Living with the Conspiracy 24-7

DNA Database - Fascism by any other name.
by lwtc247 @ 31. Oct 2007 - 06:19:42

Very respected Ian at Little Nicky Machiavelli has blogged about the DNA database canning his article "Who Do We Trust To Run The DNA Database?". Please read it.

I believe a DNA database/ID cards/RFID ad other tracking devices must be fiercely opposed. Here's why:

I utterly refuse to allow my DNA profile on any such database. I have absolutely zero trust the vast majority of these corrupt, arrogant, non-listening unrepresentative fascists squatting in Westminster who fail to represent my views on the Iraq war, poverty and exploitation etc. They may listen to you on trivial issue, like uneven paving in the town square or whatever, but not on some issue in which a lot of money is at stake (which in the end, will see them personally benefit from).

I have no doubt whatsoever that they WILL abuse it. As sensible people here have said, the govt's track record on similar matters is a disgraceful farce. AND more importantly it will not be able to stop millions of more people around the world from abusing it.

NO digital information is safe. How many times have we heard the stories of laptops belonging to military personnel going missing, of kids, Chinese or Russian hackers breaking into western computer systems? Of critical flaws in software allowing any Tom Dick and Harry "in" and how these hacks are posted on the internet just days after it becomes known some system is vulnerable. Too bloody many!

Encryption is NOT the answer. Encryption only stops the general amateur public from accessing data. ANY one of these members of the public can pay a professional to steal data. Do you think there are not private data surveillance people out there? In addition, all it takes is that ONE person with access to the database to the kidnapped, threatened, bribed or blackmailed to reveal his password and then the WHOLE database is at risk. Elements of it, if not the whole thing could be downloaded or records changed.

People go on about identity theft. ID theft is a deliberate and massively overplayed fear tactic in conjunction with the "War OF Terror", to get you to become part of the system by giving up your privacy and other liberties. There is only identity theft in the first place because it is the system that has forced you to take on an identity in the first place! "Terrorists" will not be carrying their ID, they'll be carrying YOURS!

A key element of all this is about CONTROL. You see, Money Control and Power (MCP) are what these authoritarian people crave, and of course people with authoritarian tendencies will naturally gravitate towards politics and the police etc. To the (modern) police force, big businessmen, politicians and the royals, MCP is their drug, an aphrodisiac if you will. They wield the MCP cudgel in expectation that we pay them respect and offer forms of subservience onto them - bowing, idolizing them, following their lives etc or being written kindly of in the history books of man.

The mentality of many of these authoritarian people can speed off into insanity. I think we can all picture someone who fits into that profile.

This is why virtually ALL governments head towards totalitarianism. Often its revolutions by the common folk who manage to cut back that cut back the tidal wave of fascism that emerges, but it will manifest again.

Does anyone think the Government/establishment and intelligence services will NOT manipulate it for political means? Of course they will! The government ALWAYS does what ever it can to gain political advantage which it believes it can get away with. There is a pitiful track record of political killings and jailing. The Birmingham 6 etc... Nowadays, It’s Muslims that are being framed. Ricin "plots", forestgate and liquid bomb plots, Indian tupperware containers containing chapatti flour etc. But it's increasingly those who are standing in solidarity with Muslims to resist the oppression fear and suspicion they now face from evil spiteful liars.

Remember this?

At the very minimum, you should support any innocent group against tyranny indirectly by maintaining, to the very best of your ability, the preservation of freedoms from this neocon/NOW authoritarianism that we all should enjoy. What else stands between us and total tyranny now? Isn't the DNA database a priceless tool for fascism?

Resist it good people – RESIST!

All it takes is one spy ware or keystroke logger and an IP spoofer to get access to the WHOLE database.
People go on about the DNA database will solve more crime. Perhaps it will solve crime, but is it going to be used to stop crime by oligarchs, so called "Royals", powerful politicians? International bankers, major stakeholders on oil companies or armaments companies?

We have already heard of Scottish police stitching up a woman accused of murder by using fingerprint information. Thankfully, that information could be challenged be experts in fingerprinting and could be analyzed by experts. But DNA faces an utterly serious flaw in that it can be synthesized. ANYONE could be e framed for any crime. If you are outspoken against the governments serious crimes the chance of being framed or worse is more likely.

Remember Gerard Bull {supergun}? Remember Dr. David Kelly{Iraq}? Even Wat Tyler (& Richard II)! Come on people. It is utterly dangerous to cede any liberty to any government. We have already allowed these liberties to be snatched from us in full view. We have become complacent. Perhaps we do not deserve them for that reason, but let's try and wake up to stop and then reverse the process. The centralization of power (or deceptive devolution, which answers to a central core) is dangerously open to abuse and this DNA database will be a jewel in the crown.

