Loftus: London bombing mastermind is MI6 agent

Moderators: DrVolin, 82_28, Elvis, Jeff

Execution of de Menezes

Postby Peachtree Pam » Wed Aug 17, 2005 5:57 am

Antiaristo,<br><br>Do you think that Mr de Menezes may have unwittingly acquired some knowledge that he himself did not realise was of value and threatened the perpetrators?<br><br>Just to get your opinion, I realise this is only speculation.<br>Pam<br><br>P.S. In London is there a way for a special prosecutor to be named, outside of the police/Scotland Yard? <p></p><i></i>
Peachtree Pam
 
Posts: 950
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2005 9:46 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

They did not wish to prejudice the inquiry

Postby antiaristo » Wed Aug 17, 2005 5:58 am

First part of an analysis in the Grauniad:<br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Leaks raise sharp questions about police tactics <br><br>Inquiry into the killing of De Menezes shows he was sitting down when shot <br><br>Duncan Campbell, Rosie Cowan, Vikram Dodd and Mark Honigsbaum<br>Wednesday August 17, 2005<br>The Guardian <br><br><br>The leaked details of the investigation into the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes point to <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>huge discrepancies between initial reports and reality</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->. The documents leaked to ITN have raised new questions both about the police tactics and about the inquiry into the young Brazilian's death.<br>Among the key questions prompted by the documents are:<br><br>Why was there such disparity between the initial reports and the reality?<br><br>The shooting occurred the day after what could have been a second major bombing attack on London. At the time there were many conflicting reports, <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>an air of panic and a shortage of hard information</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->. The first reports of the killing came from <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>witnesses</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> at Stockwell tube station and police sources. Much of it was unconfirmed.<br><br>First accounts to enter the public arena said Mr de Menezes aroused suspicion because he wore a "heavily padded" jacket, or a <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>"bulky coat with wires sticking out of it".</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> Reports suggested that he had ignored police calls to halt, vaulted the ticket barrier and pushed passengers out of the way.<br><br>It now appears that he entered the station at a "normal walking pace", and that witnesses mistook the pursuing police for him, hence the accounts about vaulting barriers and passengers being pushed out of the way. In any fast-moving situation there are as many differing accounts as there are people. The police at the time officially declined to give detailed information, saying that it was normal practice in such a case for an investigation to be held, and that <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong><!--EZCODE FONT START--><span style="font-size:medium;">they did not wish to prejudice the inquiry.</span><!--EZCODE FONT END--></strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/story/0,16132,1550669,00.html">www.guardian.co.uk/attack...69,00.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--></em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br>Seems to me this stands or falls on Anthony Larkin. It is noteworthy that the Guardian writers avoid using his name. But WE know. <p></p><i></i>
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Motive

Postby antiaristo » Wed Aug 17, 2005 6:22 am

Pam,<br>I'm sticking to my original hypothesis, which I now formally upgrade to the status of theory, viz:<br><br>antiaristo<br>Registered Member<br>Posts: 272<br>(7/30/05 2:59 pm)<br>Reply MI6 Motivation and Purpose<br>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br> <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Confusion leads to suspicion leads to a search for motivation.<br>Would MI6 bomb London? Look at the timing.<br><br>I was born and bred in London (Battersea).<br>The vibe I’m picking up over the net is that London people believe this was the work of the SAS.<br>I’m inclined to agree – for the ruthlessness.<br>Pumping eight bullets into a prone man’s head is what they call “Butcher and Bolt”. It’s not police. It’s straight out of “Death on the Rock”.<br>So what’s this all about? I’ll give a hypothesis.<br><br>The word is now out about Queen Elizabeth and the Treason Felony Act.<br>She feels herself urgently threatened.<br>Her personal bodyguard is the SAS. The boys from Hereford don’t report to the Ministry of Defence, but straight to “The Palace”.<br><br>What does the SAS want to guarantee Her Majesty’s safety? The right to blow away anybody they deem a threat. A shoot-to-kill policy.<br><br>But how do you introduce such a policy?<br>You create a threat.<br>The ubiquitous “suicide bomber”.<br>You demonstrate the threat – on 7 July.<br>Why 7 July? She’s invested a ton of money and effort into taking the Olympics from the French. Let's get that first, then blow up Commoners.<br><br>Then you create a diversion – on 21 July – which just so happens to reinforce your original message. You put all your media and investigative effort into the second “bombing” (the harmless one).<br><br>Then you test out your shoot-to-kill policy – in the hands of the SAS, and nobody else. They are your Swiss Guard.<br><br>A “brown” man is executed for no reason that we know.<br>The story we are fed is a patchwork of lies.<br>Outrage rightly arises – in the “brown” community.<br><br>The focus is on the discrimination, and not the underlying murder.<br><br>What’s next?<br>Shoot to kill a "white" man?<br>Will everybody be happy then, because it is an equal opportunity shoot-to-kill policy?<br><br>And Her Majesty achieve her purpose?</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> <br><br>What this implies is that they were looking for ANY opportunity to carry out Kratos. Menezes MAY have had some information that made him a target of choice, but this is not necessary to account for their behaviour.<br><br>What you ask about a special prosecutor. This is the big joke in British "democracy". Literally every arm of the State is under the control of Queen Elizabeth. There is no separation of powers and certainly no "independence".<br>EVERY inquiry since about 1990 has consisted of Her Majesty investigating her own actions. You can start with the Bingham Inquiry into BCCI in 1992.<br><br>EVERY inquiry founders on the same problem. According to the Treason Felony act it is illegal to "put any force or constraint upon her". So to tell the truth breaks the law. <p></p><i></i>
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

de Menezes

Postby Peachtree Pam » Wed Aug 17, 2005 6:49 am

It looks like there's as little hope for justice in the UK as there is in US; at least the UK papers print leaked info. This is seldom happening in US nowadays.<br><br>I'm not even sure about Fitzgerald, since nothing is what it appears to be. Could the PTB be fed up with Bush in not performing: in attacking Syria or perhaps Iran - I think Syria is a better bet. <p></p><i></i>
Peachtree Pam
 
