An urgent message to the British people
anonymous. translator: Colin Buchanan | 31.07.2005 16:09 | Anti-militarism
This is a translatin of an article which appeared recently on Indymedia in Spanish concerning the London bombings and their implications.
URGENT TO ENGLISH PEOPLE!!!!!!!
URGENT | 25.07.2005 03:17 | Analysis
Please. If you understand spanish you must translate this text to english. It is very important that english people could reading this analisy. You can wake up against thirany blair and their criminal acts from london blasts.
Bombs in London: the grand criminal farce of the Empire
Before beginning, a warning. He who writes this doesn't believe that everything that happens in this world can be explained by theories aluding to secret conspiracies. For example, I admit that I don't risk talking about who carried out the September 11 attacks. I consider the information I have on this issue to be extraordinarily confused. Nor do I necessarily think that there was a " black hand" behind some of the attacks claimed by ETA. I think that we have to base ourselves on the data which we have and the contradictions which this data lays bare: above all, we must think logically and clearly with a cool mind. In these lines, whose only aim is to make people think, I will limit myself to considering the recent massacres in Europe, above all the recent attacks in London. What has motivated me is the fact that day after day we are getting an accumulation of facts which don't fit in with the official story.
Even though the case seems partly solved, one has a feeling of unease because nothing indicates that the killers aren't once again going to get away with it.And even if we are voices in the wilderness it is important to make clear that some people don't in any way share the governmental and media theories about the bombings which have occured in the last year and a half: on the contrary we believe that no one should allow themselves to be hipnotized or seduced by appearances. It is necessary to read and listen to everything with great attention; only then will we have the knowledge and the courage to denounce with all our force the lies with which our leaders continue injecting us with a view to clearing the way to the attainment of their political and economic goals
.
We all have a lot of responsabilities and problems in life. It would be much easier to remain silent and to accept the information we are being given on what is happening. In reality, it isn't complete nonsense to say that we know who carry out terrorist attacks, and the Islamic thesis doesn't , in principle, seem bizarre. But it hasn’t taken long for some of the things they're saying to strike discordant sounds. If there is no confession and we don't put in the work it will be difficult to get evidence and present it to a court of law, but, even so, we can see enough to suspect that the killers of March 2004in Madrid and July 2005, in London were agents carrying out the dirtiest part of the strategy of the US and its closest allies(amongst others, Britain and Israel). This would mean that the people accused of these crimes, alive or dead, are completely innocent and that neither of the two operations had anything to do with Islamic extremists.
Certainly we can't arrive at this conclusion simply by reflecting on the question of "who benefits from the bombings?"
It appears clear that the international strategy of the USA, based for some years now on the nebulous "war on terror", is strengthened by the sporadic appearance of organizations which attack the civilian population of the West. As well as accentuating the doctrine of neo-liberal capitalism and the theory of the clash of civilizations, the attacks open the way to more oppressive legislation in Europe and the USA( new controls on communications and media, introduction of identity cards in UK, changes in anti-terrorist legislation, immigration controls, demonization of particular cultures and religions etc.), without forgetting the economic boost to the military-industrial and security sectors. If that's not enough, opinion poles confirm the growth of Blair's popularity and even the opposition approves his management of the the crisis(in spite of his dismissal of their demand for an inquiry into what had happened, an idea judged to be useless and a distraction from the police invstigation). But all this is not sufficient to attribute the bombings to those who benefitted.
¿ Are there any other facts which indicate that we should go beyond the flood of information from the official media?
Something beyond illusions.
Hours after the bombings in London, various media outlets spoke of claims of responsability for the attacks. The media, via picturesque claims, gave the impression that only Islamic groups could have been behind the bombings, when logic should have told us that only one communique could be the real one, the rest necessarily being false. Not one of these claims mentioned suicide attacks. All armed groups who carry out operations involving the loss of life of volunteers pay tribute to these men in their claims of reponsibility and often reveal their identity. To give a couple of examples, this happened with the attacks by Islamic Jihad in Israel and those of the leftist DHKC/P in Ankara this July. We can deduce, without fear of error, that to this moment no group has claimed responsibility for the London bombings.
In spite of everything, we go on taking for granted that these are Al-Queda attacks. Strange that this organization that has supposedly existed for years has only carried out two attacks in Europe. Actions which, in spite of the outlandish internet scribblings which are echoed in the media and which anyone could write, no one really seems to have claimed responsibility for. The reality is that we don't have proof the explosion of a single bomb, molotov cocktail or rifle shot attributable to this group. Nor have they carried out kidnappings or extorsion, bank robberies to provide funds and police throughout the world know that they have never discovered armaments or documents which can genuinely be linked to this group.
What is more , if we take into account the importance of mutual support in the Islamic milieu, it is striking that networks of support for these militants ,especially those imprisoned, and their families don't exist and that no tributes are given for their martyrs, not even at their funerals and there isn't even a record of them. In short, quite unlike any other known terrorist organization. Compare this with , for example, the Corsican militants who have been responsible for hundreds of actions, have suffered multiple detentions, have had arms and explosives confiscated, pay tribute to their dead etc..And the same can be said for many organizations in Asia which claim to be Islamic.. The fact is that Al-Queda is only behind two actions in Europe. Two massacres strangely spectacular, synchronized and perfect in execution which have had important social and political consequences.
Occasionally some journalist has dared to suggest that we don't really know what Al-Queda is, that it is something vague and elusive. Now is the time to say out loud what we could have guessed long ago: Al-Queda doesn't exist any more than ghosts do. It was the name which was given to an Islamic structure which apparently had operated in Afghanistan in the 90.s( clearly means 80’s: translator); after that it was the name that the western media chose to describe an obscure organization which was pitilessly attacking Western civilization anywhere on the globe.
The struggle against Islamic terrorism took on the status of a war. From the thousands of detentions of "Islamic militants " in the course of this war, we can conclude the following: all the detainees proclaimed their innocence and no one admitted belonging to this organization or knowing of its existence; something unprecedented given that such committed militants would be, above all, proud of their cause.
Furthermore, setting aside the pathetic fabrications that the media coughs up, nobody has established anything at all about the structure of the group, its ideology, propaganda etc.. Its time to cast aside are inhibitions and point out that "Al-queda" is nothing but a logo which the block commanded by the USA uses as a non-existent enemy to claim responsibility for the terrorist attacks which, from the sewers of the Empire, they commit against their own population and against other countries. In this respest we should underline that in Iraq, as always happens in invasions, as well as the operations carried out by the occupying army, there is a dirty war against civilians which are attributed to the resistance or Al-Queda. What I mean by this is that the fight to unmask what is happening here cannot be separated from the acts the same delinquents are carrying out in Iraq often, lets not forget, with far greater casualties.
As of today one can say that, at first sight, the operation on July 7th in London developed as its planners wished. If we overlook the question of the explosive itself, everything indicates an attempt to massacre civilians (but not too many) and that’s exactly how it turned out. But as in any complex operation in which many lose ends have to be tied up, its practically impossible not to make mistakes.
One of these was to spread the news that an Israeli minister had to suspend a meeting in London. The first report regarding this, in AP, was that Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli minister of finance was warned by Scotland Yard before the first explosion not to leave his hotel because it was feared something might happen. A few hours later this was rectified saying that the warning had come after the first explosion. Later on, the British media published that the warning came in the other direction and several days earlier; it was Israel who warned Britain of the possibility of a terrorist attack. Last minute misunderstandings between partners who had no wish to harm each other and the general confusion haven't hidden the essential facts: there were warnings between the agencies of allied states indicating that someone knew perfectly well what was going to happen and did nothing to prevent it
This is not a mad rumor . It is something crucial for the solution of the case and hasn't been denied: simulated bomb attacks took place on the underground at the same time as the real ones. We read at www.prisonplanet.com:
In an interview on BBC Radio 5 broadcast on the evening of that same 7th July, the reporter spoke with Peter Power, managing director of Visor Consultants.com, a company which assesses “crisis management, better known as a PR company. Peter Power was an official at Scotland Yard working in the anti-terrorist section. Power told the reporter that, at the very moment that the explosions took place, his company was conducting an exercise involving a thousand people which involved bombings of underground trains at the precise moment and place in which they happened in reality.
Power : “ At 8.30 this morning we were carrying out an exercise involving, more than a thousand people, which entailed simultaneous explosions in precisely the underground stations where the attacks occurred this morning- that is why my hair is still standing on end.”