And what about when genetic technology progresses ever stronger?. What do you think the chance that Multinational conglomerates will somehow have been able to get access to this DNA database? What about weapons companies? We could even see specific genetic weapons being produced. In fact Professor of Law at Berkley University in California, PNAC buddies of John Yoo, (himself a neocon and advocate of torture "crushing of child’s testicles in order to make a parent divulge information") are reported to have advocated race specific biological weapons[1]. P.S. John Yoo is a lawyer in the office of legal counsel at the US Justice [sic] Department. Do you sit comfortably with all of that? What’s to prevent ‘the other side’ from developing them against you and your loved ones? These men are insane.
We already know that weapons companies will use ANY information to create advanced weaponry. Their whole ethos is making money out of being able to kill and control people.

Corrupt political slaves will say such a possibility is potty, but screw those lying idiots, what do YOU think? Are you so confident that it will NOT happen? Remember all it takes is one blackmailed/threatened/tortured/bribed person to open up genetic database and that’s it. Security will FOREVER be compromised.

The "database" and what it will be used for, has INCREDIBLY DANGEROUS implications. Think about all these issues. Think about the future. Is it worth it?

Aren’t there far better ways in which crime can be PREVENTED, not just prosecuted after the fact? Thinks like building a more harmonious society, where respect, freedom and altruism are abundant, where the youth are not left bored and thrown onto scrap heap and drift into drugs, gangs and vandalism but are helped to become great members of a caring society. A society where ruthless greedy and genocidal foreign policy isn't practiced by evil self enriching politicians? A society were people in other countries admire us and speak highly of us? and would like to follow our example. The authoritarian route that pretends will produce this is a lie. History proves so. Goodness isn't produced from badness.

RESIST people. For heavens sake, please resist!

[1] http://noworldsystem.com/category/race-specific-bio-weapons/
[2] http://www.peace.ca/racetargetablebioweapons.htm

Extra info: NO2ID:stop ID cards and the database state–unreferenced-
NO2ID demands repeal of the Identity Cards Act 2006 and meaningful privacy protection. We need your support - now, more than ever. ...
www.no2id.net/

DNA Database - Fascism by any other name.

Anbar's Ghost - The Iraqi Fake Sheikh

This post is overdue, but is still worthy - lwtc247

 

Bush happy with his fake tan.

I had been getting annoyed with Al Jazeera (English) over a month ago. Example: David Frost's question to Mariane Pearle (wife of Daniel Pearl, a likely CIA asset cum agent) killed in Pakistan posing as a journalist. Frost asked how she thinks the War "on"[sic] Terror is going - gurrrrrr! - and if she feels "WE" are winning!! - GURRR GURRR GURRRRRRR!!! {Note: Thankfully Ms. Pearl showed a lot more sense than 'sometimes here, sometimes not' post-pensioner David Frost did, when she seemed to realise that such acts which say her husband be killed, don't spring forth from a Vacuum}. Other example, 'everyone’s mate' Riz Kahn and the sickening love-in he had with Zionist apologist, Elie Wisel.

So Al Jazeera was plummeting towards the dirt. Perhaps this is what Pilger had in mind when of Al Jazeera he said "they are hiring a lot of westerners, it will be interesting to see what happens".[see Ref 1]. The gap was closing between themselves and state funded propaganda machine, the BBC, with its predictable line of establishment-line talking heads and interviews/news presenters who softball those wielding executive power and who only (sometimes) get animated against those who challenge the establishment (See Galloway/Paxman 6th May 2005) or those who attack so called Israel.

In amongst these troubling times, I chanced upon a gem of a program ion the People & Power series, called Anbar’s Ghost.

The context of the program was laid out by the program was by the lovely Ms. Sama Al-Shahad revealing that the USUK 'Coalition of the Killing', lead by the Americans were being whipped by the Nobel Iraqi Resistance.

With excuses to justify the rape, destruction and killings rapidly running out, in conjunction (which the lovely Ms. Al-Shahad forgot to report) with a failing coalition propaganda campaign carried by a vulnerable and increasingly discredited main stream media, PhD killer, General David Betrayus needed some good news fast in order to deliver a politicised (and therefore lobbox) report on the "progress" made in Iraq,

Cue the Fake Sheikh! Sheikh Sattar Abu Reesha.

Smile, so I can show the folks at home that we are all one big happy family
(and if you stop playing the game, your history)

Betrayus' "report" was to be delivered to the Democrat controlled Congress (who interpreted their election as bestowing upon them the right to defy the very people who voted them in! A 4 year licence to defy the will of the majority of the people.) the excuse to sit on their Zionist sponsored bottoms, to allow the genocide to continue, instilling hopelessness into those highly admirable USans who oppose the massacre. Abu Reesha provided an excellent opportunity to deceive.

