For some, that question is enough to stop them believing anything other than the official conspiracy theory or ‘official narrative’ as others may phrase it.
But lets be frank, it is a thoroughly stupid stance to take.
1) That someone involved in one of the most significant world shaking event would, having initially been a willing participant, simply MUST admit to the fact later. This ‘opening’ condition alone, is likely to result in the majority of participants having a very strong reason to keep it secret.
2) Given the likely real suspects behind 9/11 and the dirty things they get up to, it is more than reasonable to believe any potential squealer would face execution with a similar threat facing their families.
3) Imagine some false-flag (FF) has occurred and a squealer came forth 7 years alter. From the time the event happened up until the ‘confession’ the false flag was still a false-flag. It does not magically become a FF simply when someone admits to it.
4) Even if a confession does come forth, the following powerful filters need to be successfully penetrated; The ‘confession’ needs
a) mass exposure
b) mass communication (not necessarily the same as a)
c) mass acceptance.
These filters even when overcome still don’t guarantee people will abandon the adopted mental barrier heading this post.
5) Not all FF’s will have a whistle-blower. To believe that to date, the FF’s and black-ops that have been exposed are the only FF / black-ops that have ever occurred and that no deadly secret has ever been taken to the grave is simply the philosophical stance of cretin.
The weight of ALL evidence towards official forces being involved in 9-11 is simply overwhelming relative to the ‘official conspiracy story’, and in my opinion is is well beyond all reasonable doubt.
Why should justice and punitive action NOT be taken just because of the idiots who adopt such pathetic stances as “If 9/11 was a false flag operation, why hasn’t anyone squealed?” The only answer to that is surely this: Because in reality, possibly deep in their conscious, they prefer and benefit from the consequences that followed the FF rather than the consequences of having true justice be served and all ramifications from that.
What a world, huh!
Suggested reading: “Conspiracy Theorists & Cognitive Dissonance” by http://eleveneleventruth.wordpress.com/2010/08/05/conspiracy-theorists-cognitive-dissonance/
The BBC newz (newz, ‘cos it certainty ain’t news) and current department really turns my stomach. Medialens [1, 2, 3] amongst others has consistently uncovered the filth (my words, not their) that gets passed off as journalism, and not only that, but insanely the worlds best journalism – so they would have us believe]. Far from the pinnacle of journalism, it’s the pinnacle of propaganda and downright lies.
BBC Covers Up War Crimes – Misleads Over Syrian Security Operations. by Tony CartalucciUpdate: Indeed BBC did not see “MIGs” bombing Aleppo, though it appears they weren’t even anti-tank SU-25’s but rather training aircraft. Aero L-39 Albatros are also not even “Russian-made” as the BBC claimed. The article below has been amended to reflect this information. Read here for more.
July 25, 2012 – When big lies must be told, BBC is there. From Iraq to Afghanistan to Libya and now Syria, BBC has paved the way for Western disinformation meant to mange public perception around a war the public would otherwise never support or tolerate.
Now, as NATO’s Al Qaeda mercenaries operating under the banner of the so-called “Free Syrian Army” flow over the Turkish-Syrian border in an attempt to overrun the city of Aleppo, BBC is there, attempting to manipulate the public’s perception as the conflict unfolds.
BBC’s Ian Pannell admits he rode with a convoy of milatnt fighters into Aleppo at night. He claims many are desperate for the FSA to succeed, “clamoring for freedom denied by their president,” but concedes many others fear an “Islamic takeover” and sectarian “division and bloodshed.” The latter of course, is self-evident, while the former is the repeated, unfounded mantra of the Western media used to cover up the latter.
Pannell poses amongst staged settings, claiming a single burning tire equates to a barricade set up by the militants (see more on the use of burning tires as propaganda here and here). He concedes that militants are taking to the rooftops with sniper rifles in the districts they claim they control – begging one to wonder where else terrorist snipers have been, and how many “sniper” deaths have been mistakenly blamed on the government.
Covering Up FSA War Crimes
Pannell then attempts to cover up serious war crimes committed by the FSA militants he is traveling with, claiming that men the FSA arbitrarily rounded up while “seeking revenge” were “suspected Shabiha,” harking back to Libya’s NATO-backed terrorist death squads rounding up and killing Libya’s black communities in orgies of sectarian genocide – which outlets like the BBC defended as simply rebels targeting “suspected African mercenaries.” Pannell papers over what he just reported with the unqualified claim that there is “little justice” on either side. What became of the FSA’s victims is not revealed.