Journalist: ”To be quite clear about this, you were carrying out an exercise dealing with exactly the scenario which in fact took place this morning.”
Power: “Exactly, it was about 8.30 this morning ; we carried this out for a company whose name, for obvious reasons, I don’t want to reveal.”
We are not suggesting that Mr. Power had any knowledge of the real purpose of the exercise. The exercises served several purposes: as a cover for the terrorists to carry out their operation without the security services being aware what was happening and, what is more important, if they are captured during or after the operation to be able to claim that they are participating in an exercise.
As the article states, the terrorists, perfectly aware of the exercises, could easily have used them to place the explosives . What we don't know at the moment is whether they placed the bombs themselves or whether they used commuters who they invited to participate in the exercise using backpacks. Personally, I am inclined towards the hypothesis that the the bombs were fixed to the trains before the people accused knew about them, and there is the possibility that, using the cover of the exercises, they were placed there the night before. It doesn't seem probable, although you can't rule it out that in the course of the exercise backpacks were handed out to certain passengers with a view to filming them wearing them. The most likely is that the accused are victims who had no participation even as extras, and what is in no way sustainable is the claim that they were suicide bombers.
What basis do the police have for their claim that they are suicide bombers? This theory seems to correspond only to pre-established explanation for events. The investigation was not driven forward by actual evidence: in fact, quite the contrary: firstly, we carry out the crime with absolute impunity and then we implicate whoever we want. The object is to cover for the real perpetrators whilst advancing, through the media, a hypothesis acceptable to public opinion. But I stress again that to carry out an operation of this nature without leaving any loose ends is extremely difficult. Firstly they told us that the explosions occurred one after the other; then that they were simultaneous. On Sunday 10th the press stated that " the fact that the bombs exploded simultaneously reinforces the thesis that the bombs were set off by timers and appears to rule out the possibility of suicide attacks".
On Tuesday 12th Scotland Yard assured us that the attacks were suicide attacks and began to identify the suspects; seemingly the terrorists not only weren't carrying false documents but took their own documents with them. Then the identities of the bombers were confirmed. Curiously, despite the fact that the bombers would have been the more exposed to the blasts they were identified before the others. It will be important when the bodies are handed back to the families to see what kind of condition they are in. Also that there should be proper autopsies carried out by independent doctors named by the families, none of whom would likely believe what they are being told.
In truth, how, where and when these men died is something that probably only the planners of the operation know. Its quite possible that they were simply selected from the many victims of immigrant origin ( the perpetrators would have known that there would have been several people of Asian origin amongst the dead) in order to concede to them the posthumous title of the guilty as a way of solving the case.
This is also a way to avoid the headaches that the investigaters into the Madrid bombing had: there they were also on the verge of choosing the suicide theory and this even went out, first of all, on channel SER, but then they realized that this was a bit too complicated( too many bombs and therefore too many suicide bombers to invent). So they thought better of it and prepared "operation Leganes" with its half a dozen suicides and the special forces officer dead . About this operation , the controlled explosion of a building, those suicides and that of a special forces agent( the only" victim of terrorism whose photo was never published and whose body was burned after the profanation of his grave some days later) one can say a lot but this is not the moment. What is important is that Scotland Yard has learned from all this and has avoided these pitfalls.
The details coming through about the circumstances surrounding the bombings and the biographies of the accused- young men with families and normal lives of whom it isn't even sure that they knew each other and to whom no one attributed extremist tendencies- make it difficult to imagine that they were the perpetrators
Although in the end it makes no difference because the presumption of innocence ceases to exist when it becomes a nuisance; if history is just it will absolve them and the whole Pakistani and Muslim community in Britain. For the moment lets point out that the detentions, the house searches, the evacuation of entire areas, the publication of supposedly incriminating photos, the propaganda against these four men and all the repressive paraphernalia of state repression are part of the frame up .The present distracting manoeuvers are designed , amongst other things, to create enough background noise to cover over cracks, silence those who are trying to tell the truth and put into place new repressive measures. Especially important is the endless circulation of rumors aimed at throwing the media and the public off the track.
Someone could ask: but couldn't they just have acted overhastily and some other Islamicists are in fact responsible? Here the element which goes through all the events from the morning of the 7th emerges: the speed with which Scotland Yard acted trying to close the case as soon as possible without any room for doubt. An overhasty response can only be excused if the police were under pressure from the public for somek immediate scapegoats. This is what happened in Spain after 11/3 and in Britain itself after some bombings in the seventies, but this time it hasn't happened at all: if one thing has characterized the response of the British public to events that they were all told were inevitable is the serene acceptance of the tragedy and this calm could have allowed the investigation, the phantom of Al-Queda having been duly summoned, to proceed slowly towards the identification of those responsable. But no: they had to close the investigation as soon as possible, not because of public pressure but through fear that questions were being asked and suspicions could gather.
Even though the massacres in Madrid passed without problems, those who carried out the London operation appear to have assessed the Madrid operation positively at the same time as learning some lessons from it. When I say positively I mean that they reached the conclusion that you can carry out such a bombing with impunity and still be showered with roses. Certainly a stormy debate broke out in Spain but we are so intelligent here that the argument centred on whether it was an attack by ETA or Islamic extremists. We allowed ourselves to be dragged along by a whirlpool of lies which served the interests of domestic political factions, whereas if only we had thought for a moment perhaps nobody would have died in London. No problem, however, for the real bombers who are free to strike again with arrogance.
The lessons learned can be seen in the differences between the two cases. Although both appear to be the work of the same hand, one of the most important differences is that the London government acted as if it knew what was going to happen and avoided stupid mistakes such as trying to blame it on the Real IRA based on the precedent of the Omagh bombing(the investigation of which is by no means resolved)
Only a few know what flows through the drains of the block which rules the world; Aznar was a servile servant of the club but never managed to move to the secret centres of power. In the case of London, the criminals, the bosses of the former Spanish pesident, didn't even consider it necessary to leave a van with a copy of the Koran. This vehicle, absurd in every way, was only the bait to eliminate any doubt and to lead the police in the "right direction"; but a fanatical government, obssessed and thoughtless began to get entangled in its own lies on seeing an opportunity to avoid the question of Iraq- a question which they not only didn't have to avoid but which they could have used to advantage as the Australian right- wing government did and as the British government is doing now- and deliver a mortal blow to ETA and Basque nationalism.
Another important difference is where the attacks were carried out: the trains bombed in London were underground and this has helped the the control of information, the images(There are hardly any graphic images of the bombed trains; it was precisely the photos which made people think the Madrid bombs were placed beneath the trains, not inside them),facilitated the identification of the "terrorists" and in general the whole" investigation". Certainly, to allow the public and the media to have a more spectacular image confirming the evil of the Islamicists, they decided to blow up a bus, pure Tel Aviv style. Another difference is that the operation was more bloody in Madrid; instead of 13 bombs, they placed four. Someone must have thought that on home ground we shouldn't go too far: a few dozen bodies will bring the desired effect.
Why had the Britsh authorities spent more than a year insisting on the inevitability of the attacks? On BBC radio 4 on July 9th Blair stated" all the vigilance in the world couldn't have prevented this”. Why would a country with such long experience in the face of political violence on its own territory, without ever betraying signs of vulnerability, repeat over and over again that there is nothing you can do to stop them. Are we seeing a sudden weakening of the confidence of the leadership, or is this rather a message to the British people and perhaps others to prepare themselves mentally for what is programmed to happen.
I recommend that you watch the videos of the first statements of Tony Blair since they are really interesting. His first statement from Gleneagles was done with complete serenity in the form of a brief speech perfectly memorized. However, someone must have spoken to him because in his second speech he made an effort to look visibly distressed. After these speeches he announced that the summit would go on and that he was returning to London to return to Scotland later. Taking into account the official version at the time according to which the bombings(they spoke of 9 at that moment) had happened without warning throughout the morning at different places and on differnet modes of transport how could he be so sure that there weren't to be further incidents and that after a short stay in London he could return to Scotland? One thing he wanted to insist upon from the start was that there could be no doubts as to the identity of the terrorists: they were" Islamic extremists".