Getting back, the programs host, Ms. Sama Al-Shahad (who is very lovely), informed us that the US govt accountability office report said that the US failed to achieve many of its benchmarks. However surge supporters countered this pointing to what they claim as having success in Anbar province {thanks to the actions of the Sheikh you see}, where peculiarly enough, the US had faced earlier some of the fiercest resistance. But now all was rosey, as if by magic, Sunni tribes thanks to Abu Reesha were now fighting side by side WITH the Americans!

The supreb host, Al-Shahad, told us the Sheihk, Sattar Abu Reesha, was so celebrated, that Bush met with him on a quick visit to Iraq (around 6th - 14th Sept). Ms. Samah Al-Shahat, a lovely woman who is probably very kind, unselfish and good comapny to boot, then handed over to the film made by  investigative journalists Richard (Rick) Rowley and David Enders to check out the story.

Sadly, but necessarily so I guess, move away from the captivating eloquent introduction given to us by the lovely and more-ish Ms. Al-Shahat, to Amman, Jordan where Rowley and Enders were waiting to get a visa to meet the Sheikh in Ramadi….

Aaah, a good initial sign; the "I'll name that tune in one" twangs the electric guitar from the Doors’ "The End" soundtrack start us off, instantly setting the mood. At least one member of the film crew has excellent taste, so I was predicating good things to come and I wasn't to be disappointed either!

We are informed "the papers are full of stories about a Sheikh from Anbar who has changed the course of the war in favour of the Americans" Which would provide food for those very starved supporters of the war, that the Coalition of the Killing could still win; a victory was to be had, snatching victory from the lower intestines of defeat. Call me a old prune, but does anyone know if a "Karen Miller" had recently emigrated to Jordan? Or, perhaps if Jordan has it own home-grown Millers, Al-Millaries  perhaps? That wouldn't happen in Israeli-British province called Jordan would it? Naaaaaah.

Insurgency Analyst, Moyad Abu Subiah for the Al-Ghad newspaper, who had written about the war from day one, especially about the war in Anbar said "I've never heard of anyone named Sattar Abu Reesha. Maybe there is a Sattar Abu Reesha, maybe there are many Sattar Abu Reeshas". With an cheeky yet intelligent grin on his face.

Moyad said that “Abu Reesha was a ghost, a name the Americans had attached to a public relations campaign.” Aaaaah. Music to my conspiracy infected heart.

I wonder if Moyad now finds himself rendered to writing articles in the internal annual publication: "Guantanamo Workers Gazzette”? Well, either that or dead, - I wouldn't be surprised.

It turned out that Abu Reesha wasn't in Ramadi afterall (I wonder why?) but in the Marriott Hotel in Aaman! LOL. Well I never. Not in Ramadi(!) but on the top penthouse floor of the Marriott, furnished with fancy furniture and paintings beyond the financial reach of most.

Here's what he, Head of the "Iraq Awakening Council" said in his first few lines...

"I want you to introduce me. I am head of the Iraq Awakening council. Leader of all the Iraqi Arab Tribes. I am real. I am not a ghost. In 5 days time, I will return to Iraq, and I will be in my house in Ramadi. And to the terrorists, I say that I will be in Anbar in 5 days, and if they want to see me, I am ready for them."

Oh dear! Did he forget he's not supposed to be acting and that he's SHOULD to look into the camera? Or perhaps there was a fly buzzing overhead and that was the reason why his eyes looked upward as if he was trying to remember his lines, but maybe not. "Head of ALL Arab Tribes" Wow. That's a big claim, and just how does he figure that one out I wonder? And announcing where he will be, slapping a glove across the face of his opponents - oh dear. That's wither immensely brave or incredibly stupid. Given Abu Reesha’s challenge, and that his top floor of the Marriott hotel had what was described as "elaborate" security, and the fact that in number of days time having returned back to Iraq he was to end up dead, you might be able to would out the correct answer to that one.

The very first time I saw the dude, quick as lightening, I got the impression that he was some 2-bit actor playing his first big part - possibly feeling that he had bitten off more than he could chew, but nonetheless, he endeavoured, as just maybe, someone had previously whispered in his little thespian ears what the salary would be; Who knows, a high position within an upcoming episode of the Iraqi mupp puppet show was in the offing, or a major stakeholder in some future 'Irachtel' petrochemicals company?

Anyway, I had a wee chuckle to myself as Sattar seemed to display opening night nerves, fretting that people might not fall for the claims of achievements that some suspicious sources were attributing to him and the near instantaneous occurrence thereof.

