Observed Change in US Annual Average Precipitation, 1958-2008

Observed Change in US Annual Average Precipitation, 1958-2008

  Saturday, August 21, 2010

US precipitation has increased an average of about 5 percent over the past 50 years. Projections of future precipitation generally indicate that northern areas will become wetter, and southern areas, particularly in the West, will become drier.
While precipitation over the United States as a whole has increased, there have been important regional and seasonal differences. Increasing trends throughout much of the year have been predominant in the Northeast and large parts of the Plains and Midwest. Decreases occurred in much of the Southeast in all but the fall season and in the Northwest in all seasons except spring. Precipitation also generally decreased during the summer and fall in the Southwest, while winter and spring, which are the wettest seasons in states such as California and Nevada, have had increases in precipitation.

Fairbanks Frost-Free Season, 1904-2008

Fairbanks Frost-Free Season, 1904-2008

  Wednesday, August 25, 2010

Over the past 100 years, the length of the frost-free season in Fairbanks, Alaska, has increased by 50 percent. The trend toward a longer frost-free season is projected to produce benefits in some sectors and detriments in others.
Over the past 50 years, Alaska has warmed at more than twice the rate of the rest of the United States’ average. Its annual average temperature has increased 3.4°F, while winters have warmed even more, by 6.3°F. As a result, climate change impacts are much more pronounced than in other regions of the United States. The higher temperatures are already contributing to earlier spring snowmelt, reduced sea ice, widespread glacier retreat, and permafrost warming. These observed changes are consistent with climate model projections of greater warming over Alaska, especially in winter, as compared to the rest of the country.

Rainfall Variability and Drought in Sub-Saharan Africa

Rainfall Variability and Drought in Sub-Saharan Africa

by
R. Gommes,
Senior Officer, Agrometeorology
and
F. Petrassi,
Statistical Clerk,
Environment and Natural Resources Service (SDRN)
FAO Research, Extension and Training Division

---

(extracted from FAO agrometeorology series working paper No. 9. "Rainfall variability and drought in sub-Saharan Africa since 1960".)

---

Droughts in general

Rainfall variability at a time scale from years to days is as much a characteristic of climate as the total amounts recorded. Low values, however, do not necessarily lead to drought, nor is drought necessarily associated with low rainfall.
Agricultural drought occurs when water supply is insufficient to cover crop or livestock water requirements. In addition to reduced rainfall, a number of factors may lead to agricultural drought, some of them not always obvious. Much more than the occasional widespread and severe climatological droughts which catch the attention of the media, it is this "invisible" agricultural drought which prevents farmers at the subsistence level from achieving regular and high yields. "Invisible" drought is brought about by environmental degradation as much as by climate.

African droughts

The continent has a long history of rainfall fluctuations of varying lengths and intensities. The worst droughts were those of the 1910s, which affected east and west Africa alike. They were generally followed by increasing rainfall amounts, but negative trends where observed again from 1950 onwards culminating, in West Africa, in 1984.
Since then, starting in 1988, the Sahel has recorded a series of good years (frequently accompanied by floods) which some interpret as the end of the Sahelian drought. The reality is that rainfall will continue fluctuating, and that good and bad years will continue occurring. Some general regional patterns can be recognised, which can be expressed in terms of variability (inter-annual and intra-seasonal rainfall), trends (upward or downward) and persistence, a typical inertia which affects many climatic variables at all time scales (good and bad years do not occur randomly, but tend to be grouped).

Good years and bad years

Even allowing for differences between countries in individual years, the period 1960-93 has experienced widely different conditions from year to year. The years from 1960 to 1969 were among the wettest of the period, while the seventies and eighties mostly recorded lower rainfall. The downward trend from 1960 to 1970 affected the whole continent, but resulted in negative impacts on food production only in the low rainfall areas.
The years 1973, 1984 and 1992 were bad, while 1963, and to a lesser extent 1989, were remarkable years in that almost the whole continent experienced above average conditions. 1973 is interesting in that it constituted the first poor year after a run of good years. As such, it caught most countries unprepared. In contrast, the impact of 1984, which was more severe than 1973 in climatological terms, was relatively less serious as the economies of many countries (especially in the Sahel) had learnt by now how to cope with such extreme situations.
In 1973 (and less so in 1984) almost all African countries suffered, north and south alike. In contrast, the 1992 southern African drought was relatively limited in space since the Sahel had one of its good "after 1988" years (with average or above average conditions).

Regional patterns

In order to allow a more synthetic discussion, the sub-Saharan countries can be classified into eight groups of similar behaviour based on rainfall patterns since 1960. The patterns observed in the different groups are not independent. Part of this behaviour is directly linked with the rain-bringing mechanisms in Africa and explains why continent-wide good and continent-wide bad years are infrequent. Each of the groups is characterised by persistence characteristics, trends and pseudo-cycles.

1. Sahel and Sudan: Burkina Faso, Cape Verde, Chad, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal and Sudan

This group is one of the driest and most variable in Africa. Runs of dry years and runs of wet years are a typical feature of the climate of the countries in this group where extreme years (either good or bad) are more likely than average ones.
The group is characterised by a downward trend of rainfall until 1988, followed by series of about-average years. Worst drought years correspond to 1983 and 1984, but severe drought were also recorded in 1972, 1973 and 1977. In 1984, drought severely affected all countries from Mauritania to Ethiopia, including several bordering countries on the southern edge of the Sahel. In contrast, Mali and Niger were more seriously affected than other countries in 1973.

2. Southern-central Africa and Madagascar: Madagascar, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, Zambia and Zimbabwe

The rainfall patterns in this second group are uncorrelated with Sahelian ones; total amounts are slightly higher, and the inter-annual variability is somewhat less. There is also no marked negative trend in rainfall, although the years after 1974, and particularly after 1985, have been characterised by marked pseudo-periodic fluctuations, with peaks in 1985 and 1989, and lows in 1987 and 1992.
Most of the area had not experienced serious drought after 1960, except in 1982, until it was hit by the 1991-92 drought (affecting the 1991-92 southern hemisphere summer cropping season). The drought most seriously affected the centre of the group, while Namibia and Madagascar where relatively less affected. Note that several countries outside this group (Zaire, the Central African Republic, Rwanda and Burundi) also experienced reduced rainfall in 1991-92. However, they usually receive rainfall far in excess of their crops' requirements and suffered less than their southern neighbours.
The countries of the second group have so far displayed a remarkably stable persistence structure in that extremely wet and dry years and average years are about equally likely.

3. Central Gulf of Guinea countries and Tanzania: Benin, Côte d'Ivoire, Ghana, Tanzania, Togo

The behaviour of rainfall in this group is not unlike what was observed in the Sahel, with a slight downward trend, and a tendency towards runs of dry years. The lowest rainfall index was recorded in 1977 (which also affected the Sahel), followed by 1992. In contrast, 1984 and 1972, which were drought years in the Sahel, were just slightly below normal in Group 3. The greatest differences, however, are observed during the sixties where group 3 experienced several well above normal rainfall years.
The group is usually not very drought prone, if only because the countries are not very homogeneous from a climatic point of view. Some areas have bi-modal rains (along the coast in the Gulf of Guinea countries, in the north-east for Tanzania), others have only one season (in the north of the Gulf of Guinea states, most of the country in Tanzania). In addition, Tanzania has high elevation climates and, considering the whole country, planting and harvesting takes place throughout the year
In the countries of this group, precisely because of the different rainfall regimes, drought usually affects relatively limited areas, e.g. southern Lake Victoria in Tanzania in 1974-75 and 1975-76.
The mechanism of the West African monsoon also accounts for the relative stability of the countries in the Gulf of Guinea: the monsoon rain belt moves north about February (first rains in the south) and reaches the "Sahelian" north in May, which thus corresponds with the short dry season in the south. When the rains move south again (September), the season ends in the north and the second season starts in the south, to last until November or December. The failure of the monsoon to move north thus leads to poor rains in the north, but unusually good rains in the south. The same type of compensatory mechanisms also plays a part on a continental scale.

4. East and West Gulf of Guinea: Cameroon, Central African republic, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Guinea, Liberia, Nigeria, Sierra Leone

This is the wettest (Rainfall index: 1938 mm) and one of the least variable groups of countries in the continent. The northern half of several of the countries has Sahelian features, in particular the downward trend of rainfall. However, in contrast to the Sahel, the East and West Gulf of Guinea countries underwent less irregular rainfall (albeit below normal) than the Sahel during the 70s and 80s, and recent years were very close to normal. Given the high absolute amounts of rain, the countries in this group do not suffer so seriously as the arid countries from a comparable reduction in precipitation. In group IV, runs of good and runs of bad years tend to be longer than in the Sahel.

5. Southern Africa: Botswana, Lesotho, South Africa, Swaziland

The Southern African group has a relatively low rainfall index and a variability that exceeds that of the Sahel. There are some common features between this group and Group 2, e.g. dry years in 1973, 1982, 1983 and 1992, but also notable differences, for instance in 1985 and 1993. The countries in this group were severely affected by the 1991-92 drought, which was the most severe after the 1981-85 droughts, the latter having been the worst since the 1920s

6. Horn of Africa and Kenya: Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia

This area includes some of the driest places in the world. The time series which describes Group VI is almost uncorrelated with all the above mentioned groups, and slightly correlated with neighbouring group 8. The Group is characterised by low rainfall and a high variability (24%). The time series displays a typical pseudo-periodic behaviour with a cycle of 4 to 5 years. The region as a whole experienced good rainfall in 1989, but the last run of good years goes back to 1981-1983. Bad years tend to have less negative effect at the higher elevations which characterise central Ethiopia and parts of southern Kenya. 1973 and 1984 were poor years in parts of the region. Parts of the region have more than one cropping season, and drought does typically affect one of them more seriously than the other.

7. Central-west Africa: Angola, Congo, Zaire

This second wettest group (rainfall index 1489 mm) has shown a very "smooth" behaviour between 1964 and 1984, with a slight positive 1960-93 rainfall trend due to a run of wet and very variable years from 1985 to 1990. This also accounts for the very high frequency of "dry" years following "dry" years in this part of the continent.