Posts: 950
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2005 9:46 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

The Family

Postby antiaristo » Wed Aug 17, 2005 8:04 am

<!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Serious questions on shoot-to-kill <br>Press Association <br>Wednesday August 17, 2005 11:38 AM<br><br><br>The lawyer for the family of the Brazilian mistakenly shot dead by anti-terror police said that disclosures about the killing raised "serious questions" about shoot-to-kill policy.<br><br>Jean Charles de Menezes was gunned down at Stockwell Tube station in the mistaken belief that he was linked to the failed July 21 bomb attempts.<br><br>Initial accounts suggested that he had fled from armed officers by vaulting over barriers before stumbling on to an Underground train, where the officers opened fire.<br><br>But according to documents obtained by ITV News, the Brazilian entered the station at a normal walking pace and even picked up a free copy of the Metro newspaper.<br><br>Harriet Wistrich, lawyer for the de Menezes family, told BBC Breakfast: <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>"It raises very, very serious questions about the shoot-to-kill policy and shows immediate questions need to be asked about whether this policy should be in operation and how dangerously wrong it can go."</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br>She said police had no reason to suspect he was a suicide bomber, beyond the fact he came out of a house under surveillance.<br><br>"He was not carrying a rucksack. He simply had a denim jacket. Was it necessary to shoot him dead as opposed to trying to confront him at an earlier stage. There was no indication he was about to blow himself up at all."<br><br>Ms Wistrich said it had always been clear to Mr de Menezes' family that his death was the result of a dreadful mistake.<br><br>"The family have always known that this was absolutely an outrageous mistake, at the very least, and that their son was entirely innocent," she said.<br><br>"They are very keen to get the full truth and justice. It is unfortunate in some ways that it has all come out in this way, without the opportunity for them to receive the news first. But clearly we now know that Jean Charles was doing absolutely nothing to arouse any suspicion, he was just unfortunate to be living in a block of flats that was under surveillance and to look slightly brown skinned."</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> <p></p><i></i>
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Pressure Rising

Postby antiaristo » Wed Aug 17, 2005 2:12 pm

<!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>5pm<br>----<br>Police under pressure over Menezes leak<br><br>Matthew Tempest and Simon Jeffery<br>Wednesday August 17, 2005<br><br>Guardian Unlimited<br><br>Family representatives and campaigners for the Brazilian man shot dead on a London tube train are demanding to know how Scotland Yard allowed misleading information to circulate about his killing.<br>In the wake of a leak last night from the independent report, which revealed eyewitnesses seeing Jean Charles de Menezes being held by police in his seat before being shot in the head, attention has now turned to the initial accounts of his death. These claimed he ran from police, vaulted a ticket barrier and was shot on the floor of the carriage.<br><br>Helen Shaw, co-director of the deaths in custody campaign group Inquest, said today that differences between the accounts - including the disclosure that he was not, as previously claimed, wearing a bulky padded jacket - raised concerns about police conduct.<br><br>"The public should be told why the Metropolitan police did not correct the misinformation about Mr de Menezes' clothing and actions once the facts became clear," she said.<br><br>Asad Rehman, a spokesman for the De Menezes family campaign, said the position of Sir Ian Blair, the Metropolitan police commissioner, would no longer be tenable if "it is demonstrated that he wilfully misled the public, that he wilfully misled the family about the circumstances of Jean's death."<br><br>Mr de Menezes was shot dead in the carriage of a tube train at Stockwell station on July 22 in the mistaken belief that he was linked to the previous day's failed bomb attempts. A report in today's Financial Times said surveillance officers mistook him for Hussein Osman, the July 21 bomb plot suspect whose extradition to Britain was today approved by a court in Italy.<br><br>Initial accounts suggested that Mr de Menezes had fled from armed officers by vaulting over barriers before stumbling on to an underground train, where the officers opened fire. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>One witness in the carriage, Mark Whitby</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->, 47, whose account formed an important part of the subsequent reports, said he had seen a man who looked Pakistani "hotly pursued by what I knew to be three plain-clothes police officers".<br><br>He described the man wearing "a coat like you would wear in winter, a sort of padded jacket" and looking as petrified as "a cornered rabbit" when he got on the train. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Mr Whitby today refused to comment on the leak</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->.<br><br>According to documents obtained by ITV News from the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), which is investigating the shooting, Mr de Menezes was filmed on CCTV cameras entering the station at a normal walking pace and even picking up a free copy of the Metro newspaper. He was wearing a denim jacket.<br><br>His family's solicitor, Harriet Wistrich, said the disclosures meant police had no reason to suspect Mr de Menezes was a suicide bomber, beyond the fact that he came out of a house under surveillance.<br><br>She told BBC Breakfast: "It raises very, very serious questions about the shoot-to-kill policy and shows immediate questions need to be asked about whether this policy should be in operation and how dangerously wrong it can go.<br><br>"He was not carrying a rucksack. He simply had a denim jacket. Was it necessary to shoot him dead as opposed to trying to confront him at an earlier stage.<br><br>"There was no indication he was about to blow himself up at all [...] he was just unfortunate to be living in a block of flats that was under surveillance and to look slightly brown-skinned."<br><br>A former flying squad commander, John O'Connor, said the leaks would force Sir Ian to contemplate resigning.<br><br>He told BBC Breakfast News: "There will be pressure on the Met Commissioner to consider his position.<br><br>"Had the normal procedures taken place in which a warning is given and officers wear specially marked clothing then this young man may not have been killed."<br><br>Politically, reaction was muted, with the <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Conservative leader, Michael Howard, refusing to comment</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> until the full IPCC report was published.<br><br>The deputy prime minister, <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>John Prescott, who is standing in for Tony Blair, also refused to comment</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->. "This is under review by an independent inquiry and I think we must wait for the result of that," he said.<br><br>The <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Liberal Democrats' president, Simon Hughes, said there would always have to be a shoot-to-kill option.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> "However, what I'm sure the report will do is make sure the police review and revise the processes that lead to that."</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> <br><br>Two comments<br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>(i)WHERE IS TONY LARKIN???</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br>(ii)You can always tell when Elizabeth Windsor is involved. The "politicians" won't touch it. <p></p><i></i>
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