The aura of the man was reminiscent of a past ooze-meister Ahmad Chalabi, 'the old anointed one', who rather amusingly, always seemed to be at the end of a major cock-up laid bare for all and sundry to throw rotten tomatos at, which ultimately washing off his anointedness. Ha ha!

What happens next is superb as Rowley and Enders describe the record of American combat dispensed across Anbar, not forgetting, if you ever could, those women, kids and husbands who the Americans in all USan lavishness, chemically burnt alive from inside their lungs, their eyes, nostrils, mouths, ears and skin when the deliberately genocide, an American Halabja, as the helpless people of Fallujah were doused with white phosphorous. But that the glorious Iraqi Resistance still came out on top, in spite of the hell unleashed by the US.

Anbar is the stronghold of the Sunni Insurgency in Iraq. More US soldiers have been killed there than in any other province. Much of Anbar has been under the direct control of insurgents since  2004 and in Anbar's most famous town, Fallujah, 2 allied invasions, dozens of air strikes tens of thousands of arrests and  three years of curfews and continuous American raids have not ended resistance."

YEAH. This confirmation of what reports from the Iraqi resistance did me a world of good. is excellent news.

But I have to laugh at those US bullying pigs, who on camera commit offences against International law by threatening to blow down someone’s house should they not get their way. And then we see the murdering US filth putting into practice their ‘intercultural awareness training’ elements of which they were no doubt expert in even before their training as they exchanged male kissed to try and cement their agreement with what we are told was a number of tribal leaders...

who of course are genuine and not simply bought off...



At this point I’m going to stop commenting on the rest of the program, as regular readers of this and other related blogs should by now, be able to spot the illution the US try to foist upon us. 

Happy viewing.

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/C223AE63-CE85-4887-9275-D2278C2A844C.htm

Postscript: Now I guess, Sheihk Sattar Abu Reesha really is Anbar's "ghost". Even though Abu Reesha's working with the Americans was a HUGE betrayl, it is doubtful that he would ever have done such a thing if the Yanks had never invaded in the first place. That highlights a tragic element present is the loss of the many thousands of other Iraqi lives. May the Coalition of the Killings defeat speed up.

Other notes:

[1] See the John Pilger speech at the world socialists forum 2007 for a scathing critique of neo-journalism

 

Desiree Anita Ali-Fairooz, A woman of immense courage, reminds murdering filth Condosleeza Rice of the blood her and her neocon scum get off on.

VIDEO here:

Thick (as Rhino) skinned Condi ignores it. After all she so used to seeing her death-porn that really it's not significant. And look at the sagaveness at with which that gorilla exercises his sudden male strength as he lurches towards Desiree. And see the bastard police aggressively try and rip some of the other peaceful protestors there. It's nothing short of a disgrace.

The courage Code Pink have been showing is awe inspiring. I hope the rest of the US start to join them.

Published on Wednesday, October 24, 2007 by Reuters
(reprinted on http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/10/24/4789/)

Protester Waves Blood-Colored Hands in Rice’s Face
WASHINGTON — An anti-war protester waved blood-colored hands in U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s face at a congressional hearing on Wednesday and shouted “war criminal!”, but was pushed away and detained by police.“The blood of millions of Iraqis is on your hands!” yelled the protester, Desiree Anita Ali-Fairooz of the Code Pink organization which often disrupts hearings on Capitol Hill with protests against the Iraq war.

Rice, an architect of President George W. Bush’s Iraq policy, appeared unfazed by the incident, which occurred when she entered a House of Representatives meeting room to testify at a hearing on U.S. Middle East policy.

“Out!,” shouted the chairman of the Foreign Relations committee, Rep. Tom Lantos, as plain-clothes security men and police hustled the woman away. The California Democrat also ordered the removal of several other Code Pink activists.

Capitol Police said later five people were arrested, including Ali-Fairooz, who was charged with disorderly conduct and assault on a police officer.

She was also charged with defacing government property for smearing the red paint from her hands on the hallway wall outside the hearing room. The other four protesters faced disorderly conduct charges.

© 2007 Reuters

Watch the BBC for free! Right here!


Once again the BBC pumps out utter crapola without the slightest suggestion of journalistic profesionalism.

This story is complete tosh for a number of reasons, but even though it pretends to be aracial, the whole thing screams racism as well as utter utter utter bollocks.

Human species 'may split in two'
Last Updated: Tuesday, 17 October 2006, 08:47 GMT 09:47 UK

Humanity may split into two
sub-species in 100,000 years'
time as predicted by HG Wells,
an expert has said.

Evolutionary theorist Oliver Curry of the London School of Economics expects a genetic upper class and a dim-witted underclass to emerge.

The human race would peak in the year 3000, he said - before a decline due to dependence on technology.