Image: From BBC’s Ian Pannell – young men “suspected” of being “Shabiha” are rounded up as the FSA “seeks revenge.” BBC fails categorically to explain how NATO-backed terrorists can “liberate” a city that is admittedly pro-government – but it appears it will be done through terrorism, brutality, mass murder, and intimidation.
….
BBC reporter Ian Pannell’s failure to report on the war crimes he admitted witnessing, smacks of endorsement and complicity – an attempt to preserve the romanticism the West has desperately tried to associate with their FSA death squads. Pannell’s report also confirms earlier descriptions of widespread atrocities committed by the so-called “Free Syrian Army.”
In Libya, when the government of Muammar Qaddafi collapsed, and as Libyan terrorists overran the last of the nation’s security forces, entire cities of Libya’s blacks were overrun, their populations either mass-murdered, imprisoned, or forced to flee to refugee camps. These are people who had lived in Libya for generations. A similar fate awaits Syrians should NATO prevail.
BBC Confirms Syrian Army Use of Heavy Weapons ARE Proportional to FSA Threats
Pannell’s propaganda in Aleppo continues, where he admits FSA militants possess tanks they allegedly “captured” from the Syrian military, but then, showing video of what is either an anti-tank SU-25 aircraft or an Aero L-39 Albatros training jet, rolling in with machine guns, claims it marks a “dramatic escalation” and a sign of “desperation.”
Image: From BBC’s Ian Pannell -FSA tanks are positioned in or around Aleppo, according to BBC. The myth that NATO-backed militants are “lightly armed” is unraveling as they attempt to take on large cities flush with cameras and media from both sides. Eager propagandists attempting to portray victories have more than once shown “captured tanks” in the hands of militants. Heavy militant weapons beget heavy government weapons.
….
In reality the Syrian army is using force directly proportional to the threats NATO-backed militants have presented. Tanks and heavy weapons mounted on trucks, also featured in the BBC report, are legitimate targets for government heavy weapons. The precision an SU-25 lends the battlefield versus heavy artillery bombardments when neutralizing FSA heavy weapons is the only conceivable way to minimize civilian casualties.
Images: (Top) From BBC’s Ian Pannell – BBC and other Western media outlets have claimed “MIGs” are bombing Aleppo’s civilian populations. This all based on a single “tweet” made by BBC’s Ian Pannell. Pannell now reports this video depicts what he saw – which in reality is either an anti-tank SU-25 or Aero L-39 deploying machine guns, not bombs, versus what Pannell already admits are FSA heavy weapons, not civilian populations. (Bottom) Several orthographic views of the SU-25 and Aero L-39 for comparison.
….
And as the Western media is so found of reminding its viewers, Aleppo is decidedly pro-government, and pro-President Bashar al-Assad. Therefore to indiscriminately use disproportionate force serves no purpose for the Syrian government, who has gone through extraordinary lengths and placed its soldiers at great risk to minimize damage to the city and its inhabitants – a city and population that serves both an important role economically and culturally for all Syrian people.
Remember Fallujah, Iraq
A government is put in a difficult position when armed gangs enter a city “seeking revenge” as BBC’s Ian Pannell puts it, when these gangs have trucks mounted with heavy weapons as well as tanks in their possession. For the West, to berate the Syrian government and portray its security operations as unmitigated “brutality” is disingenuous at best, especially considering the militants are there solely because of years of financial, military, and political support from the US, Israel, and the Gulf State despots.
Image: Western hypocrisy – Fallujah, Iraq in 2004 was bombarded by artillery and airstrikes for weeks leading up to the final invasion. When over 10,000 troops entered the city, they were accompanied by tanks, and supported by heavy artillery and airstrikes. When the West is subjugating others, heavy weapons seems acceptable – but not when another nation attempts to defend itself from admittedly Western-backed terrorists.
….
The West might want to also revisit the lessons it learned from flattening the Iraqi city of Fallujhah, twice. The US bombarded the city for weeks prior to its final invasion in 2004, where over 10,000 troops entered with heavy artillery and air support. Apparently it is acceptable for the West to subjugate others using such tactics, but nations are prohibited from using similar tactics to defend themselves. The Syrian uprising was a foreign-plot stretching back as far as 2007, foreign militants admittedly flowing over the border from across the Arab World, admittedly armed and funded by the US, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar.