Even though in the first instance nobody could know who the perpetrators were and which specific ideological motivations they had, anyone could see the that the Briish authorities hadn't resorted to the abstract notion of "terrorism" but had emphasised precisely the idea of a militant Islam counterposed to "our values and way of life". The language of the clash of civilizations. In other words, instead of waiting for a claim of responsibility and obtaining more information or simply considering the events as the work of isolated madmen they decide immediately that they were dealing with nothing more nor less than than the representatives of a civilization harbouring an evil ideology.
To cap it all they put the Islamic community in the eye of the storm by talking endlessly about them, their activities, their organizations, mosques, madrases, clerics etc., in the aftermath of the bombing. Not content with this, and to make it quite clear where our gaze should directed, they insisted on the absolute necessity of establishing contacts with this community and reporting on talks with their leaders. The message that all this gave out was that "the Muslim community is not responable but the the evil is amongst them and we must help them to extirpate it". The consequence of all this has been the murder of at least one Pakistani and a number of fascist attacks on immigrants.
Some days later- what a coincidence- the UN announced new initiatives aimed at developing" a dialogue between cultures in order to combat international Islamic terrorism" and wheeled out again the deceitful notion of "an alliance of civilizations". All according to the script and once again a step towards an ideological interpretation of events(hasn't there been an exaggerated emphasis on ideology since July 7th?);in statements on Saturday16 th of March Blair gives his own interpretation to the expression "clash of civilizations" indicating that it is in reality a fight against "malevolent ideologies". Almost at the same time(what curious and splendid coordination!) the US political scientist Seth G. Jones.a middle East specialist at Rand Corporation- according to EL Pais one of the oldest think-tanks in the USA- affirms that "the war against terrorism is a war of ideas"
If we leave aside the cynicism, hypocrisy and Machiavellianism of all these declarations, it is necessary to focus on one thing: we are in the middle of a process of reconfiguration of the rules of the international game, and that in this process, the world of ideas is more important than we often think. We can see that, in contrast to the Omagh bomb or the most deadly terrorist attack ever in Britain( Lockerbie, Scotland), the strange London underground bombs have raised a notch higher he ideological offensive of the masters of the world.
This has been mentioned but we must insist on this point: why did the authorities reduce the level of alert several weeks before the bombings? The British presidency of the EU began on July 1st; on the 6th there was the election for the seat of the 1212 Olympics and on the 7th the G-8 summit started. Despite the fact that none of these events were stopped by the bombings(this apparently was not the goal of the perpetrators), weren't these events considered sufficiently important to maintain the level of alert for a few more days? Or perhaps that they took this decision to make sure that the reinforcement of police and security, that a state of alert implied, didn't interfere with the act which other "forces" were about to carry out?
There is one fact that it is difficult to lie about: official sources, through the assistant attached to the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, confirmed that, due to the characteristics of the explosions, homemade bombs had been discarded and the probability was given that the explosives were” military, plastic or commercial." Anyone who had seen the damage caused by the four bombs would have reached the same conclusion. We lacked confirmation of the exact tpe of explosive used:C4,RDX, Semtex. But, taking into account the protection and controls over this type of explosive in the UK, due amongst other things to the conflict in Ireland, do you think it is believable that some young Britains without known political militancy, who don't live clandestinely could as if by magic get hold of several dozen kilos of military explosive, murder their own citizens without leaving any explanation as to how they did it? But no problem, within a few days the police manage to smooth over this little problem by claiming that the explosives were homemade, of the type" usually used by Al-Queda" They didn't say this on the day of the explosions but after, it was sufficient grounds for an accusation that someone had a some chemical substance or other.
Here, they didn't wrack their brains too long but went straight for a chemistry lecturer, an evil young doctor( he's Arab too) who as well as being a chemistry lecturer has chemicals . Is this real!? Indeed, the informal charges against him were all over the media even before he was detained and while he had been traced to Egypt; apparently Scotland Yard was completely unconcerned that this evildoer, who nonetheless maintains his innocence, as does the interior minister of his country, might get away. Mere details. The important thing is to get across the necessary message; they were home made explosives. Remember that in Spain the police failed to make this point and ended up having to construct an extravagant tale about smugglers; Scotland Yard avoided this banana skin through the ridiculous hypothesis of homemade explosives.
But the "investigation" keeps on bringing new novelties. So that while the identity of many of the victims and everything about the investigation is kept secret (including strict control on the diffusion of images from the scene of the massacre) Scotland Yard sent two photos to the press. The first of those shows an image of one of the terrorists at Luton station at 7:20 in the morning carrying the backpack which was to blow up the bus in Tavistock Square at 9:47. You can see it on www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22989-1694317,00.html.In fact, all we see is someone walking with what appears to be a rucksack; other information given by the police- such as place, date and time- are not visible, since the image is apparently extracted from one of larger size taken by a high tech camera which one would imagine would include this information. And even though the police now say that four were filmed together in Luton, the picture provided by Scotland Yard, having conveniently been cut, prevents us from knowing if anyone is with him.
The purpose of releasing this image is not that the public might bring more information about the final movements of the "terrorist", an adolescent in whom no one ever detected political disquiet or hatred for his fellow citizens and who if we believe his mother, was at home the night before when he told her he was going to visit some friends in London- as he does several times a month- and who told various witnesses that he would be back the next day. The fact is that if there is anything the police have in abundance it is information about what happened, and therefore they don't need the help of the public. Police sources have told us that for some days now they have had photos not yet released of the four "activists" laughing together at King's Cross station at 8:30( just when the anti-terrorist exercise started); we don't know why these images have not been released ten days after the bombings if the support of the public is so crucial, but if such images exist the police would harbour no doubts as to what the "terrorist” of the 7:20 photo was doing: quite simply, he was heading to King's Cross with his bomb at the ready and carrying in his pocket blast resistant personal documents which he was never going to use again( credit cards, driving licence, according to the official version).
So these peculiar terrorists advanced, each one with his lethal and elaborate charge not strapped to his body but in a backpack- another unprecedented detail in the whole history of martyrs- and instead of heading directly to their respective targets met up in King,s Cross for a bit of a laugh before once again separating and three of them proceeding to blow themselves up, killing in the process several people of Asian origin, by sheer chance within a few seconds of each other. In other words: this farfetched modus operandi( note the perfection of the execution of the attacks in contrast to the hopeless measures of security adopted by the presumed terrorists, who by the look of it didn't even bother to disguise themselves in case they bumped into someone they knew) which one can deduce from the police's information, by no means could have gone unobserved and makes us think that the only function of the photo released is to stick up an image which has no worth as evidence but which would settle the issue in the eyes of the public." they've got him , one of those scoundrels walking up some steps with a rucksack".
So we arrive at Saturday 16th of July, the day the police send another image to the press supposed also captured in Luton station( we still don't know what has become of the King's Cross images or why it took so long to release this second image): www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22989-1698781,00.html. Examine carefully this proof which has been published on the front page of many papers. In this case the image appears to be complete, so that we can see at the top left handside the number of the camera, the time and the date. In the centre is someone who with similar characeristics to the man in the earlier photo. You can hardly make out the features, but at least you can see he skin colour, his hair, his nose, his ears,the shadow of his eyes and what looks like the beginnings of a beard. Behing him are three figures of whom, curiously none of these elements can be discerned. Their faces are nothing more than smudged grey stains( in fact almost the whole of the left of the picture has this tone) on which there are what appear to be caps.
We don't know whether this phantasmal quality is due to the fact that they are Al-Queda, but the police say that the person who appears behind the one who leads the procession is a Britain of Jamaican origen and black skin; the only thing I can see in the obscurity of his face is a distorted image. They haven't told us this but, by the look of it, this person didn't manage to put all the explosive in his backpack because he seems to be holding a white plastic bag to match his white shoes.; maybe it's his breakfast The face of one of the others appears to merge with the railing at the back. It's not clear that any of the three others are wearing a backpack of the same size and shape , something which, in theory, you should be able to see in the next stills in the sequence, since all members of the supposed commando cell should come into view in the same position as the first guy.
Perhaps these stills are not available because the camera only takes a few photos per minute. On the other hand, if it is certain that they were laughing together at King's Cross it must be because on the way something amusing happened , because here there is no sign at all of contact or verbal exchanges between them(they are not even, strictly speaking , together) and it impossible to tell whether they are laughing , crying or making faces. Other details such as the absence of shadows cast by their bodies, the puddles on the floor or the fact that there is nobody else in the picture should be analysed by someone who knows the station. One thing is sure: if the accused were alive and they told us they were going to present this photo at the trial, we would think they were taking the mickey.