8. Great lakes countries: Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda

In this group, rainfall indices are high and not very variable. As indicated, the rainfall patterns have some similarity to those in the Horn of Africa, with an almost-significant cycle of about 7 years. The region recorded some very wet years in the early 60s, and a run of low rainfall years starting in 1987.
http://www.fao.org/waicent/faoinfo/sustdev/EIdirect/EIan0004.htm

7/7-The "Magic Bomb" Theory

- The "Magic Bomb" Theory   by Mark Faulk

    This is a story about disappearing terrorists, nonexistent bags, and botched investigations, but most of all, this is a story about magic bombs.

    It's Crime Scene Investigation 101. It's the basic law of physics. It's so elementary, my dear Watson, that even a dancer who was dazed from the shock of being seated directly over the spot where one of the bombs was planted in the London tube carriage two weeks ago could figure it out.

    In a seemingly innocuous article in the British newspaper Cambridge Evening News, 32 year-old dance instructor Bruce Lait, in an interview from his hospital bed, said that "The policeman said 'mind that hole, that's where the bomb was'. The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train. They seem to think the bomb was left in a bag, but I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag."

    Read that last part again, very slowly, and let it sink in. "The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train." "They seem to think the bomb was left in a bag, but I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag."

And the British authorities on the crime scene missed that, and just assumed that it was a carry-on bomb? C'mon, how many times have you seen that bad TV show where the eccentric detective figures out that the crime was an "inside job" because the glass was outside the broken window, not inside where it should have been. I repeat: Crime Scene Investigation 101. Basic physics.

    While describing the scene, Lait said about he and his dance partner Crystal Main, "Out of that whole carriage, I think Crystal and I were the only ones who were not seriously injured, and I think we were nearest the bomb."

    He went on to describe those sitting closest to him and Main when the bomb went off. "I remember an Asian guy, there was a white guy with tracksuit trousers and a baseball cap, and there were two old ladies sitting opposite me." He described the woman whose body was lying on top of him when he regained consciousness as a "middle-aged woman who had blonde curly hair, was dressed in black, and could have been a businesswoman."

    Again, play close attention here. "We were nearest the bomb." An Asian guy, a white guy, two old ladies, and a blond businesswoman......and two dancers.

    So.....if the bomb was in a bag carried on by the terrorist, how could two dancers be "nearest the bomb"? And why didn't the person who was the closest eyewitness see the bomber, or even ANYONE, sitting where the bomb went off? Why was the metal pushed upwards if the bomb was inside of the train carriage?

    Let's put this in perspective, piece by piece:

    "The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train."

    "I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag."

    "We were nearest the bomb."

    An Asian guy, a white guy, two old ladies, and a blond businesswoman......and two dancers.

    Here we go again. Another terrorist event with more questions than answers, questions that the major media (yet again) aren't even asking.

    Hell, I'll even take a stab at answering them:

    The metal was pushed upwards because THE BOMB WAS UNDERNEATH THE TRAIN.

    Lait didn't remember seeing anyone, or a bag that could be holding a bomb, near the point of detonation because there was no bomber sitting there, there was no bag. THE BOMB WAS UNDERNEATH THE TRAIN.

    An Asian guy, a white guy, two old ladies, and a blond businesswoman......and two dancers. There was no Islamic radical, no Mideastern terrorist sitting in that carriage. THE BOMB WAS UNDERNEATH THE TRAIN.

    Dance partners Bruce Lait and Crystal Main were nearest the bomb.....again, no Islamic radical, no Mideastern terrorist sitting in that carriage. THE BOMB WAS UNDERNEATH THE TRAIN.

     We were praised by some, and criticized by others, for posting an article by Jeff Buckley (entitled "London Calling") the day after the first London bombings two weeks ago that questioned the motives behind the bombings, and that asked readers to view the inevitable "official government response" with a healthy grain of skepticism.

    Here's how Jeff so aptly put it:

    "So, when you see the headlines dominated by this story and the mounting evidence of lies, deception, and treason being forever pushed to the back burner, be sure to ask yourself, 'Who benefits from this?' Before you throw your support behind administrations that only have doublespeak, deceit, and death to show for their efforts, be sure to ask yourself, 'Who benefits from this?' And, before you allow yourself to be steamrolled and swept away by the inevitable surge of jingoistic retaliatory euphoria, be sure to ask yourself, 'Who benefits from this?'"

    "Who benefits from this?"

    So here we are, barely two weeks (and another "symbolic" bombing episode) later, and the voices of the Far Right are busy spinning this as yet another excuse for the war in Iraq.....even though the suspected terrorists are Pakistanis. (Sound familiar? The 9/11 terrorists were mostly from Saudi Arabia, so...."Let's bomb Iraq!")

    "Who benefits from this?"

    Here we are barely two weeks later, and the disciples of doublespeak are busy blaming a group of suicide bombers with carry-on bags, even though those who died are the most unlikely group of "suicide bombers" ever to commit an act of terrorism.

    "Who benefits from this?"

    Here we are barely two weeks later, and Bush and Company is using the London bombings to.....successfully.....push through the renewal of the Patriot Act. "Screw the Constitution, they're bombing us!"

    The official spinmeisters are either ignoring the signs that something is just not right here, or dismissing those of us who are questioning the official response as the usual bunch of fringe conspiracy theorists.

    Well guess what? If we don't keep asking the hard questions, and demanding honest, straightforward answers to those questions, then no one will. They've deceived us a million times before, and if honest Americans....and Englanders....don't continue to hold our public officials accountable for their actions and demand the truth, then they will continue to spoon feed us lie after lie after lie....until we eventually all suffocate under the weight of mass deception. And THAT'S the Faulking Truth.

"I was in tube bomb carriage - and survived"

11 July 2005

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/region_wide/2005/07/11/83e33146-09af-4421-b2f4-1779a86926f9.lpf

CAMBRIDGE dancer Bruce Lait has spoken of his miraculous escape when a bomb exploded just yards away from him in a Tube train carriage.

The 32-year-old was knocked out by the blast and awoke to a terrible scene of devastation in the underground tunnel near London's Aldgate East station.

Mr Lait, who teaches dance in Cambridge, believes he and his dance partner Crystal Main were the only passengers in the carriage who survived the blast without serious injury - even though they were sitting nearest to where the bomb detonated.

When he came to, there was a body lying on top of him and he was surrounded by the dead and injured. But incredibly, the only wounds the dance coach sustained were facial lacerations and a perforated eardrum.

"I feel extremely, extremely lucky," he said.

The explosion happened just after Mr Lait and Ms Main, 23, got on the train at Liverpool Street on their way to the South Bank for a rehearsal.

He recalled that the carriage had about 20-25 people in it, from all walks of life, and aged from their teens to over 60.

"I remember an Asian guy, there was a white guy with tracksuit trousers and a baseball cap, and there were two old ladies sitting opposite me," he said.

"We'd been on there for a minute at most and then something happened. It was like a huge electricity surge which knocked us out and burst our eardrums. I can still hear that sound now," he said.

The impact of the blast made him pass out. As he came to, he wondered whether he was alive or dead.

"We were right in the carriage where the bomb was. I was knocked out. I did not know what was going on.

"I wondered if I was dead or not. I said to myself, you can't be dead because your brain is having conscious thoughts, so concentrate hard. I was telling myself 'wake up Bruce, wake up'."

Disorientated, he only gradually realised where he was and what had happened.

"When I woke up and looked around I saw darkness, smoke and wreckage. It took a while to realise where I was and what was going on, then my first concern was for Crystal.

"She was okay but she was in shock because she was trying to deal with the person on top of her who had massive head injuries. We have just found out that this person died," said Mr Lait, who lives in Suffolk.

He too was afraid to move because there was a seriously injured woman lying on top of him.

"I realised someone was lying on top of me. I tried not to move her because I didn't know if she was still alive, or I could have made it worse. This person also died, while on top of me."

At the same time, he slowly tried to work out whether he or Crystal had been injured.

"I thought if I can wiggle my toes I'm okay, and I could, and I asked Crystal to do the same."

Describing the scene as they waited for help, he said: "It was just the most awful scene of death and there were body parts everywhere. There was something next to me. I was trying not to look. I couldn't figure out what it was."

When paramedics arrived, they confirmed that the woman on top of him was dead and carefully moved her body. Mr Lait said the middle-aged woman had blonde curly hair, was dressed in black, and could have been a businesswoman.

He and Crystal were helped out of the carriage. As they made their way out, a policeman pointed out where the bomb had been.

"The policeman said 'mind that hole, that's where the bomb was'. The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train. They seem to think the bomb was left in a bag, but I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag," he said.

They were led through the tunnel to the platform at Aldgate, which was just a few hundred yards away, and taken out of the station to wait for an ambulance.

Mr Lait was taken to the Royal London Hospital, Whitechapel, where he was visited by the Queen on Friday.

He said: "They asked would I mind if my name were put forward and I said I'd love to meet the Queen, even if the circumstances weren't ideal."

Sitting with his parents, Pat and Tom, Mr Lait told the Queen as she stood at his bedside: "I'm very thankful to still be here."

He said of Her Majesty: "She just seemed very nice and concerned, she seemed very genuine."

Now back at home, he has been trying to recover from the ordeal, with the help of friends and family.

Mr Lait, who teaches the Latin formation team XS, based in Cambridge, and the Cambridge Dancers' Club, said he has been moved by people's care and consideration.

"I've had people who know me phone me from all over the world and ask if I am alright. Those pictures of me and the Queen have gone all over the world."

And he said the terrible experience has given him a new outlook on life.

"It has made me realise how important life is, and that we only get one life, and we've got to be happy with what we've got in our lives."

Reflecting on the ordeal, he said: "Out of that whole carriage, I think Crystal and I were the only ones who were not seriously injured, and I think we were nearest the bomb.

"It makes me thank Him up there. I'm not overly religious but I'm not a disbeliever. I pray now and again. Something like this has just made me think, 'thank you Lord'."