People would become choosier about their sexual partners, causing humanity to divide into sub-species, he added.

Humanity may split into an elite and an underclass, says Dr Curry

The descendants of the genetic upper class would be tall, slim, healthy, attractive, intelligent, and creative and a far cry from the "underclass" humans who would have evolved into dim-witted, ugly, squat goblin-like creatures.

Race 'ironed out'

But in the nearer future, humans will evolve in 1,000 years into giants between 6ft and 7ft tall, he predicts, while life-spans will have extended to 120 years, Dr Curry claims.

Physical appearance, driven by indicators of health, youth and fertility, will improve, he says, while men will exhibit symmetrical facial features, look athletic, and have squarer jaws, deeper voices and bigger penises.

Women, on the other hand, will develop lighter, smooth, hairless skin, large clear eyes, pert breasts, glossy hair, and even features, he adds. Racial differences will be ironed out by interbreeding, producing a uniform race of coffee-coloured people.

However, Dr Curry warns, in 10,000 years time humans may have paid a genetic price for relying on technology.

Spoiled by gadgets designed to meet their every need, they could come to resemble domesticated animals.

Receding chins

Social skills, such as communicating and interacting with others, could be lost, along with emotions such as love, sympathy, trust and respect. People would become less able to care for others, or perform in teams.

Physically, they would start to appear more juvenile. Chins would recede, as a result of having to chew less on processed food.

There could also be health problems caused by reliance on medicine, resulting in weak immune systems. Preventing deaths would also help to preserve the genetic defects that cause cancer.

Further into the future, sexual selection - being choosy about one's partner - was likely to create more and more genetic inequality, said Dr Curry.

The logical outcome would be two sub-species, "gracile" and "robust" humans similar to the Eloi and Morlocks foretold by HG Wells in his 1895 novel The Time Machine.

"While science and technology have the potential to create an ideal habitat for humanity over the next millennium, there is a possibility of a monumental genetic hangover over the subsequent millennia due to an over-reliance on technology reducing our natural capacity to resist disease, or our evolved ability to get along with each other, said Dr Curry.

He carried out the report for men's satellite TV channel Bravo.

Over 6 weeks ago, I posted an article entitled:

Was this to be the 'dirty bomb'
06. Sep 2007 - 20:24:28

Since then, we reports have emerged that one of those NUKES is missing and that strangely some of the airmen that might have been involved in this 'mistake' have ended up dead.

Is this just the 6-weeks-on 'anti-Bush' spin factory or is there substance behind it? Please read the blog entry I made on that issue including the two articles I pasted at the end.

This possibility is too significant to just ignore. Answers are needed, and fast!

I call myself lwtc247 because over the years, the global conspiracies I have gained knowledge of, does effect my life and thoughts almost second of every day. I didn't ask for it, and at times I find it annoying. It may even cause me problems sometimes. However, being compelled to reject the global rot, and trying to encourage others to reject it also, I accept my 'condition' as something positive than negative. I must embrace it. I shiver at the thought of going back to a state of ignorance, or if not ignorance, then at least acceptance and tacit complicity.

But it has a cost.

I am lucky with my job, in that it affords me great opportunity to conduct research, long and large amounts of research, I have come to satisfactory levels of understanding about life, science the way people operate etc. This has allowed me to let go of the mental prison most people cage themselves in. I do not, for example, try and cover up any mistakes I may make from time to time. I hold my hand up and deal with it. I believe it is a virtue to do so. But of course if you do this, you will be seen as 'error prone' or whatever, as relatively speaking, everyone else is busy hiding all their mistakes defects and frailties and so forth. I see people almost every day lie to themselves, and try to cover themselves in a teflon coat. They really are at war against themselves and it's a worthless war. A war of self-beguilement.

Since my life was hijacked, I have come to question almost everything. I have virtually zero inhibitions in asking relevant questions. Sometimes when posing questions a third party perhaps unaccustomed to such straightforward questions will react very adversely taking the question as being offensive, even when clearly it is not - it is just that their mind goes into 'shock'. The clever ones amongst other tricks, impose a fake sense of offence onto the question to avoid answering it. The not so clever ones try and divert the question.

And so at work today, up came "cost time".

I sent a 'public' e-mail asking very relevant and serious questions about some procedural matters. I wasn't able to clearly resolve the issues at hand myself and listed a few suggestions as to possible answers based on my understanding at the time. I also gave a stinging critique of a new aspect of work relating to Global Warming. The context of this Global Warming was very much skewed towards the anthropogenic side of the 'debate' something which I slammed in the e-mail as spurious 'opinion science'.

I later got a e-mail back from my boss, again public, and it seemed rather patronising, literally and stylistically. The reply said at least twice the procedure was clear, but strangely, no clarification was offered. Hummm. I was also asked not to send such public e-mails as I was confusing people. In addition, the reply suggested I had called into question peoples competency, which certainly wasn't my intention.