British newspapers such as the Mirror, faced with the growing mountain of strange circumstances( they say they bought return tickets to London, that someone had paid for several hours parking time, no one heard them cry out Allab u'akhbar before the explosions, that it is strange they didn't leave their documents behind in order to foil the investigation and protect their co- conspirators,etc.), have had no choice but to speculate as to whether they weren't in fact suicide bombers but rather activists who had been deceived into thinking they could just drop the packs and run! No comment.
On the other hand, we can see at www.domoticaviva.com/noticias/050-070404/news06.htm that, curiously. although no one has ever immolated themselves on any train or other form of transport in Europe, for more than a year now someone adapted the camaras for the detection of possible suicidal behaviour in the Londom underground.
There are other things that should be investigated. For example, why did the pound fall 6% against the dollar during the ten days preceeding the attacks, with no apparent motive, "an unprecedented weakness" according to one expert economist:
http://infowars.net/Pages/Jul05/170705pound.html
Or where are the images from the bus cameras.
Break out of our lethargy.
We must take care not to fall into the temptation of giving priority to our own prejudices and schemas.Many people who have demonstrated against the war want to see in these attacks a consequence, condemnable but logical, of the Anglo-american agression. But in this case it will be demonstrated that, as well as being simple and comfortable, it is false. We can't afford to make an error of this magnitude. The simple fact that we think that the massacre in Iraq or other agressions could serve as a motive for someone to set of bombs can't lead us to think that that is what actually happened in London.
We can't get past the fact that almost the entire media whose coverage conditions so many aspects of our lives, are working together either consciously or by default, in the this pantomine fabricated by the complex mechanisms of power, and this hardly helps us to unravel the fabric of lies which surrounds us. Hopefully the day will come when the faculties of media studies have to analyse what happened during these years. For the meantime, in spite of everything, we must try to analyse these events with cool heads and without a priori assumptions of any type and the facts indicate that the same hand is behind both attacks as it goes on organizing the new world order and invading and plundering Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine. As was said in a forum on 11/32 if each attack is taken separately it is possible to make astute speculations but when all are taken together we can see a perfectly eloquent, coherent whole, full of sense and absolutely effective. They give the desired effect and mark the steps of a pre-determined race.
Are we really so naive as to imagine that the our political leaders and police chiefs are telling us the truth. Do Tony Blair and George Bush impress us with their sincerity? Do we think that while they have no scruples about killing thousands of people abroad they wouldn't finish off a handfull of people at home to further their ends. Do we think the lies ended with the Iraq war? Well, it looks like it; this time were allowing ourselves to be taken for a ride. You've just got to read the headlines, commentaries and analyses of what has happened: we facing the new generation of jihadis, Al-Queda is bringing the holy war to Europe. Let's come out of our stupor: the London terrorists weren't protesting against the invasion of Iraq. The London terrorists are precisely the people who carried out that invasion and others and with this new crime intend to justify their "war on terror" in Iraq and the rest of the world.
Let's make a digression here: remember that the war in Iraq is not incompatible with the progressive reduction of troops, such as has been announced by the British minister of defense, above all if we take into account the loses and the enormous difficulties of the troops on the ground. But note that this announcement, a populist gesture without cost, was produced a day after three soldiers were killed, but also only ten days after the bombs. So many people are going to connect the announcement with the bombings and, quite probably, the government is conscious of this and did it on purpose so that, in spite of an official denial, at the end of the day the situation in Iraq remains on the scene as a factor influencing people looking for explanations of he Iraq bombing. Everything is fine as long as people don't search for other explanations. We will see that the British government is not going to be shaken by this linkage, because at this stage only the connection of the crimes to its true perpetrators would be lethal. Aznar should continue holding his head in his hands.
It is shameful to observe the behaviour of the majority of the world's media professionals around this case. But also it is painful to observe how most progressive organization, the peace movements, journalists, formers of opinion remain enmeshed in the nets layed out by those who hold the mechanisms of power. Various things can be confirmed: we don't know how to manage the vast flow of information at our disposal, that we lack an authentic critical attitude and an ability to interpret what is going on on our planet and finally that we show a supine simple-mindedness and even an absolute ignorance of many social phenomena and realities( such as Islam, immigration in europe etc.).
There are still only a few people who have begun to think that the official version of events is simply incredible and there is nothing in it. But the worst thing is to see that many people, having noted many grey areas, prefer not to advance because they will feel themselves obliged to modify the logic, if not the whole basis of their thinking. And this "who reaps the whirlwind."is a popular saying but we are wrong if we think we can apply it anywhere and in particualr not in the case of Madrid and London.
Perhaps within a few decades an anonymous source will reveal to some newspaper that these atacks in Europe were carried out as operations of" preventative violence" planned by some people without the permission of their superiors in order to avoid worse evils. or that they weren't big attacks , just as big as necessary, and that the agents(Israeli?anglosaxon?) which took part in them regretted the means used and the damage caused but that they were in the interests of the state. That is to say it was a question of injecting a raher aggressive vaccine into the body politic so that this would create the necessary defenses against an illness much worse than the bombings themselves.
Who knows if they even tell us that there were Islamic militants and other radicals prepared to do even worse things but didn't act because they they thought their own people had carried out these attacks. Perhaps the lovers of order think that it was not such a bad thing to create a new and fictitious "cold war" between civilizations and ideologies. a war in which the killers were almost always the same people and the victims always different and fell in different places because if the enemy really didn't exist or at least was unable to respond militarily, the compensating effect of the massacres in the West provided a mask of equilibrium to a global system based on unilateral exploitation and imperialist aggression, with the added effect of discrediting political violence on the part of any sector against the system. Or it could happen that nobody goes so far and there is only the recognition of the error of prematurely blaming the four young men, admitting that”perhaps others had done it"
The UK would then be at the point of clearing the names of "the West Yorkshire 4"( as was done long before with several supossed IRA terrorists who were arbitarily emprisoned) and to compensate their families.It could be that public opinion receives these messages or other similar ones without seeing any great importance in them, in just the same way that we accept the official version of what is happening now. In the end , when our sense of human dignity is questionable and little more than an abstract dialectic, the capacity to think for ourselves seems to be a thing of little importance.
A campaign by AmnestyInternational says that for every person who submits we need one who doesn't. But when new lines in the universal history of infamy are being written, even though those who submit are multitudinous, we have the duty to use what clarity we still have left to awaken from this nightmare. It is certain that when so many things that happened in the 20th century remain obscure, it is difficult to imagine a society consisting of consumers imprisoned within the narrow limits of everyday life dismantling the big lies of the early 21st century
Time is leaving a thick deposit of dust on some events with certain similarities to those discussed here. Some are recent, such as the massacres of civilians in buildings in Moscow which permitted Putin to launch a new offensive in Chechnya. Others are a bit more remote such as the Guilford bombings(5 dead) and the Birmingham bombings(19 dead), atributed initially to the IRA and which unleashed a wave of repression, although years later those detained had their names cleared. And who remembers the killings of civilians in Italy between 1969 and 1984?1969 Piazza Fontana de milan: 16 dead. 1970, Goia Tauro: 6 dead.1974, Brescia: 8 dead. Tren Italicus: 12 dead. August 1980, Bologna station: 85 dead. 1984, train Naples- Milan: 15 dead.Years later it was admitted in the Italian Senate that the "Gladio network", which was behind many of these actions as part of the "rategy of tension" and the struggle against communism, had connexions with the Italian secret services themselves and above all with the CIA. In 2005 an investigation into the affair was published:" NATO's Secret Armies. Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Waetern Europe" You can concult two references to it at www.paginedidifesa.it/2005/pdd_050415.html and at http://hnn.us/articles/12253.html
We can't trust to luck or hope that the yearning to know the truth will emerge in future generations. There are no excuses. We are physically and temporally very close to what is happening and we have to take advantage of this. We have to end this farce, no matter how, without fear that it may give rise to a social and political convulsion. Taking into account that nowadays we have at our disposal advanced information technologies, everyone who can should work on this grave question spreading information and opinions about what has happened through alternative and conventional media, forums ,associations, political organizations etc..We have to do it here and now, without respite, until the exterminators of people and peoples find themselves between the sword and the wall and they have no other option but to admit their crimes and pay for them.