More Pressure

Postby antiaristo » Wed Aug 17, 2005 2:49 pm

Who said what and when is becoming a big issue now the truth has been leaked. And I can see that Tony Larkin will prove to be hugely important. The Guardian is clearly aware of this if you read in between the lines.<br>In many respects this is a carbon copy of The Ricin Ring That Never Was, in which police lies were allowed to stand for years. It was also about NAMING A BRITISH AGENT (just like Tony Larkin).<br><br> <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>5.45pm <br><br>-------<br><!--EZCODE FONT START--><span style="font-size:medium;">Met accused over shooting confusion</span><!--EZCODE FONT END--> <br><br>Julia Day<br>Wednesday August 17, 2005 <br><br><br>Confusion surrounding last month's fatal shooting of Brazilian electrician Jean Charles de Menezes - who was mistaken for a suicide bomber - could have been alleviated by the Metropolitan police, according to journalists covering the story.<br>Leaked documents and photographs obtained by ITV News yesterday revealed that some information given by police and witnesses at the time of the Stockwell underground shooting, and in the immediate aftermath, was incorrect.<br><br>Early media reports of the circumstances surrounding the killing of Mr de Menezes on July 22 were pieced together from police statements and eyewitness accounts.<br><br>But journalists working on the story believe the police should have corrected erroneous witness statements.<br><br>"Initially a lot of information was from civilian witnesses, there was a lot of confusion. But the police didn't do anything to clear up the confusion," said the Guardian's Rosie Cowan, who has been covering the story.<br><br>"[Metropolitan Police commissioner] Sir Ian Blair said [Mr Menezes] didn't stop when challenged and it wasn't until 4.30pm the next day that the police said they had shot an innocent man," Cowan added.<br><br>"I feel the [police] people I was speaking to didn't appear to be properly briefed up and you would have thought they could have been," she added.<br><br>Evening Standard journalist Matheus Sanchez, who has been dealing directly with Mr de Menezes' family in Brazil, said: "The family clearly think the police have changed their story.<br><br>"<!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>It's hard to say where the witness statements end and the police statements begin</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->. What seems to have happened was that men seen running and vaulting the barriers by witnesses were actually the cops."<br><br>Another reporter who has worked on the story said that eyewitnesses were very shaken at the time and although they were not purposely making things up, things may not have been as they perceived them to be, and the police statements did not help matters.<br><br>Reports the day after the shooting quote the Met's statement that "a man was challenged by officers and was subsequently shot".<br><br>Sir Ian was also quoted as saying that the "shooting is directly linked to the ongoing and expanding anti-terrorist operation...I understand the man was challenged and refused to obey. I can't go any further than that at this stage."<br><br>Eyewitness accounts printed in the newspapers provided details about a man seen running and vaulting over the tube barriers wearing a padded jacket. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Other witnesses said he was an Asian man with a bomb and wires protruding from a heavy jacket.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br>The police statements and eye-witness accounts given by those traumatised by seeing a man killed together formed what became the accepted account of the day: that a suspect had been warned by the police, ignored the challenge, vaulted over the barriers and ran off into Stockwell tube station wearing a padded jacket.<br><br>From the leaked ITV documents and photos from the Independent Police Complaints Commission investigation into the shooting, a completely different story has emerged.<br><br>Mr de Menezes was never properly identified; he was unaware he was being followed; he was wearing a denim, not a bulky jacket; he did not run from police and did not jump over the barrier, according to the information leaked to ITV News.<br><br>A spokeswoman for the IPCC said that the organisation operates a high level of security that was regularly reviewed and, in any case, it was not necessarily from within its confines that the leaked documents came.<br><br>"We are not the only organisation to hold these documents, it is not clear where they came from. We still do not know," she added.<br><br>The spokeswoman said the IPCC was refusing to confirm whether the documents were genuine, but added: "We're not accusing ITV of making it up, though."<br><br>Last night, as the ITV News story was breaking on ITV1's 6.30pm bulletin, the IPCC published a statement on its website: "The IPCC investigation into the shooting of Mr de Menezes is continuing. Our priority is to disclose any findings direct to the family, who will clearly be distressed that they have received information on television concerning his death. <br><br>"The IPCC made it clear that we would not speculate or release partial information about the investigation, and that others should not do so."<br><br>A Met spokeswoman said it would be inappropriate for the force to comment on the ITV leak, or other issues surrounding the death of Mr de Menezes, while the IPCC investigation is ongoing.<br><br>Metropolitan police statements: How the story changed<br><br>Friday 22 July<br>Man shot at Stockwell tube station: "We can confirm that at just after 10am this morning, Friday 22 July, armed officers from the Metropolitan Police entered Stockwell tube station in south London. A man was challenged by officers and was subsequently shot. London Ambulance Service and the Helicopter Emergency Service attended the scene. The man was pronounced dead at the scene. Stockwell tube station is closed and cordons of 200 metres are in place. As is routine, officers from the Met's directorate of professional standards have been informed."<br><br>Friday 22 July<br>Metropolitan police commissioner Sir Ian Blair: "I can say as part of operations linked to yesterday's incidents, Met police officers have shot a man inside Stockwell underground station at approximately 10am this morning. London Ambulance Service and the air ambulance both attended and the man was pronounced dead at the scene. I understand Stockwell tube station remains closed. The information I have available if that this shooting is directly linked to the ongoing and expanding anti-terrorist operation. Any death is deeply regrettable. I understand the man was challenged and refused to obey. I can't go any further than that at this stage."<br><br>Monday 25 July<br>Police make a further arrest: "Commissioner Sir Ian Blair has expressed 'deep regret' at the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes, calling his death 'a tragedy'."<br><br>Tuesday 26 July<br>IPCC leads shooting investigation: "The investigation into the fatal police shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes on Friday 22 July has been handed over to the Independent Police Complaints Commission. This investigation was initially begun by the directorate of professional standards. Detectives have so far obtained over 100 witness statements, secured over 200 documents that may be pertinent to the investigation and ensured appropriate forensic work was conducted. A further statement has been published on the Independent Police Complaints Commission website at www.ipcc.gov.uk. ITALIC END--> <br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/0,14173,1551071,00.html">media.guardian.co.uk/site...71,00.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <p></p><i></i>
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Standard Operating Procedure