MI5 use of Torture, in Quest for the London Bombings mastermind

During many of the interrogations, he says, the MI5 officers would ask
him: “We’re not torturing you, are we?” He would confirm that they were not.

Jamil Rahman, a former civil servant from south Wales, is a British citizen who moved to Bangladesh in 2005 and married a woman he met there. He returned to the UK last year, claiming to have been tortured in Bangaladesh with MI5 collusion. They were trying to get him to confess to be the mastermind behind 7/7! He is now suing the Home Secretary over UK’s role in his detention over there.
Confess, or we Rape your Wife
A Guardian article described the threats made to Jamil Rahman: If he didn’t confess, they would rape his wife ‘(!!) They threatened my family. They go to me, “In the UK, gas leaks happen, if your family house had a gas leak and everyone got burnt, there’s no problems, we can do that easily”.’
‘Tortured while MI5 left the room: Briton’s claim after 7/7 attacks’   Ian Cobain guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 26 May 2009
Mr Rahman (31 years old) did eventually succumb – and made a false confession of his involvement in the July 7 bomb plots. It is quite hard to believe, that this is happening. We emphatically demand the names of his torturers, and that they be put on trial. One should not criticise a man for doing this. After all, even the great scientist Galileo recanted when shown the instruments of torture by the Holy Inquisition.
Explained Mr Rahman: ‘It was all to do with the British. Even the Bengali intelligence officer told me that they didn’t know anything about me, that they were only doing this for the British.’ He was released after three weeks but re-arrested and mistreated repeatedly over the next two years. He described how two men he believes were British agents would leave the room for ‘a break’ while he was beaten. They often asked: ‘We’re not torturing you, are we?’ and recorded his confirmations that they were not, he alleges.
When the Bangladeshi police came to take away Jamil Rahman, he says that among the armed officers surrounding the home of his wife’s family were a couple of incongruous figures. Wearing balaclavas that left only their eyes showing were two men who, according to Rahman, towered over the police.
Rahman immediately suspected the men were European, but could not be sure of the colour of their skin as they were wearing gloves. He said there are witnesses to what happened next: the Bangladeshi police picked out Rahman, asked the masked men if this was the individual who was to be detained, and the two men nodded. Rahman was then beaten, and he and his wife driven away.
The events he describes happened on 1 December 2005 and, according to an account by Rahman that forms the basis of civil proceedings being brought against the home secretary, Jacqui Smith, it was the start of an ordeal that would last more than two years. The couple were taken to the local headquarters of the directorate general of forces intelligence (DGFI), one of the country’s main intelligence agencies, and held in separate cells. After being stripped, beaten and told that his wife would be raped and murdered and her body burned, Rahman says he agreed to make a lengthy tape- recorded confession to a number of terrorist offences, including masterminding the suicide bomb attacks on London’s transport network the previous July.
He says he was then questioned by two well-spoken Britons by the names of Liam and Andrew, who said they were MI5 officers. When he told them he had been tortured and had made false confessions, and asked for their help, he says the two said they “needed a break”. Andrew is said to have added: “They haven’t done a very good job on you.” Rahman says he was then beaten, had extreme pressure exerted on his testicles, and was told his wife was to be raped.
When the questioning resumed, according to Rahman, Andrew said: “That’s good, you’ve learned your lesson.” Rahman then made a series of admissions that he and his lawyers say were false. He says he was also shown a number of maps that he was instructed to copy on to pieces of paper, which were taken away by the two.
Rahman says that after being interrogated for almost three weeks he and his wife were released, but he was told that he must reside in his wife’s family’s village and not talk to anyone about his experiences. He says he was told that his calls would be monitored and that he was specifically instructed not to contact any lawyers or members of the media, or the UK high commission in Dhaka.
Rahman, a graduate and former civil servant, had settled in Bangladesh that year after marrying a woman from Sylhet, in the north-east of the country. On his release there his passport was withheld and not returned by the high commission for two and a half years. During that period, Rahman says, he was frequently summoned for interrogations by MI5 and Bangladeshi officials.
He says he was shown hundreds of photographs, including surveillance photographs of friends in the UK, whom he was asked to identify. If he did not co-operate, he says, the two British officers would leave the room, during which time he would be beaten. He says that during these interrogations he was accused of “masterminding” the July 2005 suicide bomb attacks in London.
On one occasion, he says, he was ordered to bring his wife with him, and she too says she was threatened with rape. Rahman says that senior Bangladeshi agents who were supervising his mistreatment would give instructions that his head was not to be marked and that no bones were to be broken.
During many of the interrogations, he says, the MI5 officers would ask him: “We’re not torturing you, are we.” He would confirm that they were not, and on one occasion he was told to repeat his answer in a louder voice, which he did. Rahman believes that these exchanges were being recorded.
He alleges he was also questioned by three men who identified themselves as Scotland Yard officers, and by an American woman who called herself Mary. He says the police wanted him to give evidence against another man in a UK trial, and alleges that MI5 said it would arrange for others to give evidence against him if he refused.
Rahman returned to the UK in May last year after his passport was returned by British consular officials in Dhaka. He embarked on legal proceedings once his wife and son were able to join him last week. The couple’s four-month-old boy remains in Bangladesh, however, as they have not received the British passport for which they applied 12 weeks ago. They say they are deeply concerned for his safety.
The Guardian has been reporting for almost four years on allegations that British intelligence officers have been colluding in the torture of ¬British citizens during counter-terrorism ¬investigations, and on the evidence that supports a number of the claims.
Torture in Operation ‘Crevice’ (1)
Torture was also used in the ‘Crevice’ trial, which preceded the London Bombings in a rather strange manner, to obtain its confessions. My book describes (p.168) how, on the steps of the Old Bailey, on 30th April 2007, after being found guilty, Salahuddin Amin had these words read out by his lawyer, the distinguished civil rights lawyer Imran Khan:

‘I demand the truth about the other people who are still in secret detention and being tortured as part of this misguided war on terror. I was illegally detained with some of these people. I know that some of them were treated far worse than I was, while British, American, and Canadian intelligence officers stood ready to benefit from the unreliable fruits of torture.’

Fake- terror cases such as Britain’s Operation ‘Crevice’ (Nobody hurt, stash of fertiliser found in storage locker, Muslims get sent to jail, because they might have been intending to … [fill in this section]) have used torture-extracted confessions. That is the ghastly fact.
‘Crevice’ is sometimes alluded to as the ‘fertiliser trial’: ‘The fertiliser trial has also raised questions of an “MI5 link to torture”. The Guardian journalist Ian Cobain reported that “one of the men convicted of the bomb plot was arrested in Pakistan and interrogated there for 10 months while his co-conspirators were being questioned in London. Salahuddin Amin, a British citizen, alleges he was repeatedly beaten and flogged, threatened with an electric drill, shown other prisoners who had been tortured, and forced to listen to the screams of men being abused nearby….Under the 1988 Criminal Justice Act, it is illegal for British officials to commission acts of torture anywhere in the world, or even to acquiesce in the face of torture. The crime can be punished by life imprisonment. MI5 officials denied that they knew Amin was being tortured. They said there was no reason to suspect it was happening. Amin’s lawyers dismiss these denials as laughable, given the ISI’s notorious reputation for mistreatment of prisoners. His counsel, Patrick O’Connor QC, suggested to the jury that perhaps both sides in the so-called war on terror had come ‘to share common standards of illegality and immorality’. Amin’s lawyers are convinced that the reason he was held in Pakistan for so long without consular assistance was that British officials had decided that his questioning, under torture, should be coordinated with the questioning of his co-conspirators being held in the UK. Amin was eventually set free, told that he had ‘been cleared in England’, and allowed to leave the country. He was re-arrested as his plane touched down at Heathrow. Amin is expected to appeal against his conviction, and his lawyers are preparing a civil action against the British government.”’
Use of torture
In his essay upon Sir Francis Bacon, who was the Lord Chancellor of England in Elizabethan times and is regarded as the ‘father of British Philosophy,’ the historian Lord Macaulay described him as noting down confessions extracted under torture, and that he was even knowing while he did so that that confession was untrue! Macaulay has been much criticized for that essay, but it seems likely that this particular detail was correct. That is the crux of the matter: quite apart from the terrible ethics of being prepared to use torture, it is not the route to finding truth – it leads somewhere else.
Does Britain condone or collude in use of torture, under any circumstances? The answer to this needs to be very simple and unqualified: N-O, no, never. Make sure your MP agrees with you on this matter. And, to show that it means this, those imprisoned from the Crevice trial (its verdict was on May 1st, 2007) should be released. ‘Forced confessions were gained through illegal detention, and torture abroad.’ – this Operation Crevice trial statement was read out by lawyer Imram Khan on steps of Old Bailey. Official denials that Britain uses torture can all too easily mean, that it happens in host nations – with MI6 agents standing nearby!
Likewise, for the Heathrow Liquid Bomb trial – let’s here quote Guardian correspondent Craig Murray (ToT p176):

“… an interrogation in Pakistan revealed the details of this amazing plot to blow up multiple planes … Of course, the interrogators of the Pakistani dictator have their ways of making people sing like canaries. As I witnessed in Uzbekistan, you can get the most extraordinary information this way. The trouble is it always tends to give the interrogators all they might want, and more, in a desperate effort to stop or avert torture. What it doesn’t give is the truth.” (2)

Maybe those words need to be engraved on the walls in halls of justice.
1. This term ‘Crevice’ has no meaning, its just the term by US intel., who brewed it up (ToT, p166)
2. The UK Terror plot: What’s Really Going On? 15 August 2006, archived at: www.oilempire.us/blair-scare.html.