19 de julio de 2005
URGENT | 25.07.2005 03:17 | Analysis
Please. If you understand spanish you must translate this text to english. It is very important that english people could reading this analisy. You can wake up against thirany blair and their criminal acts from london blasts.
Bombs in London: the grand criminal farce of the Empire
Before beginning, a warning. He who writes this doesn't believe that everything that happens in this world can be explained by theories aluding to secret conspiracies. For example, I admit that I don't risk talking about who carried out the September 11 attacks. I consider the information I have on this issue to be extraordinarily confused. Nor do I necessarily think that there was a " black hand" behind some of the attacks claimed by ETA. I think that we have to base ourselves on the data which we have and the contradictions which this data lays bare: above all, we must think logically and clearly with a cool mind. In these lines, whose only aim is to make people think, I will limit myself to considering the recent massacres in Europe, above all the recent attacks in London. What has motivated me is the fact that day after day we are getting an accumulation of facts which don't fit in with the official story.
Even though the case seems partly solved, one has a feeling of unease because nothing indicates that the killers aren't once again going to get away with it.And even if we are voices in the wilderness it is important to make clear that some people don't in any way share the governmental and media theories about the bombings which have occured in the last year and a half: on the contrary we believe that no one should allow themselves to be hipnotized or seduced by appearances. It is necessary to read and listen to everything with great attention; only then will we have the knowledge and the courage to denounce with all our force the lies with which our leaders continue injecting us with a view to clearing the way to the attainment of their political and economic goals
.
We all have a lot of responsabilities and problems in life. It would be much easier to remain silent and to accept the information we are being given on what is happening. In reality, it isn't complete nonsense to say that we know who carry out terrorist attacks, and the Islamic thesis doesn't , in principle, seem bizarre. But it hasn’t taken long for some of the things they're saying to strike discordant sounds. If there is no confession and we don't put in the work it will be difficult to get evidence and present it to a court of law, but, even so, we can see enough to suspect that the killers of March 2004in Madrid and July 2005, in London were agents carrying out the dirtiest part of the strategy of the US and its closest allies(amongst others, Britain and Israel). This would mean that the people accused of these crimes, alive or dead, are completely innocent and that neither of the two operations had anything to do with Islamic extremists.
Certainly we can't arrive at this conclusion simply by reflecting on the question of "who benefits from the bombings?"
It appears clear that the international strategy of the USA, based for some years now on the nebulous "war on terror", is strengthened by the sporadic appearance of organizations which attack the civilian population of the West. As well as accentuating the doctrine of neo-liberal capitalism and the theory of the clash of civilizations, the attacks open the way to more oppressive legislation in Europe and the USA( new controls on communications and media, introduction of identity cards in UK, changes in anti-terrorist legislation, immigration controls, demonization of particular cultures and religions etc.), without forgetting the economic boost to the military-industrial and security sectors. If that's not enough, opinion poles confirm the growth of Blair's popularity and even the opposition approves his management of the the crisis(in spite of his dismissal of their demand for an inquiry into what had happened, an idea judged to be useless and a distraction from the police invstigation). But all this is not sufficient to attribute the bombings to those who benefitted.
¿ Are there any other facts which indicate that we should go beyond the flood of information from the official media?
Something beyond illusions.
Hours after the bombings in London, various media outlets spoke of claims of responsability for the attacks. The media, via picturesque claims, gave the impression that only Islamic groups could have been behind the bombings, when logic should have told us that only one communique could be the real one, the rest necessarily being false. Not one of these claims mentioned suicide attacks. All armed groups who carry out operations involving the loss of life of volunteers pay tribute to these men in their claims of reponsibility and often reveal their identity. To give a couple of examples, this happened with the attacks by Islamic Jihad in Israel and those of the leftist DHKC/P in Ankara this July. We can deduce, without fear of error, that to this moment no group has claimed responsibility for the London bombings.
In spite of everything, we go on taking for granted that these are Al-Queda attacks. Strange that this organization that has supposedly existed for years has only carried out two attacks in Europe. Actions which, in spite of the outlandish internet scribblings which are echoed in the media and which anyone could write, no one really seems to have claimed responsibility for. The reality is that we don't have proof the explosion of a single bomb, molotov cocktail or rifle shot attributable to this group. Nor have they carried out kidnappings or extorsion, bank robberies to provide funds and police throughout the world know that they have never discovered armaments or documents which can genuinely be linked to this group.
What is more , if we take into account the importance of mutual support in the Islamic milieu, it is striking that networks of support for these militants ,especially those imprisoned, and their families don't exist and that no tributes are given for their martyrs, not even at their funerals and there isn't even a record of them. In short, quite unlike any other known terrorist organization. Compare this with , for example, the Corsican militants who have been responsible for hundreds of actions, have suffered multiple detentions, have had arms and explosives confiscated, pay tribute to their dead etc..And the same can be said for many organizations in Asia which claim to be Islamic.. The fact is that Al-Queda is only behind two actions in Europe. Two massacres strangely spectacular, synchronized and perfect in execution which have had important social and political consequences.
Occasionally some journalist has dared to suggest that we don't really know what Al-Queda is, that it is something vague and elusive. Now is the time to say out loud what we could have guessed long ago: Al-Queda doesn't exist any more than ghosts do. It was the name which was given to an Islamic structure which apparently had operated in Afghanistan in the 90.s( clearly means 80’s: translator); after that it was the name that the western media chose to describe an obscure organization which was pitilessly attacking Western civilization anywhere on the globe.
The struggle against Islamic terrorism took on the status of a war. From the thousands of detentions of "Islamic militants " in the course of this war, we can conclude the following: all the detainees proclaimed their innocence and no one admitted belonging to this organization or knowing of its existence; something unprecedented given that such committed militants would be, above all, proud of their cause.
Furthermore, setting aside the pathetic fabrications that the media coughs up, nobody has established anything at all about the structure of the group, its ideology, propaganda etc.. Its time to cast aside are inhibitions and point out that "Al-queda" is nothing but a logo which the block commanded by the USA uses as a non-existent enemy to claim responsibility for the terrorist attacks which, from the sewers of the Empire, they commit against their own population and against other countries. In this respest we should underline that in Iraq, as always happens in invasions, as well as the operations carried out by the occupying army, there is a dirty war against civilians which are attributed to the resistance or Al-Queda. What I mean by this is that the fight to unmask what is happening here cannot be separated from the acts the same delinquents are carrying out in Iraq often, lets not forget, with far greater casualties.
As of today one can say that, at first sight, the operation on July 7th in London developed as its planners wished. If we overlook the question of the explosive itself, everything indicates an attempt to massacre civilians (but not too many) and that’s exactly how it turned out. But as in any complex operation in which many lose ends have to be tied up, its practically impossible not to make mistakes.
One of these was to spread the news that an Israeli minister had to suspend a meeting in London. The first report regarding this, in AP, was that Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli minister of finance was warned by Scotland Yard before the first explosion not to leave his hotel because it was feared something might happen. A few hours later this was rectified saying that the warning had come after the first explosion. Later on, the British media published that the warning came in the other direction and several days earlier; it was Israel who warned Britain of the possibility of a terrorist attack. Last minute misunderstandings between partners who had no wish to harm each other and the general confusion haven't hidden the essential facts: there were warnings between the agencies of allied states indicating that someone knew perfectly well what was going to happen and did nothing to prevent it
This is not a mad rumor . It is something crucial for the solution of the case and hasn't been denied: simulated bomb attacks took place on the underground at the same time as the real ones. We read at www.prisonplanet.com:
In an interview on BBC Radio 5 broadcast on the evening of that same 7th July, the reporter spoke with Peter Power, managing director of Visor Consultants.com, a company which assesses “crisis management, better known as a PR company. Peter Power was an official at Scotland Yard working in the anti-terrorist section. Power told the reporter that, at the very moment that the explosions took place, his company was conducting an exercise involving a thousand people which involved bombings of underground trains at the precise moment and place in which they happened in reality.
Power : “ At 8.30 this morning we were carrying out an exercise involving, more than a thousand people, which entailed simultaneous explosions in precisely the underground stations where the attacks occurred this morning- that is why my hair is still standing on end.”
Journalist: ”To be quite clear about this, you were carrying out an exercise dealing with exactly the scenario which in fact took place this morning.”