I analysed the reply as one of mild hostility against unfamiliar probing questions. questions which weren't furnished with answers. Questions that had significant consequences depending on the actual answer. It is a shame that the questions were made to carry personalised baggage which my boss took offence to. My boss displayed a familiar frailty which I have seen in many other people. It disappointed me, as I do actually hold my boss in quite high regard.

The issue of confusing people was a bit of a sore point, as virtually all my colleagues are recognised for their professional abilities and also their accredited academic intellectualism, which is why I e-mailed them in the first place, to get their learned responses, This showed that the reply sent to me hadn't been given a moments thought but also because: If they were confused, then it would have meant that they too had a issue with this procedure and so would have benefited from my question to clarify and the following discourse upon it.

The Global Warming part of it wasn't specifically addressed, but I'm sure the nature of my annoyance at being asked to impose a very disputable side of it (the Al-Gore side), added to, unnecessarily, the irked reply I got.

So I ask myself this:
Should I try and garnish up my questions to prevent this kind of thing in the future? Will it achieve more? Will it be worse for failing to make people realise some ideas they have are daft and they are actually living in a multi-layered prison cell?

Help me out here.

Why should it be me that changes my approach - why cant people raise to my level of questioning and how I am; a bitter old man who is living with the conspiracy 24-7?

Previous articles on Turkey:

1) Cold Turkey. by lwtc247 @ 12. Oct 2007 - 05:05:48
2) Headless Turkey by lwtc247 @ 23. Jul 2007 - 00:30:50

The Kurds do NOT want Turkey to invade north Iraq and the people do not want the PKK to precipitate a Turkish invasion, yet very very stupidly the PKK aparently attack Turkey AFTER parliament authorised military action. How very convenient. The Kurdish people although terribly opressed by the Turks (see Al Jazeera's (English) Inside story: Turkish/Iraqi tensions as well as Kurdish Students Continue to Face Oppression do NOT want war. They have suffered so long already and interestingly enough, they have many connections to Israel and the US via what is reported of the Peshmurga paramilitaries.

Lets look at the areas with significant populations of Kurds. Let me call it Kurdistan. It spreads out between Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran.

"Kurdistan"

Turkey is a very close ally of occupied Palestine, a.k.a. Israel and also the the US. Syria has offered support to the Turkish Invasion. Why? syria is enjoying a love-in right now with anti-Bushites. I think the answer is quite clear from the map below.

It wants a piece of the action!

Juan Cole gives and interesting interview on the situation on Democracy Now.

Juan Cole. Professor of History
at Michigan University .
www.truthdig.com

AMY GOODMAN: Our guest is Professor Juan Cole, professor of history, University of Michigan. He’s joining us from Ann Arbor from the campus. He runs an analytical website called "Informed Comment," and has written a new book called Napoleon's Egypt: Invading the Middle East.

Let's go today's top story: tension remaining high on the Turkish-Iraq border, following the killing of seventeen Turkish troops by Kurdish militants over the weekend. How significant is this?

JUAN COLE: Well, it’s extremely significant. I mean, imagine what would happen in this country if a guerrilla group based in a neighboring country came over the border and killed seventeen US troops. That would be a war. And the Kurdish guerrilla movement, the Kurdish Workers Party, based now in Iraq, but originally from Eastern Anatolia, from the Turkish regions, is conducting a guerrilla war against the Turkish military. It is being given safe harbor by Kurdish politicians on the Iraqi side.

And, in essence, the United States has created this situation in which a NATO ally -- people forget Turkey fought alongside the United States in Korea; it’s got troops in Afghanistan -- a NATO ally of the United States is being attacked and its troops killed by a terrorist organization, so designated by the State Department, that essentially has US auspices. The US is responsible for security in Iraq.

AMY GOODMAN: And how connected is the US to the PKK, or is it at all?

JUAN COLE: Well, the United States doesn’t like the PKK and doesn’t have much connection to it, but the United States has allied with the Iraqi Kurdish leaders, who are the most reliable allies of the United States in Iraq: Massoud Barzani and Jalal Talabani. And Barzani, in particular, it seems to me, just de facto, is giving harbor to, giving haven to, these PKK guerrillas. So the United States needs Barzani and needs his support. He’s doing an oil deal with Hunt Oil, which is close to the Bush administration. His Peshmurga paramilitary is the backbone of the most effective fires of the new Iraqi army. They do security details in other cities like Mosul and Kirkuk. So the US really desperately depends on the Kurdistan Regional Authority and its paramilitary and can’t afford to alienate Barzani. And since Barzani is -- behind the scenes seems to kind of like the PKK and does -- giving them a haven, the US is politically complicit in these attacks.