Postby antiaristo » Thu Aug 18, 2005 7:49 am

Question: What does Colin Powell have to do with Jean-Charles de Menezes? It’s all in the method.<br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em><!--EZCODE FONT START--><span style="font-size:small;">The ricin ring that never was</span><!--EZCODE FONT END--> <br><br><!--EZCODE FONT START--><span style="font-size:small;">Yesterday's trial collapse has exposed the deception behind attempts to link al-Qaida to a 'poison attack' on London</span><!--EZCODE FONT END--> <br><br>Duncan Campbell<br>Thursday April 14, 2005<br>The Guardian <br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Colin Powell</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> does not need more humiliation over the manifold errors in his February 2003 presentation to the UN. But yesterday a London jury brought down another section of the case he made for war - that Iraq and Osama bin Laden were supporting and directing <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>terrorist poison cells throughout Europe, including a London ricin ring.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> <br>Yesterday's verdicts on five defendants and the dropping of charges against four others make clear there was no ricin ring. Nor did the "ricin ring" make or have ricin. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Not that the government shared that news with us. Until today, the public record for the past three fear-inducing years has been that ricin was found in the Wood Green flat occupied by some of yesterday's acquitted defendants. It wasn't.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> <br>The third plank of the al-Qaida-Iraq poison theory was the link between what Powell labelled the "<!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>UK poison cell" and training camps in Afghanistan</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->. The evidence the government wanted to use to connect the defendants to Afghanistan and al-Qaida was never put to the jury. That was because last autumn a trial within a trial was secretly taking place. This was a private contest between a group of scientists from the Porton Down military research centre and myself. The issue was: where had the information on poisons and chemicals come from? <br>The information - five pages in Arabic, containing amateur instructions for making ricin, cyanide and botulinum, and a list of chemicals used in explosives - was at the heart of the case. The notes had been made by Kamel Bourgass, the sole convicted defendant. His co-defendants believed that he had copied the information from the internet. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>The prosecution claimed it had come from Afghanistan.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> <br>I was asked to look for the original source on the internet. This meant exploring Islamist websites that publish Bin Laden and his sympathisers, and plumbing the most prolific source of information on how to do harm: the writings of the American survivalist right and the gun lobby. <br>The experience of being an expert witness on these issues has made me feel a great deal safer on the streets of London. These were the internal documents of the supposed al-Qaida cell planning the "big one" in Britain. But the recipes were untested and unoriginal, borrowed from US sources. Moreover, ricin is not a weapon of mass destruction. It is a poison which has only ever been used for one-on-one killings and attempted killings. <br>If this was the measure of the destructive wrath that Bin Laden's followers were about to wreak on London, it was impotent. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Yet it was the discovery of a copy of Bourgass's notes in Thetford in 2002 that inspired the wave of horror stories and government announcements and preparations for poison gas attacks.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> <br>It is true that when the team from Porton Down entered the Wood Green flat in January 2003, their field equipment registered the presence of ricin. But these were high sensitivity field detectors, for use where a false negative result could be fatal. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>A few days later in the lab, Dr Martin Pearce, head of the Biological Weapons Identification Group, found that there was no ricin. But when this result was passed to London, the message reportedly said the opposite.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> <br>The planned government case on links to Afghanistan was based only on papers that a freelance journalist working for the Times had scooped up after the US invasion of Kabul. Some were in Arabic, some in Russian. They were far more detailed than Bourgass's notes. Nevertheless, claimed Porton Down chemistry chief <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Dr Chris Timperley</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->, they showed a "common origin and progression" in the methods, thus linking the London group of north Africans to Afghanistan and Bin Laden. <br>The weakness of Timperley's case was that neither he nor the intelligence services had examined any other documents that could have been the source. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>We were told Porton Down and its intelligence advisers had never previously heard of the "Mujahideen Poisons Handbook</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->, containing recipes for ricin and much more". The document, written by veterans of the 1980s Afghan war, has been on the net since 1998. <br>All the information roads led west, not to Kabul but to California and the US midwest. The recipes for ricin now seen on the internet were invented 20 years ago by survivalist Kurt Saxon. He advertises videos and books on the internet. Before the ricin ring trial started, I phoned him in Arizona. For $110, he sent me a fistful of CDs and videos on how to make bombs, missiles, booby traps - and ricin. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>We handed a copy of the ricin video to the police.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> When, in October, I showed that the chemical lists found in London were an exact copy of pages on an internet site in Palo Alto, California, the prosecution gave up on the Kabul and al-Qaida link claims. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>But it seems this information was not shared with the then home secretary, David Blunkett, who was still whipping up fear two weeks later. "Al-Qaida and the international network is seen to be, and will be demonstrated through the courts over months to come, actually on our doorstep and threatening our lives," he said on November 14.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> <br>The most ironic twist was an attempt to introduce an "al-Qaida manual" into the case. The manual - called the Manual of the Afghan Jihad - had been found on a raid in Manchester in 2000. It was given to the FBI to produce in the 2001 New York trial for the first attack on the World Trade Centre. But it wasn't an al-Qaida manual. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>The name was invented by the US department of justice in 2001,</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> and the contents were rushed on to the net to aid a presentation to the Senate by the then attorney general, John Ashcroft, supporting the US Patriot Act. <br>To show that the Jihad manual was written in the 1980s and the period of the US-supported war against the Soviet occupation was easy. The ricin recipe it contained was a direct translation from a 1988 US book called the Poisoner's Handbook, by Maxwell Hutchkinson. <br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>We have all been victims of this mass deception</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->. I do not doubt that Bourgass would have contemplated causing harm if he was competent to do so. But he was an Islamist yobbo on his own, not an Al Qaida-trained superterrorist. An Asbo might be appropriate.</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> <br><br>==============================<br><br>Note: an Asbo is an anti-social behaviour order, issued to punks that do things like blow up frogs.<br><br>This story was D-Noticed within a few days on the grounds that it named Timperley. But even with the name removed it is still prohibited.<br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Latest</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>There is a lot in the British press today - this is THE big story. The part I would like to highlight is<br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Two members of the public were to become key witnesses. Christopher Wells, a 29-year-old photo processing shop manager, said: "I was coming through the barriers when I saw a man running very fast into the station. Behind him were loads of policemen all carrying weapons. There were at least 20 of them and they had big black guns.<br><br>"The man ran towards a large number of people standing around and jumped over the barriers. The police ran after him and jumped the barriers as well, shouting at the crowd to leave immediately. The man carried on running and was followed down."<br><br>Sitting in the carriage was Mark Whitby, 47, a water hygiene surveyor from Brixton. "He ran on to the train hotly pursued by three plain clothes officers, one of them wielding a black handgun. As he got on the train, I looked at his face. He looked sort of left and right but basically looked like a cornered rabbit. He looked absolutely terrified."<br><br>According to Mr Whitby, Mr de Menezes had half-stumbled and been half-pushed to the floor. Moments later, Mr Whitby saw the officer hold a pistol in his left hand and take aim. "He held it down to the guy and unloaded five shots into him," he said.<br><br>A third witness, <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Anthony Larkin</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->, described police officers shouting "Get down, get down" and how the man they were pursuing appeared to have "a bomb belt and wires coming out".<br><br>According to Scotland Yard, the first Gold Command knew of the shooting was a radio message which said: "Man down."</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/story/0,16132,1551401,00.html">www.guardian.co.uk/attack...01,00.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Standard Operating Procedure