7/7-The Phantom Menace

The Phantom Menace

Last year, Britain’s Prime Minister Gordon Brown wrote:

We should be under no illusion that the biggest security threat to our country and other countries is the murderous agents of hate that work under the banner of al-Qaida.  (The Guardian March 22 2009)

Wow, it is hardly surprising that British taxpayers need to hand over more than forty billion a year to the military - and also have to maintain an ‘anti-terror’ police squad. (1) Or … could this be in large part imaginary, a kind of collectively-shared hallucination, what we might call the Phantom Menace? WWould that be needed by a war-making civilisation like ours, to keep everyone scared? For that view, we quote here the wise cleric of the Birmingham mosque, Dr Naseem:  

I don’t think al-Qaeda exists because we Muslims all over the world have not known this organisation. The only information about this organisation is coming from the CIA. Now, the CIA is not known for telling the truth.

There are two books concerning the event of July 7^th, 2005, which have chapters with a title, The Phantom Menace - my book and that of Daniel Obachike, called The 4^th Bomb. Who did it, who is the enemy? My ToT described how Al-Qaeda was assembled and formulated by the FBI in the late 1990s (ToT, p.214) – ‘when no Muslim organization called itself by that name’. Maybe John Pilger is right to argue:

Western war-states such as the US and Britain are not threatened by the Taliban or any other introverted tribesmen in faraway places, but by the antiwar instincts of their own citizens.

- quoting from another fine essay of his about those who are trying to kick-start WW3. Fear is the message and, war, alas, is the purpose.
On the day of July 7^th, 2005, Labour MP Robin Cook wrote,

So long as the struggle against terrorism is conceived as a war that can be won by military means, it is doomed to fail. The more the west emphasises confrontation, the more it silences moderate voices in the Muslim world who want to speak up for cooperation.

Those were wise words written on that historic day! We should remember them. His article further explained how ‘Al-Qaeda’ only meant ‘the database’ and was Bin Laden’s list of persons working under him. Cook was the one person who had the authority to challenge Blair over the ‘War on Terror’ narrative within the parliamentary Labour party – and he was dead a week after writing this (he died suddenly of a ‘heart attack’ while out walking on a family holiday). Thus the Empire works, ‘through force and make-believe.’
BBC Admits, Al-qaeda never existed                                                                            27 December 2009
Britain’s Al-Qaeda expert is surely Jason Burke, who wrote Al-qaeda, Casting a Shadow of Terror’ in 2003 (2). On a BBC documentary, September 2009, viewers were staggered to hear him explain how ‘There is no al-Qaeda organization … it simply does not exist.’ Britain and America have been ‘chasing a phantom enemy’ for all these years. The West has dreamed it up, as if it had ‘tentacles that spread out to sleeper cells’ in various nations. Gosh! Burke characterized this as the great Osama bin Laden myth, as if he were walled up in a great ‘fortress that did not exist’ in the Tora Bora mountains. His video shows how British and American troops invading Afghanistan in 2001 had to admit that they could not find al-Qaeda to fight – because, as Burke explained, it wasn’t there…
Too right Mr Burke – and thank you for saying that! That’s why the Phantom Menace is such an important modern concept. The British army is fighting a war against an enemy that does not as such exist, which is why it can’t ever ‘win.’ It will soon be a bunch of sitting ducks protecting a US pipeline; is that why it’s there? Fake terror has continually to be generated, to make the populations of the US/UK compliant in what are in effect colonial wars of Empire. Otherwise the British  people might start to wonder, as to whether there is not some more enjoyable way of spending forty billion a year?   
The US presently has a ‘burn’ of five million dollars an hour for its Afghan war – altogether it is spending twenty million dollars an hour on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Also, the biggest UK army base since WW2 (according to Wikipedia) is in Helmand province in Afghanistan. 90% of the world’s opium/cocaine comes from that poppy cultivation area, which gives a huge source of liquid or invisible income for whoever is cultivating it: tens of billions of dollars or opium from Afghanistan alone – in effect, managing the world’s heroin supply. The Taliban had succeeded in stamping out the opium poppy production in 2000, then after 9/11 and the US/UK occupation it was back to business as usual! Now under ‘NATO’ auspices its numero uno for cannabis as well as Heroin: the British army needs a story as to what it is doing there – a shared myth about who we have to hate.
Bin Laden – still dead after all these years
Osama Bin Laden died on or around 14 December 2001, of kidney failure in the Tora Bora mountains. He had a funeral, produced a will – that sort of thing. Rather final. Complete termination of his radio and phone messages then happened. One wishes that politicians could finally bring themselves to appreciate this simple fact. Can they kindly stop making fatuous remarks about trying to catch him? They would then have to face up to the staggering sequence of about forty manufactured fake OBL videos. That would indeed be a beneficial exercise for them. Who has produced them – with all those bored-looking OBL lookalikes? To a large degree the ISI (Pakistani intelligence) has indeed collaborated with the CIA in making these. This has encouraged the fairy tale that Bin Laden was lurking in the mountains of Eastern Pakistan. The dire consequence of this arrives, in the form of drone attacks by the US military, allegedly ‘taking out’ Al-Qaeda cells in Pakistan.
‘Osama Bin Laden, Dead or Alive?’ is the title of last year’s book by that wise 9/11-expert professor David Ray Griffin. A BBC Conspiracy Files program about Bin Laden (January 2010) used this title. It characterised his view (of OBL dying nine years ago) a ‘conspiracy theory’ and had it opposed by various intel agents and US military experts. It admitted that no authentic sightings or other evidence of his existence had surfaced since December 2001; however, it ducked the question, of whether or not he was responsible for making 9/11 happen. But, that is central to his identity. OBL put out three or four statements post-9/11 denying he had had any involvement in the event and these were his last-ever messages. Like the character Emmanuel Goldstein in Orwell’s 1984, he has been made to live on after death as a hate-and-fear character, a bogeyman who provides ‘menacing’ messages as required.
People are startled when they realize what voice morphing technology can do. Have a laugh here: the faking of so many OBL videos must have consequences for our perception of the posthumous confession-videos of two of the London ‘bombers’ Sid Khan, and Schezad Tanweer. (http://www.wanttoknow.info/060123psyops ) My book quotes a longtime friend of Sid Khan who firmly stated that the voice on that posthumous video did not belong to Khan.
Article Excerpts
1 “Hunt for Bin Laden a National shame’                                       Veterans Today, December 2009

The embarassment of having Secretary of State Clinton talk about bin Laden in Pakistan was horrific.  He has been dead since December 13, 2001 and now, finally, everyone, Obama, McChrystal, Cheney, everyone who isn’t nuts is finally saying what they have known for years.
However … Since we spent 200 million dollars on “special ops” looking for someone we knew was dead, who is going to jail for that?  Since Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney continually talked about a man they knew was dead, now known to be for reasons of POLITICAL nature, who is going to jail for that?  Why were tapes brought out, now known to be forged, as legitimate intelligence to sway the disputed 2004 election in the US? …
The bin Laden scam is one of the most shameful acts ever perpetrated against the American people.  We don’t even know if he really was an enemy, certainly he was never the person that Bush and Cheney said.  In fact, the Bush and bin Laden families were always close friends and had been for many years.
What kind of man was Osama bin Laden?  This one time American ally against Russia, son of a wealthy Saudi family, went to Afghanistan to help them fight for their freedom.  America saw him as a great hero then.  Transcripts of the real bin Laden show him to be much more moderate than we claim, angry at Israel and the US government but showing no anger toward Americans and never making the kind of theats claimed.  All of this is public record for any with the will to learn.
We know this:  Bin Laden always denied any ties to 9/11 and, in fact, has never been charged in relation to 9/11.  …We, instead, showed films made by paid actors, made up to look somewhat similar to bin Laden, actors who contradicted bin Ladens very public statements, actors pretending to be bin Laden long after bin Laden’s death…
For years, we attacked the government of Pakistan for not hunting down someone everyone knew was dead.  Bin Laden’s death hit the newspapers in Pakistan on December 15, 2001.  How do you think our ally felt when they were continually berated for failing to hunt down and turn over someone who didn’t exist?

 2. London’s “Daily Mail” asks  whether Osama bin Laden is Dead, September 11, 2009

 What if he has been dead for years, and the British and U.S. intelligence services are actually playing a game of double bluff? What if everything we have seen or heard of him on video and audio tapes since the early days after 9/11 is a fake – and that he is being kept ‘alive’ by the Western allies to stir up support for the war on terror?

Indeed – and how were the world’s media so gullible? The Mail quotes academics who point out that the early, verifiable videotapes of bin Laden do not match the post- 2001 tapes: ‘Telltale distinguishing features include changed facial structure and increasing secularism in the content of the messages.’ The Mail commented on DRG’s new book:

‘A reason to suspect that all of the post-2001 Bin Laden tapes are fabrications is that they often appeared at times that boosted the Bush presidency or supported a claim by its chief ‘war on terror’ ally, British Prime Minister Tony Blair.

- and concluded, ‘For years, Bin Laden has been the central plank of the West’s ‘war on terror’. Could it be that, for years, he’s just been smoke and mirrors?’
It could indeed, and let’s hope that people get angry as this dawns upon them.
3. This war on terror has been about scaring people, not protecting them’ – The Guardian (concerning the ‘Christmas bomber’)

 ‘The ease with which the plane bomber could operate exposes the vacuity and recklessness at the heart of the US response to 9/11′
So there was no ticking time bomb. No urgent need ever arose to torture anybody who was withholding crucial details, so that civilisation as we know it could be saved in the nick of time. No wires had to be tapped, special prisons erected or international accords violated. No innocent people had to be grabbed off the street in their home country, transported across the globe and waterboarded. Drones, daisy-cutters, invasions, occupations were, it has transpired, not necessary. Indeed, when it actually came down to it, to forestall a near-calamitous terrorist atrocity in the US the authorities didn’t even have to go in search of information or informants. The alleged terrorist’s father came to the US embassy in Nigeria of his own free will and warned them that his son, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, had disappeared and could be in the company of Yemeni terrorists. Meanwhile the National Security Agency had heard that al-Qaida in Yemen was planning to use an unnamed Nigerian in an attack on the US. If that were not enough, then came Abdulmutallab himself, a 23-year-old Nigerian bound for Detroit who bought his ticket in cash, checked in no bags and left no contact information. For seven years the American state manipulated the public with its multicoloured terror alerts. But when all the warning lights were flashing red, it did nothing.’