AMY GOODMAN: What is the deal with Hunt Oil?

JUAN COLE: Well, Hunt Oil, which is, I think, losing its bids in Yemen, is desperate for a new field to develop, and they are exploring a partnership with the Kurdistan Regional Authority in northern Iraq.

AMY GOODMAN: And the issue of the US Congress taking a vote within one of its committees, Foreign Relations Committee, that Turkey was involved in a genocide against the Armenians, the significance of that vote, though it’s expected to fail at a congressional level with the whole Congress voting, and how it has played in Turkey, leading to the parliament vote to invade northern Iraq?

JUAN COLE: Well, I really here would underline that, as a historian, I think it’s important that everybody understand the horrible things that were done to the Armenians during World War I. On the other hand, it’s my duty also to try to understand the Turkish contemporary response, which is that the United States has made enormous trouble for this close ally. Turkey has put itself out over the last decades to help the United States. It was an ally in the Cold War. It was an ally in the Gulf War.

And in return, the United States seems to have told Turkey, “Drop dead,” I mean, they invaded Iraq against Turkish advice. They have unleashed Shiite fundamentalism, Sunni fundamentalism, Kurdish separatism on Turkey's doorstep. There is now a resurgence of the PKK and terrorism against Turkish citizens. And now, on top of all this trouble the United States is making for the Turks, the US Congress was set to condemn the Ottoman government of Turkey, the predecessor government to the present one, for this genocide against the Armenians.

So, the Turks are hurt and confused. In Bill Clinton's last year, 56% of the Turkish public thought well of the United States. That number is down to 9%. So it’s not entirely clear what motive the United States has in so alienating a country that has been a valued and close ally.

I don't endorse all of Cole's analysis, but it is quite powerful.

UPDATE:
Came across this just now. A very interconnected piece with possible disinformation:

Turkey Requests ‘Urgent’ Iran Military Aid As Syria Warns To Prepare For War
http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1042.htm

Russian Military Analysts are reporting in the Kremlin today that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has requested neighboring Iran to provide ‘urgent’ military aid in its planned invasion of Iraq. Likewise, Iran has confirmed that its President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has ‘cut short’ his state visit to Armenia and is returning to Tehran.

Western Media sources are also reporting that the Turkish President has ‘warned’ the United States War Leaders that his Nation will begin its invasion of Iraq ‘within days’. Israeli news sources are further reporting that Syria is, also, in final preparations for war, and as we can read:

"Be prepared to fend off all external aggression that seeks to harm the homeland," General Ali Khabib, the Syrian chief of staff, instructed pilots at a ceremony marking their graduation from flight school Monday. He also told the pilots to "maintain a high level of readiness and always be ready for the homeland's calling".

"Syria will never relinquish its right to return occupied land," the general continued. "As President Bashar al-Assad emphasized, Syria is interested in gaining back of all of its rights – including the return of all of its territory and sovereignty."

Not being told to the American people, by their War Leaders, is Turkey’s exploding anger against Israel for the training, and the US of arming, the Kurdish Rebels currently attacking both Turkish and Iranian troops. Turkey’s leader, Erdogan, in meeting with Israel’s Prime Minister Olmert, has also just issued ‘strong warnings’ against Israel’s continued interference with its sovereign territory.

For the greatest understanding, however, of the United States and Israel support of the Kurdish people against Turkey, Iran and Syria, we can read:

"An article in the Armed Forces Journal, published in the United States, has suggested the Middle East map should be redrawn “according to the situation of the ethnic minorities.”

In an article written by retired Army Lt. Col. Ralph Peters, it was claimed that the redrawing of the borders drawn by Westerners would correct the “injustice” in the region.

Suggesting a free Kurdistan to be established on the Turkish, Iraqi, Iranian and Syrian territory in this frame, Peters suggested such a state “stretching from Diyarbakir through Tabriz would be the most pro-Western state between Bulgaria and Japan.” Peters also suggested a sort of Muslim super-Vatican to be established in Mecca and Medina.”

But, and according to these Kremlin reports, the greatest concern of the United States lies in its dwindling access to World oil supplies, especially since Mexico, the Americans third largest oil supplier, has reported:

"President Felipe Calderón of Mexico is delivering a grim message: The largest oil producer in Latin America is running out of crude."Our oil reserves have been consistently falling," and the decline is "severely threatening" government finances, Calderón told a nationwide television audience in an address last month at the National Palace."

Even grimmer news about the true state of oil has just been reported from Germany, and as we can read:

"World oil production has already peaked and will fall by half as soon as 2030, according to a report which also warns that extreme shortages of fossil fuels will lead to wars and social breakdown.