Postby slimmouse » Thu Aug 18, 2005 8:16 am

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Question: What does Colin Powell have to do with Jean-Charles de Menezes? It’s all in the method.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br> Hopefully, the latest Sham is really going to work against these murdering 'comedians' running the show.<br><br> There is only so much bullshit that even the average Brit can take - surely ?<br><br> I mean the part about the guy not being identified properly due to someone taking a leak as De Menezes emerged from his appartment. I mean really ?<br><br> Do these people seriously believe that were all quite so fucking stupid as to believe that complete and utter bullshit ?<br><br> Let us hope and pray that Mr De Menezes death <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>truly</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> isnt in vain.<br> <p></p><i></i>
slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

Anthony Larkin - the Bigger Picture

Postby antiaristo » Thu Aug 18, 2005 9:55 am

The significance of Larkin's statement becomes clearer by the hour.<br>The thread is gone, but I recall his "belt with wires coming out"statement came a couple of hours after the initial reports, and served to completely change the direction of the media coverage.<br><br>Look at what was going on at the time<br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em><!--EZCODE FONT START--><span style="font-size:medium;">Met chief tried to stop shooting inquiry</span><!--EZCODE FONT END--> <br><br>Rosie Cowan, Vikram Dodd and Richard Norton-Taylor<br>Thursday August 18, 2005<br>The Guardian <br><br>Britain's top police officer, the Scotland Yard commissioner Sir Ian Blair, attempted to stop an independent external investigation into the shooting of a young Brazilian mistaken for a suicide bomber, it emerged yesterday.<br>Sir Ian wrote to John Gieve, the permanent secretary at the Home Office, on July 22, the morning Jean Charles de Menezes was shot at short range on the London tube. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>The commissioner argued for an internal inquiry into the killing on the grounds that the ongoing anti-terrorist investigation took precedence over any independent look into his death.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br>According to senior police and Whitehall sources, Sir Ian was concerned that an investigation by the Independent Police Complaints Commission could impact on national security and intelligence. He was also understood to be worried that an outside investigation would damage the morale of CO19, the elite firearms section working under enormous pressure.<br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>"We did make an error, the IPCC should have been called in immediately,"</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> the police source said.<br><br>Later that same day, after an exchange of opinions between Sir Ian, the Home Office and the IPCC, the commissioner was overruled. A Whitehall insider said: "We won that battle. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>There's no ambiguity in the legislation, they had to do it</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->."<br><br>But a statement from the Met yesterday showed that despite the agreement to allow in independent investigators, <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>the IPCC was kept away from Stockwell tube in south London, the scene of the shooting, for a further three days. This runs counter to usual practice, where the IPCC would expect to be at the scene within hours.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--></em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/story/0,16132,1551340,00.html">www.guardian.co.uk/attack...40,00.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br> <p></p><i></i>
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Crap