Power: “Exactly, it was about 8.30 this morning ; we carried this out for a company whose name, for obvious reasons, I don’t want to reveal.”
We are not suggesting that Mr. Power had any knowledge of the real purpose of the exercise. The exercises served several purposes: as a cover for the terrorists to carry out their operation without the security services being aware what was happening and, what is more important, if they are captured during or after the operation to be able to claim that they are participating in an exercise.
As the article states, the terrorists, perfectly aware of the exercises, could easily have used them to place the explosives . What we don't know at the moment is whether they placed the bombs themselves or whether they used commuters who they invited to participate in the exercise using backpacks. Personally, I am inclined towards the hypothesis that the the bombs were fixed to the trains before the people accused knew about them, and there is the possibility that, using the cover of the exercises, they were placed there the night before. It doesn't seem probable, although you can't rule it out that in the course of the exercise backpacks were handed out to certain passengers with a view to filming them wearing them. The most likely is that the accused are victims who had no participation even as extras, and what is in no way sustainable is the claim that they were suicide bombers.
What basis do the police have for their claim that they are suicide bombers? This theory seems to correspond only to pre-established explanation for events. The investigation was not driven forward by actual evidence: in fact, quite the contrary: firstly, we carry out the crime with absolute impunity and then we implicate whoever we want. The object is to cover for the real perpetrators whilst advancing, through the media, a hypothesis acceptable to public opinion. But I stress again that to carry out an operation of this nature without leaving any loose ends is extremely difficult. Firstly they told us that the explosions occurred one after the other; then that they were simultaneous. On Sunday 10th the press stated that " the fact that the bombs exploded simultaneously reinforces the thesis that the bombs were set off by timers and appears to rule out the possibility of suicide attacks".
On Tuesday 12th Scotland Yard assured us that the attacks were suicide attacks and began to identify the suspects; seemingly the terrorists not only weren't carrying false documents but took their own documents with them. Then the identities of the bombers were confirmed. Curiously, despite the fact that the bombers would have been the more exposed to the blasts they were identified before the others. It will be important when the bodies are handed back to the families to see what kind of condition they are in. Also that there should be proper autopsies carried out by independent doctors named by the families, none of whom would likely believe what they are being told.
In truth, how, where and when these men died is something that probably only the planners of the operation know. Its quite possible that they were simply selected from the many victims of immigrant origin ( the perpetrators would have known that there would have been several people of Asian origin amongst the dead) in order to concede to them the posthumous title of the guilty as a way of solving the case.
This is also a way to avoid the headaches that the investigaters into the Madrid bombing had: there they were also on the verge of choosing the suicide theory and this even went out, first of all, on channel SER, but then they realized that this was a bit too complicated( too many bombs and therefore too many suicide bombers to invent). So they thought better of it and prepared "operation Leganes" with its half a dozen suicides and the special forces officer dead . About this operation , the controlled explosion of a building, those suicides and that of a special forces agent( the only" victim of terrorism whose photo was never published and whose body was burned after the profanation of his grave some days later) one can say a lot but this is not the moment. What is important is that Scotland Yard has learned from all this and has avoided these pitfalls.
The details coming through about the circumstances surrounding the bombings and the biographies of the accused- young men with families and normal lives of whom it isn't even sure that they knew each other and to whom no one attributed extremist tendencies- make it difficult to imagine that they were the perpetrators
Although in the end it makes no difference because the presumption of innocence ceases to exist when it becomes a nuisance; if history is just it will absolve them and the whole Pakistani and Muslim community in Britain. For the moment lets point out that the detentions, the house searches, the evacuation of entire areas, the publication of supposedly incriminating photos, the propaganda against these four men and all the repressive paraphernalia of state repression are part of the frame up .The present distracting manoeuvers are designed , amongst other things, to create enough background noise to cover over cracks, silence those who are trying to tell the truth and put into place new repressive measures. Especially important is the endless circulation of rumors aimed at throwing the media and the public off the track.
Someone could ask: but couldn't they just have acted overhastily and some other Islamicists are in fact responsible? Here the element which goes through all the events from the morning of the 7th emerges: the speed with which Scotland Yard acted trying to close the case as soon as possible without any room for doubt. An overhasty response can only be excused if the police were under pressure from the public for somek immediate scapegoats. This is what happened in Spain after 11/3 and in Britain itself after some bombings in the seventies, but this time it hasn't happened at all: if one thing has characterized the response of the British public to events that they were all told were inevitable is the serene acceptance of the tragedy and this calm could have allowed the investigation, the phantom of Al-Queda having been duly summoned, to proceed slowly towards the identification of those responsable. But no: they had to close the investigation as soon as possible, not because of public pressure but through fear that questions were being asked and suspicions could gather.
Even though the massacres in Madrid passed without problems, those who carried out the London operation appear to have assessed the Madrid operation positively at the same time as learning some lessons from it. When I say positively I mean that they reached the conclusion that you can carry out such a bombing with impunity and still be showered with roses. Certainly a stormy debate broke out in Spain but we are so intelligent here that the argument centred on whether it was an attack by ETA or Islamic extremists. We allowed ourselves to be dragged along by a whirlpool of lies which served the interests of domestic political factions, whereas if only we had thought for a moment perhaps nobody would have died in London. No problem, however, for the real bombers who are free to strike again with arrogance.
The lessons learned can be seen in the differences between the two cases. Although both appear to be the work of the same hand, one of the most important differences is that the London government acted as if it knew what was going to happen and avoided stupid mistakes such as trying to blame it on the Real IRA based on the precedent of the Omagh bombing(the investigation of which is by no means resolved)
Only a few know what flows through the drains of the block which rules the world; Aznar was a servile servant of the club but never managed to move to the secret centres of power. In the case of London, the criminals, the bosses of the former Spanish pesident, didn't even consider it necessary to leave a van with a copy of the Koran. This vehicle, absurd in every way, was only the bait to eliminate any doubt and to lead the police in the "right direction"; but a fanatical government, obssessed and thoughtless began to get entangled in its own lies on seeing an opportunity to avoid the question of Iraq- a question which they not only didn't have to avoid but which they could have used to advantage as the Australian right- wing government did and as the British government is doing now- and deliver a mortal blow to ETA and Basque nationalism.
Another important difference is where the attacks were carried out: the trains bombed in London were underground and this has helped the the control of information, the images(There are hardly any graphic images of the bombed trains; it was precisely the photos which made people think the Madrid bombs were placed beneath the trains, not inside them),facilitated the identification of the "terrorists" and in general the whole" investigation". Certainly, to allow the public and the media to have a more spectacular image confirming the evil of the Islamicists, they decided to blow up a bus, pure Tel Aviv style. Another difference is that the operation was more bloody in Madrid; instead of 13 bombs, they placed four. Someone must have thought that on home ground we shouldn't go too far: a few dozen bodies will bring the desired effect.
Why had the Britsh authorities spent more than a year insisting on the inevitability of the attacks? On BBC radio 4 on July 9th Blair stated" all the vigilance in the world couldn't have prevented this”. Why would a country with such long experience in the face of political violence on its own territory, without ever betraying signs of vulnerability, repeat over and over again that there is nothing you can do to stop them. Are we seeing a sudden weakening of the confidence of the leadership, or is this rather a message to the British people and perhaps others to prepare themselves mentally for what is programmed to happen.
I recommend that you watch the videos of the first statements of Tony Blair since they are really interesting. His first statement from Gleneagles was done with complete serenity in the form of a brief speech perfectly memorized. However, someone must have spoken to him because in his second speech he made an effort to look visibly distressed. After these speeches he announced that the summit would go on and that he was returning to London to return to Scotland later. Taking into account the official version at the time according to which the bombings(they spoke of 9 at that moment) had happened without warning throughout the morning at different places and on differnet modes of transport how could he be so sure that there weren't to be further incidents and that after a short stay in London he could return to Scotland? One thing he wanted to insist upon from the start was that there could be no doubts as to the identity of the terrorists: they were" Islamic extremists".
Even though in the first instance nobody could know who the perpetrators were and which specific ideological motivations they had, anyone could see the that the Briish authorities hadn't resorted to the abstract notion of "terrorism" but had emphasised precisely the idea of a militant Islam counterposed to "our values and way of life". The language of the clash of civilizations. In other words, instead of waiting for a claim of responsibility and obtaining more information or simply considering the events as the work of isolated madmen they decide immediately that they were dealing with nothing more nor less than than the representatives of a civilization harbouring an evil ideology.