Refs

1. For a right-wing Tory viewpoint see Celsius 7/7, by British MP Michael Gove. This will accept all of the US/UK military myths put out – the war-ratifying illusions. (Its title alludes to the Ray Bradbury classic, Fahrenheit 451…) 
2. My essay on The Last Days of Bin Laden has: ‘a shelfload of untrue books about OBL exist, of which Jason Burke’s Al-qaeda the true story of Radical Islam is only the most recent.’  His book did I felt rather buy into current terror mythology – of how the 9/11 event had been perpetrated by Osama Bin Laden and so forth. But, all is forgiven with this brilliant TV statement of his. (NB this is one of my five five 9/11 essays that jim Fetzer has reposted.

Help on the 7/7 story from Keith Mothersson

Keith Mothersson helped me more than anyone else with this ToT book. He died catastrophically on the 3rd July 2009, synchronising with its launch, in a psychiatric hospital, his memory wiped. His heart just stopped beating: well fancy that. He had seemed fit enough before that, as someone who worked as a gardener and pedalled around on his bicycle. His grandfather had founded the Tavistock Clinic, and he was looking into certain stories about this institution, when he suddenly lost his memory. I guess nobody will ever know what happened. I carry on without him, but his guiding words are greatly missed.
He founded ‘All Faiths for 911 Truth’, and was the lynchpin of the Scottish 911 movement. He was one character who could get on with the diverse ‘7/7 truth’ factions which otherwise tends to be rather splintered and aggrieved. If perchance one believes he was ‘taken out’ then quite a lot ceased to function after this act.
I knew Keith for about thirty years. He was a socialist Buddhist visionary. I’d say he kept asking himself the question, under what conditions could people live in peace, and why does that not ever seem to happen? He and I and some legal enthusiasts co-founded the little known group Inlap (the Institute for Law and Peace) in the late 1980s, concerned with legal defences used by peace activists and with the concept of mass destruction technology being inherently unlawful. His was basically a feminist vision, about our common Motherland. His vision of what ought to be sacred concerned the immunity of noncombatant civilians, in time of war: that women and children not participating in a war, ought to be safe.
My earliest memory of him, is at a CND conference, where he was distributing leaflets about some international-law arguments.
Maybe it was because of his grandfather being the founder of the Tavistock Clinic, but in the new millennium he became deeply involved in the 9/11 and 7/7 truth movements. Lightly and quickly, he would come out with shafts of insight over what was really going on. He could grasp the psychologically strange manipulation, whereby the public were being given an image of something that had not happened, but only seemed to be: whereby our reality is being manipulated. That is something outside the traditional socialist agenda, so that normal peace groups do not grapple with the matter. Up in Scotland he worked as a gardener and I always supposed this would assist and maintain his peace of mind. Keith and I share happy memories of being present at the early July 7 truth campaign meetings (he had just donated to them his URL www.julyseventh.co.uk which they still use).
Nobody helped me so much in producing my ‘Terror on the Tube’ book, both in the text and evaluation of the difficult central issues, than Keith. Gently he guided me, to avoid all sorts of blunders. I cannot hope to write something as good as that book again, in any political context, because Keith is no longer around for help. But also, Keith was a guide and helpmate for me, through the puzzling paths of life. It’s hard to think who else I’d say that of! Shortly before his passing he sent out a swathe of e-mails to various editors of papers and journals about the forthcoming publication of my book, eg:

‘A trusted colleague and friend has written a very fine book which I was privileged to read and comment on in draft, and which sets out the case that the supposed perpetrators of July 7th were almost certainly entrapped and framed. The attachments set out the cover pages and contents pages of ‘Terror on the Tube’ by Dr Nick Kollerstrom, to be published shortly by US based progressive Press…. this handsomely produced book (30th April).’

- the main discernable effect of which was that Rachel North started blogging about the forthcoming opus, presumably someone sent it to her. But, I worried, could this have had some adverse effect upon him, which he did not anticipate?
As Scotland’s main 9/11 activist, he was founder of ‘All faiths for 9/11 Truth’ which was concerned to heal the millenia-old ‘war’ between Muslims and Christian civilizations, being reactivated in our time. As such he had quite a lot to do with MUJCA – Muslims, Jews and Christians for 9/11 Truth – founded in the US by Kevin Barrett. Kevin was planning to come over to London on July 7th for his first major UK 9/11 meeting, so they would have met. He had written the foreword to my book and this was the time of its launch. Keith was also expected at a 7/7 meeting at the Birmingham Mosque on 5th July two days earlier. Here again his unique peace-building and liasing skills would have been of value. He would have been good at the building of bridges of understanding with the Muslims there. So this was quite an important period for him – had he lived.
Sudden, terminal amnesia
Abruptly, his memory was gone, one evening (June 4th) and soon after he was shipped into Scotland’s Murray Royal psychiatric clinic. A week after he had arrived, the nurse there whom I asked did not know what was wrong with him, or at least how he had got into that condition. It’s a kind of dementia, she told me, but the staff had not seen so sudden an onset of this condition before. His mind had sort of gone. The evening before he had gone to his Buddhist society as usual, and before that he had paid his usual weekly visit to a prison inmate. Had he been having troubles with his memory? If so, I believe that none of us lot noticed anything. Soon after arriving at the hospital he was sedated by a heavy, anti-psychotic drug, because of an attempt he made to leave, and did not remember a great deal. His friend Daphne who visited him has described his memories of being in a van where a terrible struggle took place and where his mind may have been tampered with.
For what little it may be worth, here is my record of phone calls with his close friend Daphne, taken on June 17th .

Wed 3rd KM went to his Buddhist group as usual, in evening.
Thurs 4th 7pm Daphne arrived, saw him lying in bed dishevelled, he had forgotten the day and even the year – all he had done over last few months was a ‘horrible jumble’. He had no idea of what they had intended to do that evening – she thought maybe he was ill, and took him to the doctor.
Friday 5th ‘My mind has totally collapsed hasn’t it?’ He kept repeating. He mentioned the van to Daphne as he was going, 4th- 8th June – there had been a horrible row in a van he kept saying, over this period; he went in hospital on Friday. Into a Psychiatric hospital, but not under section. He forgot 911 and sequence of time, with an immediate amnesia of past events.
Murray Royal Hospital, Moridan b wing. He looks dreadful. He tried to escape, and from Mon 15th, he was given Haliperodal – 1 mg three times a day –an anti psychotic drug. This slows him down. 5 mg is max, turns one into vegetable. Dr Praetorius was his consultant psychiatrist. The hospital staff were confused – the nurse Tyrone said this was very unusual, because dementia does not usually arrive by a ‘sudden disintegration’ like this and he had never seen a case like this.
Then on june 16th, Keith told Daphne, ‘I’ve been in a van with some people and they messed with my head.’ I phoned her the next day, and wrote this sentence down as she said it. She was very positive about it. A ‘health advocate’ came to argue case, but could not really communicate at all with him
His brother, sister and daughter do not approve of 911. Their grandfather founded Tavistock clinic, Keith was trying to ask his sister and brother about this, but they would not talk. They viewed his conspiracy beliefs as evidence of mental derangement.
A further note on the 19th June, after I phoned both KM and the staff nurse. The nurse doesn’t know what his condition is, it is still being assessed, MRI scan etc, they will have an answer next week.
I talked to Keith and found that his memory and self-identity had rather faded away. He asked me if he was staying with me (as if he did not recall that I was way down in London hundreds of miles away) adding ‘Sorry, I can’t remember.’
A couple of weeks after entering the hospital his heart stopped beating. He was a very strong man, he worked as a gardener. I phoned the nurse one more time to ask if they knew why and again she had no idea. They were waiting for the inquest…
That was it – his heart just stopped beating, in a loony bin. Aged 60, he was a grandfather and had certainly lived a good life. But, Keith! We needed you!

Keith’s Inlap books
From Hiroshima to the Hague, a Guide to the World Court project
Plus he co-authored The Pax Legalis papers, nuclear conspiracy and the Law.

His work on 9/11 and 7/7 was mainly in the form of leaflets and it might be worth collecting some of these together. The orbituaries which appeared, eg here and here ignored the strange manner of his passing.
There is a group concerned with the manner of his passing, and in due time we may get to hear of any progress they make.