Postby antiaristo » Thu Aug 18, 2005 10:05 am

Sorry slim, didn't see you had replied.<br>Your reading is pretty accurate. It's THE big story, even elsewhere in Europe. Here in Spain the top story was of course the 17 troops that died in Afghanistan. But the second story was Jean-Charles.<br>Usually we get beaten to death by ignorance. That is why the leak is so important. People have something to rally round.<br>Can you believe that pratt SIR Ian Blair wants to halt the IPPC and launch an inquiry into the leak.<br>And the FUCKING POLITICIANS ARE NOWHERE. <p></p><i></i>
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

"Something Sinister"

Postby antiaristo » Thu Aug 18, 2005 11:03 am

12.30pm <br><br>--------<br>De Menezes questions 'unanswered' <br><br>Mark Oliver and agencies<br>Thursday August 18, 2005 <br><br><br>Lawyers for the family of the innocent Brazilian shot dead by police demanded today to be told whether misinformation about the killing was incompetence by officials or "<!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>something sinister</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->".<br>Gareth Peirce and Harriet Wistrich, acting for the family of Jean Charles de Menezes, said many of their urgent questions remained unanswered after meeting investigators this morning.<br><br>Ms Peirce said her main concern remained why the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) had not been called in immediately to begin the inquiry.<br><br>It emerged yesterday that the commissioner of the Metropolitan police, Sir Ian Blair had attempted to stop the investigation by the IPCC into the shooting of the Brazilian, who was mistaken for a suicide bomber.<br><br>Sir Ian wrote to John Gieve, the permanent secretary at the Home Office, on July 22, the morning the 27-year-old was shot seven times in the head at close range on a train at Stockwell underground station in south London.<br><br>After today's meeting at her Camden offices in north London, Ms Peirce said: "<!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>We expressed our extreme concern that although they [the IPCC] have a statutory duty to investigate from the very moment of a fatal death at the hands of the state, they were not there.<br><br>"We know not whether it was the commissioner of the Metropolitan police or the home secretary, or both, [who] delayed their advent into the case</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->."<br><br>She added that she and Ms Wistrich had today expressed their "<!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>profound dissatisfaction" with the "chaotic mess" of the inquiry</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->.<br><br>Ms Peirce repeated her call for a public inquiry "of a broad kind" that could deal with the "<!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>big policy issues</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->" and demanded that it take place quickly, noting that the IPCC had "<!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>mentioned delays of two to three years".</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br>The IPCC instigated today's meeting to update the De Menezes family via their lawyers after controversy was reignited this week by new revelations about the shooting by anti-terror police.<br><br>It was the first meeting between IPCC officials and lawyers for the family since documents and photographs related to the inquiry were leaked to ITV News on Tuesday. The papers included details that appeared to contradict much of what was previously understood about his death.<br><br>The documents revealed that Mr De Menezes had done little to arouse suspicion other than to emerge from a block of flats in south London that had been under surveillance.<br><br>The disclosures have caused fury among the Brazilian's family, put pressure on Sir Ian and prompted allegations of a cover-up.<br><br>Ms Peirce told reporters today: "One of the things we asked the IPCC to investigate is: <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>are there lies that have been told? Who told them?"</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>She added: "<!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>There are lies that have been told and lies that have been allowed to remain uncorrected. He was not wearing a bulky jacket ... he did not run."</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>The IPCC had not been able to give any answers about the misinformation. Ms Peirce said: "This has been a chaotic mess. What we have asked the IPCC to find out is how much is incompetence, negligence or gross negligence and how much of it is something sinister."<br><br>She said the investigation into the shooting had to be "speeded up" because there was an <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>ongoing debate about the police's shoot-to-kill policy that "needs to be made on the basis of correct facts".</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br>Ms Peirce said: "We don't want to be waiting, as with some families who are <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>waiting for the outcome of death in custody cases, for over three years."</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>She said a large part of any delay would be because of the Crown Prosecution Service "<!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>sitting on papers</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->".<br><br>The lawyers said that most of the information they and the family had received about the progress of the inquiry had been from the leaked report through the media.<br><br>Ms Peirce said she had not expected to receive answers at today's meeting and that these would come from the inquiry itself; Ms Wistrich said that during the meeting, which lasted more than an hour, officials had mostly discussed the "processes" they were going through. A direct meeting between the De Menezes family and the IPCC will follow today's talks. Members of the family are expected to arrive in the UK next week, Ms Peirce said.<br><br>The fatal shooting came the day after the failed July 21 bomb attacks on the London transport network and it is thought Mr De Menezes may have been mistaken for the alleged Shepherd's Bush bomber, Hussein Osman.<br><br>Sir Ian had reportedly argued for an internal inquiry into the killing on the grounds that the ongoing anti-terrorist investigation took precedence over any independent scrutiny of the shooting.<br><br>He was also said to be concerned at the impact an external inquiry might have on the morale on the elite C019 firearms squad. "We did make an error; the IPCC should have been called in immediately," a police source told the Guardian yesterday.<br><br>Mehmuda Mian Pritchard, one of the IPCC commissioners who is working on the case, also attended today's meeting with the family's lawyers and described it as "very constructive".<br><br>She said the IPCC would put out a statement later today. The IPCC's chairman Nick Hardwick is in charge of the inquiry, but out of the country on leave this week.<br><br><br><br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

de Menezes

Postby Peachtree Pam » Fri Aug 19, 2005 4:52 am

Hi Antiaristo,<br><br>Here is a little article suggesting that the execution was to ratchet up fear and distract from the crime of 7/7. This supports your theory of a "power demonstation" by the PTB.<br><br>Just heard on BBC World that Brazil will send team of investigators to London.<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=3478">www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/...sp?ID=3478</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <p></p><i></i>
Peachtree Pam
 