The Battle of Fullujah is considered a notch in the belt of Western military prowess, while the West condemns Syria’s attempts to defend one of its most important cities from foreign-subversion and destruction. While NATO believes it can still win the geopolitical battle it is waging against the Syrian people, it has already long lost the battle for moral superiority.
Sadly, I’m still unable to get the time to comment on my last two posts. I’ll repost them when I’ve commented. But I HAVE to comment on this.
That horrible Frank ‘Goebels’ Gardner is peddling his trade again.
see: h___ttp://www.b___bc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18015935 (remove the underscores)
Frank in my eyes, is the kind of creature I really don’t like. I have zero confidence that he isn’t part of a British establishment cum ‘intelligence’ [sic] ring placed in the media (like they so often are) just to spread propaganda.
Well here, the BBC allows its “security” correspondent (pfffff!) to trot out his own little conspiracy theory, that the Syrian regime is engaging in false flag operations against itself. The BBC allows this because it fits in nicely with whitey is mighty and white-knightly while darky is naughty and dark-knightly. Where’s your proof Pffffrank?
The weird Lyse Doucet plays the game too, reporting – without challenge: “The opposition says the attacks were carried out by the government itself to discredit rebel forces.”
Come on Frank, why not talk about 9-11 then you creep.
By the way, do you still keep miniature Qur’ans in your ass pocket?
Please note: It is actually entirely possible that Frank is actually onto something. I have no love for the Syrian tyranny, like many so called “Muslim” governments. Who seem to think torture, oppression and idol worship of the countries leader is one of the pillars of Islam. Well, maybe that’s a bit harsh. They are after all largely propped up by their pro-Zionist western masters, so what do you expect. However, the bare faced cheek of the BBC to only channel certain conspiracy theories is just vile.
And actually, Frank would know a thing or two about false flags, wouldn’t ya Frankie.
The sexual pressure has gotten too much. It’s been too long since Zionist Israyhellis last masturbated over the bodies of dead Palestinians. So to get their sexual catharsis, they’re once again killing more kids and innocent adults whose crime has been to be born on land the Ziofreaks decided to steal. All fully supported by fellow necrophiliacs Obama and Cameron, like all US and UK ‘leaders’ before them.
The real modern axis of evil USUKZ simply cannot stop. It’s love of slaughtering people seems insatiable.
And of course the shitty BBC/BBZ is talking about it as there are no instigators and no victims – other than the poor Israyhellis of course. As usual when the BBZ can be bothered to talk about the killing of a Palestinian, then that Palestinian is ‘Militant’ as though the accused was on some operation in progress with just seconds left before Israyhell came to a fiery end. The BBZ is a real nasty piece of work – a perfect companion to lick the hand of who it loyally serves. It simply cannot and will not report things as they are regarding to the genocide against the Palestinians. It always counters the MASSIVE, instigation of force and bombs (supplied by US with full support of the UK) with some mysterious and totally inapplicable and sickly laughable notion of balance, reducing the eye for an eyelash to equality.
Just imagine them applying their Israyhelli methodology to Cambodia.
I hope and pray the BBZ’s lies and deceptions are easily sen through by the people, and I think they may well.
I seriously look forward to the day the BBC makes it’s last rotten broadcast.
Finally American (more accurately: ‘USan’) leadership that I don’t mind: The Occupy Wall St. protests. This weekend has seen a number of similar protests around the world.
No, I won’t attempt to smear them by posting a video of one of their activists reading out their manifesto or demands, after which the crowd, very likely for morale building / unity / solidarity reasons then go ahead and repeat, but I’m sure you can find plenty of places in the ‘alternative’ media/blogosphere that will.
John Pilger, my favourite Journalist, was talking at a demo in London the other day on the 10th Anniversary of the US/NATA global bomb fest, which has perhaps claimed 2,000,000 million innocent lives so far.
John said “Civil disobedience is the only way now”. John is wrong IF it doesn’t include public based austerity measures against the state which is screwing them over. For example:
a) Refusal to pay taxes
b) Refusing to keep their money in banks.
there are more, but those two are perhaps the most potent.