7/7-Little Old Englandh

Little Old Englandh

A false-flag terror attack has a story with it, a cover story which the media broadcast about who is to blame.
This is in effect an intelligence test given to a people – are you dumb enough to believe this?
If you are, then – aargh – life will get worse.
And that means more fear, more surveillance, new wars, bigger ‘security’ industries, more intrusive police…
And you deserved it, yes you did, by failing to demand justice be done, after the atrocity.
Instead, you were given the ‘fairy tale from Hell’ cover story – and you believed it … On British daily news, ‘Terror’ and ‘Al-qaeda’ are now the most common terms, perpetually echoing in the background, that’s how far we have come.
The false-flag terror trick appeals to the worst side of the character of Britons – their belief in the War, their need for the Enemy, their need to be told whom to hate. Will you forever vote more money for the military? If so, don’t be surprised if it brews up certain … stories, to reassure you about the Enemy. Stories with real deaths in them – aye, there’s the rub.
Let’s take a glance at the road-to-hell on which Britain today is now traveling, in consequence of its citizens believing in the 9/11 and 7/7 cover-stories – an across-the-pond view:
‘We all know that Britain has the highest ratio of CCTV cameras to people in the world, but I want to take a closer look at some stories from within the past two months to see at what is going on right now.
British bus passengers could soon be forced to use electronic tags to get onto buses. This fits in with the British government’s move away from paper checks and toward an electronic system to be implemented by 2018. The best part of an electronic bus pass is that it will surely help prevent bus-based terrorism.
Britain is also making sure its schools are safe. Four-year-olds are being monitored for “radicalization” and 5-year-olds are being taught sexual education. After all, there is nothing worse than a sexually naive 5-year-old who is also a terrorist.
British school teachers have also been given the authority to frisk school children and search their school bags for drugs without consent, because we know how seriously Britain takes drug enforcement.
Britain isn’t only making sure its schools are safe. It’s making sure everywhere else is safe as well.
A few months ago, Britain started to put CCTV cameras into the homes of 20,000 “problem families” to make sure that the families raise their children correctly. This is good for keeping people safe indoors, but what about outdoors?
Well, luckily, the government has been going into the homes of willing citizens and placing CCTVs inside to be trained on the street to keep a watch for “anti-social behavior.”
What about inside private establishments? Can we make them as safe as our homes? Well, luckily, now a pub can be closed down if it doesn’t have “sufficient” CCTV coverage. . . . And I was afraid I might actually be alone!
Also, if you are ever lonely, don’t worry, because new CCTV cameras have been outfitted with speakers so they can talk to you. . . . I want them to tell me how pretty I am!
The best thing about these CCTV cameras is that they’re cost-effective. In fact, the top-earning CCTV speeding camera takes in over £420 thousand in fines a year. No wonder people love them so much.
Of course, CCTV isn’t Britain’s only tool against crime, pre-crime, and legal drinking. Britain is also still capable of that “personal touch.” That is why they’ve given 20,000 town hall bureaucrats the power to enter homes without a warrant.
Reasons these bureaucrats can enter include: checking to make sure a house has an “eco-friendly” refrigerator, making sure a hedge is not too high, and making sure no ‘unregulated hypnotism’ is taking place. . . . Regulated hypnotism, of course, is fine.
Cyberspace also got safer when Britain enlisted telecoms to help them spy on every phone call, email and web search British citizens make. This makes people safer because naturally now the government knows what they’re doing.
The information gathered will be available to such important agencies as local councils, the Financial Services Authority, the ambulance service, fire authorities and even prison governors. . . . Finally, ambulance drivers will know what our Google searches have been even if we’re unconscious!
The best news for the police state, however, has been that the criminal code has expanded. Since 1997, 3,000 criminal offenses have been created, 1,472 of which are imprisonable. The number of people over 50 entering the criminal justice system has also risen by almost 50 percent in eight years.
Not only has the criminal code expanded, but the people who have arrest powers has also expanded. In Norwich, mall cops can now arrest people. . . . Sorry, Grandpa, but now it looks like you really are going to have to get out of the massage chair.
Despite all these victories, the police state did suffered one setback during the last two months. Britain was collecting the names, dates of birth and passport details of every passenger entering into and exiting from the country well before they got to the airport, just like any good police state would. But then the EU, which after the ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon has authority to overrule member nations’ criminal laws, disallowed it.’
(Gratitude to Josh Fulton, ‘What’s New in Britain’s police state?’)
Passenger humiliation at airports: BBC promotes conventional x-ray technology to be used on only ’suspicious’ travelers at Newcastle Airport.
Plans for street use of X-ray CCTV cameras X-ray cameras that would “undress” passers-by in a bid to thwart terrorists concealing weapons, could be coming to a street near you, according to reports  Millimetre wave machines give more of a three-dimensional image, while terahertz radiation also penetrates clothing. On 3rd January, Prime Minister Gordon Brown has given the go-ahead for full body scanners to be introduced at Britain’s airports,  currently being trialled at Manchester airport.
UK ‘relentless pursuit of terrorists’ UK terrorism document says strategy will target al-Qaida 30 Mar 2009 The British government will tackle the threat of terrorism through the relentless pursuit of terrorists and disruption of their plots, according to a document released by the Home office. The Home Office laid out a comprehensive strategy, under the name “CONTEST,” “to reduce the risk to the UK and its interests overseas from international terrorism,” in the report. The threat from ‘al-Qaida,’ and Islamist groups and individuals that al-Qaida seeks to “bring together into a single global movement,” represent the biggest current challenge to the UK, according to the document.
‘One of the four bombers of 7 July was, on the face of it, a model student.’ Police identify 200 children as potential terrorists –Drastic new tactics to prevent school pupils as young as 13 falling into extremism 28 Mar 2009 Two hundred schoolchildren in Britain, some as young as 13, have been identified as potential terrorists by a police scheme that aims to spot youngsters who are “vulnerable” to Islamic radicalisation. The number was revealed to The Independent by Sir Norman Bettison, the chief constable of West Yorkshire Police and Britain’s most senior officer in charge of terror prevention. He said the “Channel project” had intervened in the cases of at least 200 children who were thought to be at risk of extremism, since it began 18 months ago.
And let’s not forget – in 2007, ‘Evidence of extremism in mosques ‘fabricated’’ Guardian 13.12.07
Far-right Tory think-tank exposed as fabricating ‘terror’ stories.
In October 2007 the influential Tory think tank, Policy Exchange, produced a report which hit the headlines. They investigated 100 mosques around Britain and claimed that 25 of them were disseminating extremist literature. They published their report titled: The Hijacking of British Islam claiming that “it was the most comprehensive academic survey of it’s kind”. It was front-page news. Policy Exchange “researchers” apparently visited 100 Mosques and found evidence of extremist literature being sold in 26 of them. They purchased books at these locations and produced receipts to support their claims. The documents were then found to be forged by a Newsnight investigation.
Policy Exchange also sent Newsnight a long legal letter threatening legal action should the film be broadcast. ‘Mr Paxman became more accusatory. “You are claiming that you had evidence that these books had been bought in these mosques, and that evidence is quite clearly, in expert opinion, fabricated,” he said.’ Yep.

 Be afraid! Threat level history

• 22 January 2010 = Threat level raised to SEVERE
• 20 July 2009 = Threat level lowered to SUBSTANTIAL
• 4 July 2007 = Threat level lowered to SEVERE
• 30 June 2007 = Threat level raised to CRITICAL
• 14 August 2006 = Threat level lowered to SEVERE
• 10 August 2006 = Threat level raised to CRITICAL
• 1 August 2006 = Threat level published for the first time. = Threat level: SEVERE

Journalists have been wondering what the raising of the government’s ‘how scared should we be’ index kindly provided by HMG for the first time to ‘Severe’ is supposed to mean. It seems to be the first time it has been raised without anything actually happening. It means that an attack is ‘highly likely’ and is the second highest on a five-point scale. Professor Richard Bonney believes the arrival of the U.S. Secretary of State in London next week is why the official level has gone from substantial to severe. ‘ Also the Detroit plot was ‘one of the factors’ behind raising the alert level NB We’re following MI5 in using block capitals and bold for these terms.
Police psychiatrists can now interrogate anyone suspected of ‘terrorism’ via the shadowy new ‘Fixated Threat Assessment Centre’ the secretive new police unit. Once they have been labelled mentally ill, people can be put away without the normal protection of ‘Habeus Corpus’ i.e. the right to a court trial. This unit has a half a million a year budget and can detain persons indefinitely. It sounds very Orwellian.
Soon unmanned military drones will be spying on UK citizens permanently from twenty thousand feet – in case the four million CCTV cameras aren’t enough. In Britain, MI5 and GCHQ already use three planes based at RAF Northolt in North-West London to spy on citizens.
The army may soon be patrolling the streets, according the new Strategic Defense Review, to ‘confront the threat of terrorism.’ They will supposedly promote security and enhance ‘resilience.’ The latter is a term used by companies for their terror-drill rehearsals, and means they have an ability to survive the shock of some catastrophe.
Most British folk believe the army should never be used on the streets. The army on the streets represents the beginning of Martial law, the declaration of a state of emergency.
Ever wonder how to spot a terrorist? Well our government has given some helpful hints in a TV sports ad, on who to report to the police: if your neighbour seems to be enjoying their privacy, using cash rather than a credit card, or if he seems to be drawing curtains when they should be open …  if so, you better report them! We quote the irrepressible Alex Jones here:

‘As America and Britain sink deeper into militarized police states, society begins to parallel more and more aspects of Nazi Germany, especially in the context of citizens being turned against each other, which in turn creates a climate of fear and the constraining sense that one is always being watched.’ 

(Reminds me of how people used to be picked out as werewolves in the Middle Ages: such things as having too much hair on the back of one’s hand, or eyebrows too close together… )
Who is creating terror? Let’s look here at how bewildered young children are being exposed at school to mock-terror attacks – without them or their parents being told beforehand: Psychological Attacks Coming To A Primary School Near You : ‘Children arriving at the school in the morning were greeted with a pool of blood and a police crime scene. One female member of staff in on the act pretended to have been assaulted, and the children were tasked to help police in the investigation. The school made no attempt to put the traumatized children’s minds at ease, because the alleged problem solving exercise wasn’t exposed as such until 4 days in to the week!’ One furious parent said: ‘I think it’s disgusting – the children are too frightened to go back to school because it has not been made clear it’s a fictitious incident.’ That is by any standards the construction of terror.
Police now spy on Internet users on cafes as part of the government’s counter-terrorism strategy, which aims to stop ‘radicalisation.’ Presumably such prohibited ’radical’ websites would include this one!  And this is merely part of a huge program undertaken by MI5 to train 60,000 UK citizens as a civilian network of terrorist spotters.
 We have now reached the stage where a grannie owning a pet shop gets charged with selling a goldfish to a young lad. Not only was she arrested and fined, she was tagged – tagged – for the crime. This is soulless and robotic behaviour. An elderly woman is tricked and trapped by a bunch of male police. It reminds us, of how far police have lost track of the meaning of the word, ‘crime.’
Britain now has the highest violent crime rate in the EU. Over two per minute! France appears to have four times less per capita (or, per thousand citizens).
A NHS hospital has started labelling all newborn babies with barcodes.The computer can quickly read name, date of birth, National insurance number etc, with the barcode strapped to the ankle.  This may remind usof how one in three secondary schools now requires fingerprinting of pupils, just for them to register in class or take out library books.