Posts: 950
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2005 9:46 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Boys From Brazil

Postby antiaristo » Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:10 am

Hi Pam,<br>Glad to see you've been lurking. Thanks for the reinforcement - it's nice to see a spade so described.<br><br>The Brazillian move is good news. The word that comes to mind from this is "assertive"<br><br>12.15pm <br><br>---------<br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Brazilian officials fly in for Menezes answers <br><br>Mark Oliver and agencies<br>Friday August 19, 2005 <br>The Guardian<br> <br>Brazilian officials will fly to London next week seeking urgent clarifications from the investigators examining the fatal shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes by anti-terrorism officers.<br><br>A statement today from Brazil's foreign ministry said the disclosures leaked to the media this week over the killing of the innocent Brazilian had "outraged" the government.<br><br>Judicial officials will visit London on Monday to meet with the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), which is investigating Mr de Menezes' death, and the Metropolitan police. The Brazilian foreign ministry said it expected the officials to "obtain ample clarifications".<br><br>The move follows a leak from the IPCC inquiry to ITV news in which it was revealed Mr de Menezes did not act suspiciously, was not wearing a heavy padded jacket, and did not run and vault a ticket barrier, as previously reported.<br><br>Lawyers acting for the dead man's family yesterday said that the Metropolitan police had either "lied" or been negligent over misinformation being circulated, or left uncorrected.<br><br>The De Menezes family today added to the pressure on the Metropolitan police and its commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, with a highly critical statement.<br><br>Allesandro Pereira, 25, a cousin of Mr de Menezes, who delivered the emotional statement at a news conference in London, said: "For three weeks we've listened to lie after lie about Jean and how he was killed."<br><br>He demanded answers to the misinformation that has surrounded the killing and said British police who visited the family in Brazil had not given a full and true account.<br><br>"I want Ian Blair to think how it felt having to ring Jean's mother and father, our family in Brazil, and tell them that their son was dead, that he was killed in such a way," he said.<br><br>"I want Ian Blair to imagine how we felt having to listen to the lies about Jean, about why he died, to see Ian Blair on television telling those lies. The police know Jean was innocent and yet they let my family suffer, they let us suffer, Ian Blair let us suffer."<br><br>Mr Pereira also asked whether evidence had been lost in the six days before the IPCC became involved. <br><br>Yesterday the IPCC said it had to "work hard" to recover lost ground after the Met had "initially resisted" the external investigation.</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/story/0,16132,1552556,00.html">www.guardian.co.uk/attack...56,00.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>========================<br><br>I'm going to crave your indulgence and highlight another of my letters which I believe is very relevant to the Menezes case.<br>This was my reply to F Elens-Pasos of the European Court of Human Rights. That person had told me that my case (ECHR 24316/03) had been thrown out without considering the facts.<br>However, for the period it was in the system (mid October to 13 November) the effect of my case was to paralyse the Treason Felony Act. It is for that reason that I highlighted the unprecedented nature of these actions.<br>One other comment. The decision of the Court was made on 13 November, but they did not write to me until 25 November. During that window three things happened.<br>First, Bush went to Buckingham Palace. Second, the State Opening of Parliament. Third, Chirac went to London to sign the renewed Entente Cordial.<br><br><br><br>Dear Mr/Ms Elens-Passos,                                        3 December 2003<br><br>Thank you for your carefully (12 days worth) worded reply of 25 November.<br>I’m disappointed of course, but given the new Entente Cordiale I’m not really surprised. Corruption is the very reason I have taken the trouble to circulate these documents to those I consider to be my peers. They can decide for themselves on the truth of the matter and on the integrity of the Council of Europe.<br><br>But you cannot buck the market, Mrs Windsor. The market in expectations functions well, behaves rationally, has digested all publicly available information (including that contained in my own application), and has accurately discounted the future. Those “in the know” know that the Treason Felony Act of 1848 (TFA184<!--EZCODE EMOTICON START 8) --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/glasses.gif ALT="8)"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> is dead meat. To quote Lord Steyn “The idea that s3 of the 1848 Act could survive scrutiny under the Human Rights Act is unreal.” And that changes everything.<br>Just look at the fantastic boosts to British liberties that have been achieved these last three months. The Windsors’ attack dogs – the police and the courts – can be de-fanged and de-clawed. And only time, and the Hutton Report, will show whether this Pandora’s box can ever be closed.<br><br>Look at the evidence. On 3 November the British legislature was informed that three hundred and twenty eight persons had died while in police custody or shortly thereafter during the last five years. Three hundred and twenty eight separate homicides, and never an apology, never an explanation. That is the Windsor interest masquerading as the public interest under authority of the TFA1848.<br>Then, completely out of the blue on 13 November, Sussex Chief Constable Ken Jones travelled to Liverpool to meet the family of James Ashley, who was shot dead on 15 January 1998. The family’s solicitor, Jane Dyson, described the Chief Constable’s apology as “unprecedented”, and she is entirely correct. <br><br>The same is true for the prisons. You can see from my application how the Windsors tried to do murder to me in January 1995 and then again in April 2000. How could they hope to get away with it? Easily. Over the past thirty years more than a thousand human beings have been murdered whilst incarcerated in a British prison. Overwhelmingly they were male, working class and ethnic minority. So I fit the profile quite well.<br>Now this is very useful if you have a problem and make a habit of telling your servants to “make it go away!” So can we really feign surprise that our Most Gracious Lady the Queen should use her dictatorial powers to suppress all information about individual homicides? So no apologies, and never an inquiry in all these thirty years.