And the good news for a change is that there are reports of this very thing happening…
Below is a screenshot of Google search results for “bbc obama jobs plan”. As you can tell – and may well remember – the BBC reported this plan to much fanfare with bold headlines (like in a parallel kind of way its fear inducing reporting in 1990 when Saddam Hussein was tricked into invading Kuwait) almost as though the ‘jobs rescue’ had actually transpired.
I only just realised the plan seems to have failed having read this Bloomberg report about it. I thought to myself, how come I didn’t read it on the BBC? – Especially in light of the way it was hailed last month. It turns out the BBC have written an article about it but wth certainly none of the ‘Shock and Awe’ headlines they peddled out over a month ago. They haven’t ‘undone’ their promotion of this fiendish freak squatting in the house of freaks, known as the White House.
Apart from the Rubgy Union story, you can see the torrent of stories the BBC made.
No, this is NOT a case of media left wing / liberal bias. It’s a case of BBC WHITE POWER ELITE BIAS, which the ‘black’ feel-good figurehead known as Obama pulls off to a tea. The BBC always supports the filthy elite mobsters no matter that political party they are from.
Here’s to the continual decay and rot of the BBC.
–
–
Last thing, was this plan ever sincere? Was it planned to fail? Hummm…
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.
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.
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.”
“Dear white Europeans, please come out in mass protests condemning the terrorist attack in Oslo, don’t be silent, the moderates amongst you must reject him. If you don’t, how do we know you don’t all agree?”
–
Craig Murray also put up a good post entitled “Islamophobia Run Wild” about the BBC (and other Corporate MSM) on this terrorist attack.-
In the UK, the usual idiots are getting into a lather about the latest electronic hijacking (mobile phone) incident which they have been privileged to be informed about. E.g. h_ttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-14027879 and last month: h_ttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14040841
People may remember Henry Porter’s documentary “Suspect Nation” (Henry is a journalist with the Observer – an offshoot from the tabloid newspaper The Guardian)
Suspect Nation ~ 1/5
Suspect Nation ~ 2/5
Suspect Nation ~ 3/5
Suspect Nation ~ 4/5
Suspect Nation ~ 5/5
–
But even Henry’s (now old) documentary was lame in the sense that was analogous to locking the stable door after the horse had bolted, that is the horse that bolted long long ago.
Whether designed for this purpose or not, the electronic age is a boon for the disgusting powers that be. With only common sense, I will assert with 100% confidence that…
You really must expect ANY electronic information about you, will be accessed by anyone that decides to take an interest in your life, for whatever reason, and even if you are not specifically under investigation, there will be (and are!) automated electronic programs that will search the electronic world at random for infomation which someone is interested in. If a random ‘scan’ snares some of your data, you are going to flagged and that information will then probably come under more attention, whereby more of your electroic dealings and private life will come under someone spotlight and be logged.
All this talk of encryption and we need more electronic security etc. is all guff. The medium itself is fundamentally ‘leaky’. Encryption simply prevents the small guy (e.g young nerd) from gaining access to the higher organisations, e.g. government and the pervasive shady organisations that collude with it. Oh, that would be those governments which pontificate about being open the people and all that other BS, you know, the ones what do what they like and don’t have to explain why, because of the ‘national interest’. Like I said, BS!
Microsoft (MS) said the other day it’s cloud based information in Europe cannot be refused if US spy agencies what to look at it. And of course if a US spy agency gets your info, that means Israyhell gets your info. But something that didn’t get as much attention was that MS having a branch in almost every country in the world would have to follow the laws of that particular nation, hence ANY information MS has, would be, if requested to do so, given to in effect ANY government.
And it’s not just MS of course. ALL these megacorps will too.
Basically, if you use electronic media for some kind of action, someone, somewhere does or can know about it. DNA, Iris scans, fingerprint scans. bank transactions inc those over the internet. e-mails, facebook, political views…… You name it. Your life is an open book, and that, from an ordinary person point of view ‘s NOT good at all!
There is only one solution. If you want to maximise your privacy, stop using electronic media.
But NOBODY will.
So why don’t those people ‘shocked’ by all these MSM revelations just shut heck up.
Idiots.
–
Edmund Hillary – the first white man to climb Mt Everest is reported to have been asked:
“Why did you climb Everest” to which came the reply “Becuause it’s there”.
Ask a spy
“why do you do electronic spying” and they may answer “because I can”
Living with the Conspiracy 24-7 
Recent Comments