 Rage, rage against the dying of the light                                                                                                                                       Do not go gently into that good-night                                      Dylan Thomas

The enigma of Israel embassy bombing, Argentina 1992

The Phantom Truck
* 17 March 1992 In a busy street of Buenos Aires, in the early afternoon, a three-story Israeli embassy was entirely demolished: ‘a pickup truck driven by a suicide bomber and loaded with explosives smashed into the front of the Israeli Embassy located on the corner of Arroyo and Suipacha, and detonated. The embassy, a Catholic church, and a nearby school building were destroyed.’ – or, that is Wikipedia’s story. In fact, we shall here argue, no trace of any such car-bomb has ever been found, or suicide bomber, nor has any witness testified to seeing it; nor were other buildings adjacent destroyed, they merely had windows broken. Quoting from a more reliable source:

although the shock wave broke glass windows and plaster of practically all the buildings across the street from the Embassy – even blowing in a vitreaux of a church across the street, which sadly fell on a priest and killed him – the only building structurally affected was the Embassy itself.

A car bomb soon became the official story, but do you really want to believe that its blast could have worked in so selective a manner? We quote further from this expert (Salbuchi), below.
* Two years later, a seven-story building nearby was reduced to rubble, belonging to AMIA, l’Association Mutelle Israélite Argentine. Again, a car-bomb was alleged as the cause, but a US explosives expert who was part of the investigation, Charles Hunter, identified “major discrepancies” between the car-bomb thesis put forward and the blast pattern recorded in photos. A report drafted two weeks later noted that, in the wake of the bombing, merchandise in a store immediately to the right of AMIA was tightly packed against its front windows and merchandise in another shop had been blown out onto the street—suggesting that the blast came from inside rather than outside. Hunter also could not understand how the building across the street could still be standing if the bomb had exploded in front of AMIA.
The AMIA building blew up killing 85 innocent Argentinean civilians and 230 wounded. Once again the casualties were mainly Argentineans and only a few Jews. Those killed were all Argentine citizens, and the whole tragedy fell strictly under Argentine jurisdiction. None of the Israeli personnel in charge of security were killed in either of the two terrorist attacks.
On the day the first explosion took place, President Carlos Menem officially requested the assistance of the FBI and CIA from the United States and the Mossad intelligence service and the armed forces of Israel. Why, how very thoughtful of the President. Years later, these same guys somehow turned up immediately after the Bali bomb in Jakarta to ‘investigate’ it – and that was without even having been invited.
Car bombs were alleged for both of these events, despite a complete absence of witness testimony. A court hearing in 2004 continued to insist on the car bomb thesis despite the testimony of at least a dozen witnesses, who swore blind that there was no car bomb. This was dealt with in a section of the report headed “Those who didn’t notice it”[i.e.the car bomb]. Eg, Gabriel Alberto Villalba: “He related that…..his glance being directed towards the police patrol car in front of AMIA, he saw suddenly an explosion which came out of the main entrance of the building, from the inside outwards, which covered everything,” and “a ball of fire which came from the building towards the street”.
Another witness, Juan Carlos Alvarez, was a street cleaner standing in front of the main entrance just where the car bomb was meant to have passed- he would have been knocked over by it – when the explosion happened. Miraculously, he survived, the doorman with whom he had been speaking only seconds before dying instantly. He also failed to “notice” the car bomb, laden with 300 kilos of explosive, turn at speed, its breaks screeching as it came straight at him. He paid a heavy price for his insistence: in an article which appeared in October 2006 he recounts how his treatment at the hands of the prosecutors nearly lead him to suicide. He suffered terrible after-effects from the bombing and now lives in poverty in Buenos Aires without the medical support that he needs. Effectively, the court claimed that the failure of these witnesses to see the car bomb was attributable to post-traumatic stress rather than to the more obvious explanation that it simply wasn’t there.
The investigation of the 1994 bombing by the Argentine judiciary, which had no political independence from the executive branch, has had little credibility with the public, because of a bribe by the lead judge to a key witness and a pattern of deceptive accounts based on false testimony (Source)
Security Staff Unhurt
1996: Towards the end of the year a document entitled “Buenos Aires police are being scapegoated” is circulated, presumed to come from within the Federal Police. It questioned, in an ironic manner, the car bomb thesis, listing all the witnesses who say that there was no car bomb. It mockingly questioned how the car bomb managed to make it to the fourth floor, the epicenter of the 1994 explosion, and points out the exceedingly suspicious circumstance that none of the Israeli personnel in charge of security were killed in either of the two terrorist attacks.
May, 1997 The report of the National Academy of Engineers, commissioned by the Supreme Court, is heard. On the insistence of Beraja and DAIA this was held behind closed doors. However, the 77-page document came into the possession of Libre Opinion, who published a summary on their web site. In their report, these experts expressed their absolute certainty that the explosions at the Israeli Embassy came from bombs within the building.
“The day after this session, the spokesman for the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires deplored these conclusions and accused the Supreme Court of anti-semitism.” Absolutely no witness recalled seeing the Renault van. The Israeli army turned up after the event, planted a flag in the rubble, and then one soldier ‘found’ a twisted fragment of Renault van. The existence of this phantom van has become central to such arguments. The final death toll was 29 killed, and 242 wounded. Several Israelis died, but most of the victims were Argentine civilians, many children.
The Israeli military Shin Beth may have been the actual bombers. They held complete security at the embassy and a bomb that size could never have been brought in. The Shin Beth also refused to allow an independent investigation of the embassy, only allowing Mossad allowed access to the site. The 1994 destruction of the seven-story AMIA building had some similarities to the Oklahoma City bomb two years later.
False-Flag Terror
JF: What similarities do you find with other attacks in the US on 9/11, in the UK on 7/7, and in Madrid on 3/11?(interview by Jim Fetzer with Adrian Salbuchi on 13.10.09.)
AS: Well, they all seem to have the same “fingerprint” so to speak. As I say above:
• these false flag events all had near-perfect technical performance, where the buildings they wanted to be blown up and collapse, always did so – reflecting massive technological support and planning;
• but they left “loose ends” that were impossible to explain-away – their lies ended up showing glaringly;
• they all had episodes of planted evidence;
• the “right people” – common workers – died, while top brass – ambassadors, CEOs, governors, billionaires – were “luckily” out of the buildings at the time; and,
• finally, they all served to support the “Global War on Islamic Terror”.
See videos of Salbuchi.
 Argentina here needs philosophers – not politicians, lawyers or journalists – who are able to tell the difference between what is real and what is not. The media sneer at these, as ‘conspiracy theorists.’ Media hacks have sold their souls to Corporate Untruth and so are annoyed to come across persons who have not done this. Analogies with the Oklahoma bombing of the Murray federal building, where the local FBI lived, are relevant: none were present in the building when it blew up, and the FBI received an increase in funding after the event. Those perpetrating false-flag terror normally get an increase in funding as a consequence of the event. This is partly to ensure that everyone stays loyal and quiet. Blame at Oklahoma was meant to fall upon some local Muslims, but this didn’t go according to plan. The judge at the enquiry insisted upon the ‘lone nut’ explanation, a certain Mr Timothy McVeigh, and all other testimony was ignored – and lost. Its up to Argentinians to try and prevent this from happening and rescue the true and relevant facts – before they vanish down the Memory Hole.
‘9/11 was an inside job’ is a slogan, a motto, that is relevant to both Argentine terror-events. The bomb(s) were placed inside, not outside. If the two events of 1992 and 1994 were both ‘inside jobs’, then the two buildings both completely destroyed were wrecked from within – not by an external cause, viz a Renault truck packed with explosives. If they were ‘inside jobs’, then the hypothesis would have to be, that Shin Beth the Israel army perpetrated the event and then (in 1994) planted the fragment of a Renault van.
The turning-point of the investigation has to be the publication in May 1997 of the National Academy of Engineers report, which determined that the Israeli embassy explosion had originated from within the building. It is important that the full text of this report be published and circulated around science departments.
There are analogies with the London Israel embassy bombing ten days after the 1994 event in Buenos Aires. Here the blame was assigned to Palestinian sources. These two embassy bombings were both successfully blamed upon enemies of Israel. The London embassy was blown up by a car bomb (without excluding the option of a bomb also having gone off within the embassy). If a mere ten days separated the these two events, in Buenos Aires and London, is it not likely that the same agency was involved? 85 were killed in one event, none in the other. The latter was phantom terror in the sense that no-one was badly hurt. Phantom terror is cheaper, but it has to ride on the back of real terror. It aims to produce fear and terror, by reawakening the memory of what happened earlier.
In this new millennium, what called itself the ‘Truth’ movement came into existence, in the wake of 9/11. This looks at the global extent of false-flag terror, by those who seek to control our world: the Vampire Elite. Argentine philosophers need to use the insights gained by this movement, to acquire a proper perspective on things, and remedy the ghastly mistake that their country has made, of blaming Iran. A Mexican viewpoint could be relevant…
 Atomic Collaboration

JF: These events appear to me to have been orchestrated with the objective of undermining technical and scientific cooperation between Argentina and Iran in relation to the development of peaceful atomic energy.