<br><br>Until the fight put up by the family and friends of Zahid Mubarek, a nineteen year old first offender who was murdered on 21 March 2000. Lord Woolf and two others had ruled that under English law no inquiry was mandated. Yet on 16 October FIVE Law Lords were hurriedly convened to overrule Woolf and effect an historic volte-face. Again, this is wholly unprecedented.<br>So we are starting to get information now about some of the dirty deeds done by agents on the Windsors’ instructions. And these three months have also been marked by the free flow of information about the Windsors themselves. We have learned from Paul Burrell of how Diana Spencer knew she would be killed, in order to clear the way for a Charles/Camilla marriage. We know from George Smith that crimes of violence and domination have been suppressed and hidden by the royal household. We have learned that life does indeed imitate art in the ambiguous, ambivalent relationship between the Prince of Wales (Edward Fox) and Michael Fawcett (Dirk Bogarde). This 24-carat horror story resonates profoundly with my own experiences at the hands of this wicked family. <br><br>Now compare all this to what happened to Kitty Kelley’s book on the Windsors in 1997, when Elizabeth Bowes Lyons was in her pomp and brandishing the TFA1848 at every opportunity. This book by a world-renowned author is still not available in the United Kingdom, but that ban now has no basis in law.<br><br>Developing further the subject of bans with no legal foundation, I’m sure you know all about the Public Interest Immunity certificates scam (PII). The British State secures a criminal conviction by preventing the victim from defending himself in a court of law. And having secured the conviction the poor unfortunate victim is rendered helpless within the prison system. And we know what goes on in there.<br>The most notorious use of the PII was probably in the Matrix Churchill case, where the British State was looking for patsies to take the blame for selling armaments to Sadam Hussein (déjà vu). But the system is employed with increasing frequency because it works! The procedure calls for a minister of the crown to sign a document certifying that specific information is injurious to the public interest. This specific information just happens to be the core of the defence: but that, as they say, is show biz.<br><br>Under the authority of the TFA1848, and by the device of a PII signed by a minister, the interest of the Windsor Mob morphs into the public interest. That is why David Shayler was prevented from using the public interest defence, and was convicted under the Official Secrets Act, even though he had revealed a crime.<br><br>Now the public interest and the Windsor Mob interest are two very different things, often diametrically opposed. You only have to look at the smash and grab raid on Iraq to see the truth in that contention. The Windsor Mob wanted invasion while the general public did not. That’s a pretty raw difference. Yet when passed through the upside down, back to front, positive to negative filter that is the TFA1848, then the public interest lies in not being told the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. It is better for us if we do not know about such things.<br>Yet with the TFA1848 in suspense there is now no continuing legal basis to underpin these rank abominations. And what’s more, the public interest defence is now available to those whose actions are truly in the interests of the general public. I certainly hope the courageous Kathy Gun learns that what was denied David Shayler cannot be denied to her.<br>All this is evidence enough of a fait accompli. The damage to the Windsor dictatorship has been done. There is now no reason to persecute me apart from the vile and miserable vindictiveness of the Windsors, their Lords and their Knights.<br><br>All this filth and corruption, all those victims, all of this pain and suffering and desolation. And for what? So that Charlie’s girlfriend can lord it over the peasantry as our Most Gracious Lady the Queen. And leave Charlie to wow his boyfriends with his enormous royal prerogative. Honi Soit Qui Mal y Pense.<br>Honi Soit Qui Mal y Pense. Shame on him who thinks ill of it. That’s the medieval equivalent of “You’re with us or you’re against us.”<br>Those were the words on the lecterns before Bush and Blair, when they stood shoulder to shoulder in London to deny their war on Islam.<br><br>This is the motto of the Order of the Garter. The Knights Templar. The Crusaders.<br>“From the 18th century to 1946 appointments to the Order of the Garter were made on the advice of government. Today the order has returned to its original function as a mark of royal favour. Knights of the Garter are chosen personally by the sovereign.” The garter was returned to its cabalist roots by our Most Gracious Lady the Queen. She was acting on the instructions of the notorious Satanist Aleister Crowley. It is important to understand that the Order of the Garter is not a Christian body. St George’s Chapel is not a Christian church and not a part of the Anglican Communion, but a reproduction of the Temple of Solomon. Everything is back to front with these people, so it is not difficult to deduce that they worship the Prince of Lies. These Crusaders, like the last, have nothing whatsoever to do with Jesus.<br><br>In January 1991 White House correspondent Sarah McClendon reported overhearing George HW Bush say “If the people knew what we are doing they would chase us up the street and hang us from the lamppost.” Knights of the Garter include Harald of Norway, Juan Carlos of Spain, Carl Gustaf of Sweden, Beatrice of the Netherlands, Margarethe of Denmark and Jean of Luxembourg. And of course Bonesman George HW Bush. Warrior knights who send others to die on their behalf. Knights of the Temple of Solomon, out to destroy Islam and take possession of Jerusalem. And the only way to stop them is to destroy the British Monarchy. The only way to save democracy may lie with Ari Fleischer’s well-directed bullet.<br><br>In 1994 the wicked old witch of Windsor cast an evil spell on my family and me. In 2002 I broke that spell, only to have the Knights of the Prince of Lies deny there was ever such a spell in the first place. When you tell me this decision is not subject to appeal you speak a higher truth than you understand, for this bad faith cheating by the Council of Europe invites only violence in return.<br>Yours sincerely,<br><br><br><br>John Cleary BSc MA MBA<br>cc Amnesty International (Irene Khan); Liberty (Katharine Gun)<br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Your theory re-stated by Zymphora

Postby Peachtree Pam » Sat Aug 20, 2005 9:25 am

Hi Antiaristo,<br><br>This article duplicates your reasoning 100 percent.<br><br>Have a great day!<br><br>Pam<br><br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://xymphora.blogspot.com/">xymphora.blogspot.com/</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <p></p><i></i>
Peachtree Pam
 
Posts: 950
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2005 9:46 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to 7/7 London bombings

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest