on my findings in relation to his death which you may wish/be able to distribute.

Jim Corr – doing what he feels is right – speaking the truth as he sees it

It really is easy pickings to show the BBC throwing out garbage dressed as journalism.

Simply read a page on its website.

Consequently, it’s really quite boring to keep referring to it, but sometimes I cannot just let it pass unchallenged. While going through it’s swin(dl)e flu nonsense (e.g. computer models of what to do in possible said pandemic cases)


tip: use this image if you want one to illustrate garbage in garbage out.
Do not use google image to look for gigo
unless you like pictures of men is strange shaped underpants.

I spotted a link to Jim Cor and conspiracy, or HIS conspiracy as it said twice in the very short article. Being the BBC it’s gonna try and paint him as a nut-job or anti-Semite (or double jeopardy: both!). As it turns out the BBC(hite) tries to make it look as if these opinions are his and his alone, which of course they are not. It continues…

“Mr Corr said he took an interest in what he calls “geo-politics” – source http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-12268558

Oh, so now “geo-politics” is a term, his term, that’s specific to Corr. The BBC really have no shame. And if the BBC ever use that term are they going to put it quotes along with the overtones of eye-rolling ridicule.

Here’s Jim on RTE’s ‘The Late Late Show’

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=seU4xsz9vsY

P.S. When I lived in Ireland as a youngster I used to watch the show. Gay Byrne (Gaybo as he was affectionately known) used to present it then. But looking back I think that program plus the influence of British culture upon the Irish youth who migrated in droves to the UK in search of jobs when Ireland’s economy was said to be terrible (my, how history repeats – but this time it’s got loads and loads of lovely debt to service too!) was a pivotal point for Ireland as it began to destroy the restraints the Catholic church placed on society. Now, it seems to me,  Ireland is pretty much a polythene version of the neighbouring nightmare neighbour the UK. Shame.

Anyway, reading the “article” I began thinking (re-thinking is more accurate) that it seems (I may be wrong) that people who have time for one conspiracy seem more prone to embrace the other quite well known conspiracies as a package.

The BBC showed this (as of course was their intention) mentioning HAARP / Earthquake causing technology and man made viruses (H1N1) something I actually agree with. And they do it as a way to ‘rubbish’ such conspiracies. The extremes of this are UFO’s. Which hardens my opinion that these fringe conspiracies are disinformation/diversion.

By way of deception thou shalt wage war. A motto المسيح الدجّال‎ would be proud of.


Viva Palestina – break the siege:

Viva Palestina - break the siege

This blog supports victims of western aggression

This blog supports victims of western aggression

BooK: The Hand of Iblis. Dr Omar Zaid M.D.

Book: The Hand of Iblis
An Anatomy of Evil
The Hidden Hand of the New World Order
Summary Observations and History

Data on Fukushima Plant – (NHK news)

Fukushima Radiation Data

J7 truth campaign:

July 7th Truth Campaign - RELEASE THE EVIDENCE!

Recommended book: 3rd edition of Terror on the Tube – Behind the Veil of 7-7, An Investigation by Nick Kollerstrom:

J7 (truth) Inquest blog

July 7th Truth Campaign - INQUEST BLOG
Top rate analysis of the Inquest/Hoax

Arrest Blair (the filthy killer)

This human filth needs to be put on trial and hung!

JUST:

JUST - International Movement for a Just World

ICH:

Information Clearing House - Actual News and global analysis

John Pilger:

John Pilger, Journalist and author

Media Lens

My perception of Media Lens: Watching the corrupt corporate media, documenting and analysing how it bends our minds. Their book, 'Newspeak' is a gem.

Abandon the paper $cam:

Honest and inflation proof currency @ The Gold Dinar
August 2019
M T W T F S S
« Jul    
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  
Advertisements