Background: IranCen in 1987–88 signed three agreements with Argentina’s National Atomic Energy Commission. The first Iranian-Argentine agreement involved help in converting the U.S. supplied Tehran Nuclear Research Center (TNRC) research reactor from highly enriched fuel to 19.75% low-enriched uranium, and to supply the low-enriched uranium to Iran. The uranium was delivered in 1993. The second and third agreements were for technical assistance, including components, for the building of pilot plants for uranium-dioxide conversion and fuel fabrication. Under US pressure, assistance under second and third agreements was reduced
In December 1991, according to the detailed account in the report, the U.S. Embassy in Buenos Aires informed Argentina’s foreign ministry that the United States could not accept the continuation of the contracts on nuclear cooperation with Iran. In January, Argentina announced the suspension of the shipments of nuclear materials to Iran.
Feb 1993: The IAEA confirms that a shipment of nearly 20 percent enriched uranium from Argentina will arrive in Iran within the year. 1989 Argentina replaces the core of Iran’s research reactor at TNRC. 1988 Nuclear Fuel reports that Argentina has contracts to supply 115.8 kg of nearly 20 percent enriched uranium to Iran, which must by filled by mid-1990. Argentina was continuing to provide Iran with low-grade enriched uranium and the two countries were in serious negotiations on broader nuclear cooperation when the bombing occurred.(2) 
2002: The arrest warrants for former Iranian president Ali Akbar Rafsanjani and six other former top Iranian officials were issued only after the United States had applied diplomatic pressure, according to a Nov. 3 report by Marc Perelman in the Jewish daily Forward. Perelman also reported that the George W. Bush administration was going to cite the indictment as part of its campaign to get Russia and China to support a Security Council resolution on sanctions against Iran.
The main theory about Iran’s motive for ordering the bombing of the headquarters of the Jewish organisation AMIA on Jul. 18, 1994, is that Iran wanted to retaliate against Argentina for its decision to cut off exports of nuclear materials. That motive was asserted by former Iranian intelligence officer Abdolghassem Mesbahi in a 2002 deposition and repeated in a report by the Argentine intelligence service, SIDE, in September 2002.
Argentina has a Spanish ancestry, and so after 2004 some turned to the Madrid bombing, (Chapter 14 of ToT) to help make sense of the horror: ‘If you study the works of the Spanish investigator Del Pino, you can find out uncanny similarity to the attack in Atocha. Would you like to meet the twin sister of the false Ford truck used in the attack on the Embassy of Israel and the false Traffic used in the attack on AMIA? Meet the False Backpack that the “silly terrorists left behind” in the Spanish station Vallecas’.  item (5) In the early hours of the morning after terror struck the Madrid train stations, a planted rucksack was ‘found’ nearby and it had ‘clues’ that led the police straight to some hapless Muslims.
Why would Iran, thousands of miles away from Argentina, wish to cause this horror? Arrest warrants were issued in Argentina for top Iranian politicians with no scrap of real evidence, but instead only an allegation. The allegation concerned a supposed bitterness of Iran, over the cancellation of a civil nuclear-power program. In 1991 Argentina was instructed by America to cease this exchange program, after it had signed several binding contracts with Iran and was thereby put into a quite stressful situation. But, this program was evidently still ongoing, in that enriched-uranium was being exchanged, over the key period 1992-4. Iran was benefitting from this, it really needed that collaboration. No way could it have deliberately engineered such a bomb outrage, to terminate the collaboration. Is it not more likely that ve been
The US ambassador to Argentina at the time, James Cheek, commented in a 2008 article: “To my knowledge, there was never any real evidence of [Iranian responsibility]. They never came up with anything.”

Voltaire Network commented: ‘While trying to provide grounds for the accusations against Muslims, the US are attempting to exploit the memory of the attacks perpetrated in 1992 and 1994 in the city of Buenos Aires. In fact, most encyclopedias continue to attribute those crimes to Hezbollah or Iran. Despite that, no one believes in those accusations anymore, and the Argentinean justice itself is currently turning towards an Israeli lead. Consequently, Washington is putting pressure to end an investigation that is becoming uncomfortable.’ T. Meyssane

The Fetzer – Salbuchi interview:
AS: ‘The case for a car bomb melted away when the State Prosecutor and the Court hearing on this case invited technical specialist surveyors from the Argentine National Engineers Academy to determine what caused the Israeli Embassy building to collapse. Their conclusion was that the explosion took place from inside the building and was not caused by an alleged car-bomb. To make matters worse for Zionist pressure groups, a passer-by had filmed from several blocks away the mushroom cloud that rose from that explosion, a characteristic effect that also pointed to an internal explosion….strong rumours surfaced that what actually blew up was an arsenal that the Israelis apparently had housed in the building’s basement.
AS: ‘The in-fighting among Zionists had as one of its bloody episodes the bombing of the Israeli Embassy and later the AMIA building in Argentina, which was perceived by the Zionist Nazis at the time as a symbol of Labour’s stronghold. Why Buenos Aires, you might ask? Simple – because Argentine public security has always been, and still is, very weak, thus making both terror operations relatively easy with Argentine targets. … The problem with Argentina is that over the past forty years our Nation-State has eroded so badly that it has ceased being a Sovereign Institution and become a highly dependent Colonial Administration entity. Now, how can you expect a totally dependent nation like Argentina to have an “independent judiciary”? No way. Our judiciary does the bidding for those people who really control and run the country, where a global power network of think tanks, NGO’s, lobbies and pressure groups has the final say.
‘This network includes not just entities like the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, the Bilderberg Conference, and Chatham House, but also embedded within it are The World Jewish Council, AIPAC, the B’Nai B’Rith Masonic Lodge, the World Zionist Organization, the ADL, and the American Jewish Congress, among many, many others. It is this power network that calls the shots and twists our government’s arms! … Naturally, the global think-tank network also drafts what the global media should report and say. They are those who decide who will appear as “good guys” and who as “bad guys” on CNN, Fox News, The New York Times, Washington Post, Financial Times, and so on. More still, they are the ones who decide what is and what isn’t news!
A Mexican Clue
The Congress Hall of Mexico, Mexico City, 11 October, 2001: Two Israelis sneak past security into the Chamber of Deputies, Mexico’s parliament, posing as cameramen. But they arouse suspicion, and security guards frisk them. It turns out, they were armed with: 9-mm plastic Glock pistols (undetectable by metal detectors) nine grenades, several sticks of explosives, three detonators and 58 cartridges. Two terrorists, Ben Zvi and Smecke, have been caught red-handed, so what is their punishment? This is Guy Fawkes, plotting to blow up Parliament! Guy Fawkes and his gang were hung, drawn and quartered, for attempting so heinous a crime. But these guys – just went back home! Let’s quote John Leonard – in what is arguably the sole English-language account published of this event: ‘In a flurry of damage control, the Israeli embassy interceded, Sharon sent a special envoy, strings were pulled, the story was spiked, and everyone went home.’ (1) This edifying tale seems to have completely disappeared not only from the media but also from the web. You can only find it today on Rense. Thank God for Rense!
What was the motive for this foiled attempt at false-flag terror? There was no personal or evidently- national motive, no revenge called for – only a global strategy. Mexicans, and South Americans in general were not reckoned to be keen on the forthcoming war with Iraq. In fact they saw it as totally pointless. This act of terror would supposedly have gotten them in the mood for it – according to the schemes of the Vampire Elite. It is an axiom of false-flag terror, that it always strengthens the position of the far-right – who devised the act in the first place. But, we ask, how could the tiny state of Israel have extended its hand as far as Mexico, plucking away the guilty culprits, and then have the influence to crush media debate? And, who could ever be so wicked, as to want to do such a thing?
The Zion Mafia
Does the Old Testament help us to answer these issues? ‘I will send my terror ahead of you and throw into confusion every nation you encounter.’ (Exodus 23:27) In the Book of Deuteronomy, somebody is explaining the tactics of deception to the Hebrews (20:10-13) ‘When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. When the LORD your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it.’ Let’s refrain from quoting any further from these still-shocking texts…and just ask, does there exist a far-reaching ‘Zion Mafia’ in our modern world, inspired by such ethics? Here are some helpful attempts to describe it, by a colleague (I have made extracts):

* ‘Their ambition seems to go far beyond the desire for a Jewish homeland towards their own brand of world control. Their brand of world control does not seem to include the well-being of the existing world human population or the well-being of the world environment on which all our existence depends.
* ‘These people, who ever they are, have a lot of similarities with the Italian Mafia. They are secret, they are ruthless, they loan money to people, they kill people when necessary, even their own kind. Their success depends on the public not being aware of their activity and accepting the guilt of those publicly blamed.
* ‘In the early days of the Israeli State there was a lot of idealism and there was even socialism. The covert criminal militarism we see now was not part of the agenda.
* ‘The core of the Zion Mafia is probably a relatively small number of people, we can speculate as to who they are. At present they have the whole world under a spell.
* ‘To break a spell, it is recognised traditionally by magicians that one has to have a name, a word or group of words to focus on as a reference. Anyone can use the term ‘Zion Mafia’, and it refers to the inner circle of activists who are running, driving, coordinating the current global conspiracy.
* ‘The Zion Mafia have considerable influence on American foreign and military policy, in the banking system, in the security business and intelligence services, and in supply of fuel, and in Pharmaceuticals.’ Quotes from Here.

That notion of breaking a spell is important. Standard accounts of both of these Argentine events state matter-of-factly that a suicide driver blew up a truck etc., while those who doubt this are ‘anti-semitic.’ These trucks were nonexistent just like as the Boeing airplane alleged to have flown into the Pentagon on 9/11. People are made to believe in a phantom. It is indeed remarkable that they could pull off the same ploy, twice. (4)
Sources: http://inthesenewtimes.com/2008/05/16/timeline-israeli-embassy-and-amia-bombings1992-2006/  http://inthesenewtimes.com/2009/11/09/false-flag-attacks-in-argentina-1992-and-1994/

1. John Paul Leonard, p.363 of The War on Freedom, How and Why America was attacked on September 11, 2001 Nafeez Ahmed, 2002.
2. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HK15Ak03.html
3. Zionist ideology was expressed by Yitzhak Shamir, former Israeli Prime Minister: “Neither Jewish morality nor Jewish tradition can be used to disallow terror as a means of war… We are very far from any moral hesitations when concerned with the national struggle. First and foremost, terror is for us a part of the political war appropriate for the circumstances of today…”
4. Meyssan commented, ‘Il est étrange qu’il faille une dizaine d’années pour se rendre compte qu’un attentat a été réalisé en plaçant un explosif dans un bâtiment et non avec un véhicule kamikaze’ which, roughly translated, means, how odd that it took them ten years to realize, there was no truck. Still today, Israel Shamir, whose geo-political views are generally sound, has a page on the topic which begins: ‘Israel’s embassy in Buenos Aires, Argentina was bombed on March 17, 1992, when a pickup truck, driven by a suicide bomber and loaded with explosives, smashed into the front of the Israeli Embassy and detonated destroying the embassy.’  To English-language readers, it will hopefully have become clear that no such truck existed, from Jim Fetzer’s interview with Adrian Salbuchi in October of 2009.