To cap it all they put the Islamic community in the eye of the storm by talking endlessly about them, their activities, their organizations, mosques, madrases, clerics etc., in the aftermath of the bombing. Not content with this, and to make it quite clear where our gaze should directed, they insisted on the absolute necessity of establishing contacts with this community and reporting on talks with their leaders. The message that all this gave out was that "the Muslim community is not responable but the the evil is amongst them and we must help them to extirpate it". The consequence of all this has been the murder of at least one Pakistani and a number of fascist attacks on immigrants.
Some days later- what a coincidence- the UN announced new initiatives aimed at developing" a dialogue between cultures in order to combat international Islamic terrorism" and wheeled out again the deceitful notion of "an alliance of civilizations". All according to the script and once again a step towards an ideological interpretation of events(hasn't there been an exaggerated emphasis on ideology since July 7th?);in statements on Saturday16 th of March Blair gives his own interpretation to the expression "clash of civilizations" indicating that it is in reality a fight against "malevolent ideologies". Almost at the same time(what curious and splendid coordination!) the US political scientist Seth G. Jones.a middle East specialist at Rand Corporation- according to EL Pais one of the oldest think-tanks in the USA- affirms that "the war against terrorism is a war of ideas"
If we leave aside the cynicism, hypocrisy and Machiavellianism of all these declarations, it is necessary to focus on one thing: we are in the middle of a process of reconfiguration of the rules of the international game, and that in this process, the world of ideas is more important than we often think. We can see that, in contrast to the Omagh bomb or the most deadly terrorist attack ever in Britain( Lockerbie, Scotland), the strange London underground bombs have raised a notch higher he ideological offensive of the masters of the world.
This has been mentioned but we must insist on this point: why did the authorities reduce the level of alert several weeks before the bombings? The British presidency of the EU began on July 1st; on the 6th there was the election for the seat of the 1212 Olympics and on the 7th the G-8 summit started. Despite the fact that none of these events were stopped by the bombings(this apparently was not the goal of the perpetrators), weren't these events considered sufficiently important to maintain the level of alert for a few more days? Or perhaps that they took this decision to make sure that the reinforcement of police and security, that a state of alert implied, didn't interfere with the act which other "forces" were about to carry out?
There is one fact that it is difficult to lie about: official sources, through the assistant attached to the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, confirmed that, due to the characteristics of the explosions, homemade bombs had been discarded and the probability was given that the explosives were” military, plastic or commercial." Anyone who had seen the damage caused by the four bombs would have reached the same conclusion. We lacked confirmation of the exact tpe of explosive used:C4,RDX, Semtex. But, taking into account the protection and controls over this type of explosive in the UK, due amongst other things to the conflict in Ireland, do you think it is believable that some young Britains without known political militancy, who don't live clandestinely could as if by magic get hold of several dozen kilos of military explosive, murder their own citizens without leaving any explanation as to how they did it? But no problem, within a few days the police manage to smooth over this little problem by claiming that the explosives were homemade, of the type" usually used by Al-Queda" They didn't say this on the day of the explosions but after, it was sufficient grounds for an accusation that someone had a some chemical substance or other.
Here, they didn't wrack their brains too long but went straight for a chemistry lecturer, an evil young doctor( he's Arab too) who as well as being a chemistry lecturer has chemicals . Is this real!? Indeed, the informal charges against him were all over the media even before he was detained and while he had been traced to Egypt; apparently Scotland Yard was completely unconcerned that this evildoer, who nonetheless maintains his innocence, as does the interior minister of his country, might get away. Mere details. The important thing is to get across the necessary message; they were home made explosives. Remember that in Spain the police failed to make this point and ended up having to construct an extravagant tale about smugglers; Scotland Yard avoided this banana skin through the ridiculous hypothesis of homemade explosives.
But the "investigation" keeps on bringing new novelties. So that while the identity of many of the victims and everything about the investigation is kept secret (including strict control on the diffusion of images from the scene of the massacre) Scotland Yard sent two photos to the press. The first of those shows an image of one of the terrorists at Luton station at 7:20 in the morning carrying the backpack which was to blow up the bus in Tavistock Square at 9:47. You can see it on www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22989-1694317,00.html.In fact, all we see is someone walking with what appears to be a rucksack; other information given by the police- such as place, date and time- are not visible, since the image is apparently extracted from one of larger size taken by a high tech camera which one would imagine would include this information. And even though the police now say that four were filmed together in Luton, the picture provided by Scotland Yard, having conveniently been cut, prevents us from knowing if anyone is with him.
The purpose of releasing this image is not that the public might bring more information about the final movements of the "terrorist", an adolescent in whom no one ever detected political disquiet or hatred for his fellow citizens and who if we believe his mother, was at home the night before when he told her he was going to visit some friends in London- as he does several times a month- and who told various witnesses that he would be back the next day. The fact is that if there is anything the police have in abundance it is information about what happened, and therefore they don't need the help of the public. Police sources have told us that for some days now they have had photos not yet released of the four "activists" laughing together at King's Cross station at 8:30( just when the anti-terrorist exercise started); we don't know why these images have not been released ten days after the bombings if the support of the public is so crucial, but if such images exist the police would harbour no doubts as to what the "terrorist” of the 7:20 photo was doing: quite simply, he was heading to King's Cross with his bomb at the ready and carrying in his pocket blast resistant personal documents which he was never going to use again( credit cards, driving licence, according to the official version).
So these peculiar terrorists advanced, each one with his lethal and elaborate charge not strapped to his body but in a backpack- another unprecedented detail in the whole history of martyrs- and instead of heading directly to their respective targets met up in King,s Cross for a bit of a laugh before once again separating and three of them proceeding to blow themselves up, killing in the process several people of Asian origin, by sheer chance within a few seconds of each other. In other words: this farfetched modus operandi( note the perfection of the execution of the attacks in contrast to the hopeless measures of security adopted by the presumed terrorists, who by the look of it didn't even bother to disguise themselves in case they bumped into someone they knew) which one can deduce from the police's information, by no means could have gone unobserved and makes us think that the only function of the photo released is to stick up an image which has no worth as evidence but which would settle the issue in the eyes of the public." they've got him , one of those scoundrels walking up some steps with a rucksack".
So we arrive at Saturday 16th of July, the day the police send another image to the press supposed also captured in Luton station( we still don't know what has become of the King's Cross images or why it took so long to release this second image): www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22989-1698781,00.html. Examine carefully this proof which has been published on the front page of many papers. In this case the image appears to be complete, so that we can see at the top left handside the number of the camera, the time and the date. In the centre is someone who with similar characeristics to the man in the earlier photo. You can hardly make out the features, but at least you can see he skin colour, his hair, his nose, his ears,the shadow of his eyes and what looks like the beginnings of a beard. Behing him are three figures of whom, curiously none of these elements can be discerned. Their faces are nothing more than smudged grey stains( in fact almost the whole of the left of the picture has this tone) on which there are what appear to be caps.
We don't know whether this phantasmal quality is due to the fact that they are Al-Queda, but the police say that the person who appears behind the one who leads the procession is a Britain of Jamaican origen and black skin; the only thing I can see in the obscurity of his face is a distorted image. They haven't told us this but, by the look of it, this person didn't manage to put all the explosive in his backpack because he seems to be holding a white plastic bag to match his white shoes.; maybe it's his breakfast The face of one of the others appears to merge with the railing at the back. It's not clear that any of the three others are wearing a backpack of the same size and shape , something which, in theory, you should be able to see in the next stills in the sequence, since all members of the supposed commando cell should come into view in the same position as the first guy.
Perhaps these stills are not available because the camera only takes a few photos per minute. On the other hand, if it is certain that they were laughing together at King's Cross it must be because on the way something amusing happened , because here there is no sign at all of contact or verbal exchanges between them(they are not even, strictly speaking , together) and it impossible to tell whether they are laughing , crying or making faces. Other details such as the absence of shadows cast by their bodies, the puddles on the floor or the fact that there is nobody else in the picture should be analysed by someone who knows the station. One thing is sure: if the accused were alive and they told us they were going to present this photo at the trial, we would think they were taking the mickey.
British newspapers such as the Mirror, faced with the growing mountain of strange circumstances( they say they bought return tickets to London, that someone had paid for several hours parking time, no one heard them cry out Allab u'akhbar before the explosions, that it is strange they didn't leave their documents behind in order to foil the investigation and protect their co- conspirators,etc.), have had no choice but to speculate as to whether they weren't in fact suicide bombers but rather activists who had been deceived into thinking they could just drop the packs and run! No comment.
On the other hand, we can see at www.domoticaviva.com/noticias/050-070404/news06.htm that, curiously. although no one has ever immolated themselves on any train or other form of transport in Europe, for more than a year now someone adapted the camaras for the detection of possible suicidal behaviour in the Londom underground.
There are other things that should be investigated. For example, why did the pound fall 6% against the dollar during the ten days preceeding the attacks, with no apparent motive, "an unprecedented weakness" according to one expert economist:
http://infowars.net/Pages/Jul05/170705pound.html Or where are the images from the bus cameras.
Break out of our lethargy.
We must take care not to fall into the temptation of giving priority to our own prejudices and schemas.Many people who have demonstrated against the war want to see in these attacks a consequence, condemnable but logical, of the Anglo-american agression. But in this case it will be demonstrated that, as well as being simple and comfortable, it is false. We can't afford to make an error of this magnitude. The simple fact that we think that the massacre in Iraq or other agressions could serve as a motive for someone to set of bombs can't lead us to think that that is what actually happened in London.
We can't get past the fact that almost the entire media whose coverage conditions so many aspects of our lives, are working together either consciously or by default, in the this pantomine fabricated by the complex mechanisms of power, and this hardly helps us to unravel the fabric of lies which surrounds us. Hopefully the day will come when the faculties of media studies have to analyse what happened during these years. For the meantime, in spite of everything, we must try to analyse these events with cool heads and without a priori assumptions of any type and the facts indicate that the same hand is behind both attacks as it goes on organizing the new world order and invading and plundering Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine. As was said in a forum on 11/32 if each attack is taken separately it is possible to make astute speculations but when all are taken together we can see a perfectly eloquent, coherent whole, full of sense and absolutely effective. They give the desired effect and mark the steps of a pre-determined race.
Are we really so naive as to imagine that the our political leaders and police chiefs are telling us the truth. Do Tony Blair and George Bush impress us with their sincerity? Do we think that while they have no scruples about killing thousands of people abroad they wouldn't finish off a handfull of people at home to further their ends. Do we think the lies ended with the Iraq war? Well, it looks like it; this time were allowing ourselves to be taken for a ride. You've just got to read the headlines, commentaries and analyses of what has happened: we facing the new generation of jihadis, Al-Queda is bringing the holy war to Europe. Let's come out of our stupor: the London terrorists weren't protesting against the invasion of Iraq. The London terrorists are precisely the people who carried out that invasion and others and with this new crime intend to justify their "war on terror" in Iraq and the rest of the world.
Let's make a digression here: remember that the war in Iraq is not incompatible with the progressive reduction of troops, such as has been announced by the British minister of defense, above all if we take into account the loses and the enormous difficulties of the troops on the ground. But note that this announcement, a populist gesture without cost, was produced a day after three soldiers were killed, but also only ten days after the bombs. So many people are going to connect the announcement with the bombings and, quite probably, the government is conscious of this and did it on purpose so that, in spite of an official denial, at the end of the day the situation in Iraq remains on the scene as a factor influencing people looking for explanations of he Iraq bombing. Everything is fine as long as people don't search for other explanations. We will see that the British government is not going to be shaken by this linkage, because at this stage only the connection of the crimes to its true perpetrators would be lethal. Aznar should continue holding his head in his hands.
It is shameful to observe the behaviour of the majority of the world's media professionals around this case. But also it is painful to observe how most progressive organization, the peace movements, journalists, formers of opinion remain enmeshed in the nets layed out by those who hold the mechanisms of power. Various things can be confirmed: we don't know how to manage the vast flow of information at our disposal, that we lack an authentic critical attitude and an ability to interpret what is going on on our planet and finally that we show a supine simple-mindedness and even an absolute ignorance of many social phenomena and realities( such as Islam, immigration in europe etc.).
There are still only a few people who have begun to think that the official version of events is simply incredible and there is nothing in it. But the worst thing is to see that many people, having noted many grey areas, prefer not to advance because they will feel themselves obliged to modify the logic, if not the whole basis of their thinking. And this "who reaps the whirlwind."is a popular saying but we are wrong if we think we can apply it anywhere and in particualr not in the case of Madrid and London.
Perhaps within a few decades an anonymous source will reveal to some newspaper that these atacks in Europe were carried out as operations of" preventative violence" planned by some people without the permission of their superiors in order to avoid worse evils. or that they weren't big attacks , just as big as necessary, and that the agents(Israeli?anglosaxon?) which took part in them regretted the means used and the damage caused but that they were in the interests of the state. That is to say it was a question of injecting a raher aggressive vaccine into the body politic so that this would create the necessary defenses against an illness much worse than the bombings themselves.
Who knows if they even tell us that there were Islamic militants and other radicals prepared to do even worse things but didn't act because they they thought their own people had carried out these attacks. Perhaps the lovers of order think that it was not such a bad thing to create a new and fictitious "cold war" between civilizations and ideologies. a war in which the killers were almost always the same people and the victims always different and fell in different places because if the enemy really didn't exist or at least was unable to respond militarily, the compensating effect of the massacres in the West provided a mask of equilibrium to a global system based on unilateral exploitation and imperialist aggression, with the added effect of discrediting political violence on the part of any sector against the system. Or it could happen that nobody goes so far and there is only the recognition of the error of prematurely blaming the four young men, admitting that”perhaps others had done it"
The UK would then be at the point of clearing the names of "the West Yorkshire 4"( as was done long before with several supossed IRA terrorists who were arbitarily emprisoned) and to compensate their families.It could be that public opinion receives these messages or other similar ones without seeing any great importance in them, in just the same way that we accept the official version of what is happening now. In the end , when our sense of human dignity is questionable and little more than an abstract dialectic, the capacity to think for ourselves seems to be a thing of little importance.
A campaign by AmnestyInternational says that for every person who submits we need one who doesn't. But when new lines in the universal history of infamy are being written, even though those who submit are multitudinous, we have the duty to use what clarity we still have left to awaken from this nightmare. It is certain that when so many things that happened in the 20th century remain obscure, it is difficult to imagine a society consisting of consumers imprisoned within the narrow limits of everyday life dismantling the big lies of the early 21st century
Time is leaving a thick deposit of dust on some events with certain similarities to those discussed here. Some are recent, such as the massacres of civilians in buildings in Moscow which permitted Putin to launch a new offensive in Chechnya. Others are a bit more remote such as the Guilford bombings(5 dead) and the Birmingham bombings(19 dead), atributed initially to the IRA and which unleashed a wave of repression, although years later those detained had their names cleared. And who remembers the killings of civilians in Italy between 1969 and 1984?1969 Piazza Fontana de milan: 16 dead. 1970, Goia Tauro: 6 dead.1974, Brescia: 8 dead. Tren Italicus: 12 dead. August 1980, Bologna station: 85 dead. 1984, train Naples- Milan: 15 dead.Years later it was admitted in the Italian Senate that the "Gladio network", which was behind many of these actions as part of the "rategy of tension" and the struggle against communism, had connexions with the Italian secret services themselves and above all with the CIA. In 2005 an investigation into the affair was published:" NATO's Secret Armies. Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Waetern Europe" You can concult two references to it at www.paginedidifesa.it/2005/pdd_050415.html and at
http://hnn.us/articles/12253.html We can't trust to luck or hope that the yearning to know the truth will emerge in future generations. There are no excuses. We are physically and temporally very close to what is happening and we have to take advantage of this. We have to end this farce, no matter how, without fear that it may give rise to a social and political convulsion. Taking into account that nowadays we have at our disposal advanced information technologies, everyone who can should work on this grave question spreading information and opinions about what has happened through alternative and conventional media, forums ,associations, political organizations etc..We have to do it here and now, without respite, until the exterminators of people and peoples find themselves between the sword and the wall and they have no other option but to admit their crimes and pay for them.
19 de julio de 2005
anonymous. translator: Colin Buchanan
e-mail:
troopsoutofiraqnetwork@hotmail.com
Comments
Display the following 3 comments