The German-based Energy Watch Group will release its study in London today saying that global oil production peaked in 2006 - much earlier than most experts had expected. The report, which predicts that production will now fall by 7% a year, comes after oil prices set new records almost every day last week, on Friday hitting more than $90 (£44) a barrel."

These reports also state that the United States access to oil on the World markets suffered a severe blow when Venezuela’s President, Hugo Chavez, signed a multi-billion dollar agreement with China, and which will further erode the Americans ability to find the resources to fuel their vast military Empire.

It is, without doubt, that the United States, and its allies, aggression to secure oil for their Nations lie only in the Middle East, but can only be secured by them by means of Total War, and which by their aggression against Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria prove, beyond doubt, that they are prepared to do, no matter the cost in human lives, no matter the threat that Russia and China won’t intervene.

So is the World we exist in today, where nowhere on our Planet can either safety or security be found. So is the World we exist in today where the dreams of the future have been turned into the nightmare of war.

Note:

There are a number ways you can realise you are getting old. One of them is that you begin to say things like “When I was young…”.

Anyway, when I was young, I was quite a big fan of music. My range wasn’t so great, but I was often listening to it. One night in my drinking days, coming home with my Dad, the issue of music popped up. My father said music made no difference to the world, and that surprised me a lot. He had quite a large music collection himself and helped influence some of my tastes. For example, when I hear the Rolling Stones’s “Ruby Tuesday” I think about going swimming because on Sunday, my father would take us to the swimming pool, give us a packet of polo’s and play songs from the compilation “Get Stoned” by the Rolling stones. Somehow “Ruby Tuesday” seemed the most prominent.

I've always looked at this album cover
with interest and curiousity.

And when I hear The Buggles “Video killed the Radio Star” and Kate Bush’s “Wuthering Heights” (which now, I kinda like – lol!) I am immediately pulled back to my youth.

“How can you say that?” I impatiently asked - of course, I took the implications of what my father said, inclusinve as an ‘attack’ on what I liked. I know, stupid right? “People like John Lennon inspiring people to voice out demands for peace and so on.”

Sadly I can’t quite remember what my father said, but I remember being dissatisfied afterwards. But you know what, there was much truth in what my father said because music will never offer a solution to anything (in western culture), it merely captures/reflects and advertises a mood, at any one particular period. But while it’s wider role probably irrelevant, I do think it does have a short-term personal influence.

I went through a stage where I didn’t listen to music at all, partly because I thought there may be some religious based cautions against it; the kind of arguments I was hearing w was that music (especially involving ‘strings’) altered your emotional states and made you behave differently. Whatever the wrongs or rights or legitimacy of all this, I have in recent years begun listening to it again. And it does affect/affect or set your mood, as does clothing, the smart suit, the tight jeans, the big baggy jumper, the Doc Martens booth, not to mention hairstyle. However this ‘altered state’ is fleeting and I could argue, in the absence of pleasure from other expressions of ‘escapism’, it is therapeutic. I spent many a summers day, just lying down watching the clouds breeze by, listening to Jimi Hendrix’s and especially his Electric Ladyland album, thinking of life elsewhere.

The Jesus and Mary Chain (JAMC). Two great albums with unique style.
I was also and big fan of the Jesus and Mary Chain. You may have heard their music style. It makes me feel kind of reflective {in fact, humming some of their songs has lead to me writing this article), kind of hopeless(despair) and yet kind of like being in love (I was madly in love then and played this music a lot at the time). I also went through a black clothes period then. I could on occasions get quite ‘down’ when listening to this music, even though I liked a lot and thought it was quite clever music. It was a two way association. If I was down I would often play this music. Or If I played the music I would feel down. I could well imagine some suicidal kids feeding off this vibe, to whatever degree, and then making an attempt at taking their own lives.

I find it amazing that even though I am getting old, and have come and to be honest with myself and get to know myself very well, that an external force such as music can still affect me in such ways.

lw

www.wamy.co.uk/bd_ask.htm

Akum.
I was talking with a Directors of the Islamic Society of Britain (Dr Abdul Aziz) in his house last year and he game me a book: European Council for Fatwa Research {like many Islamic books, it carries no ISBN, printed in Egypt}. It tries to give guidance to Muslims on how to live a successful Muslim life in a non-Muslim country where Sharia law is not practiced (indeed it is demonized in some instances). Members must among other things, be qualified in Sharia at the University level and have a sound knowledge of Arabic.

In it on page 27 is very strange fatwa whereby in the summer, it is permissible to combine magrib and Ish'a prayers.

I am incredibly reluctant to embrace it because I believe that it is still possible to have a n Ish'a time, it just means sleep patters are broken slightly, and of course prayers are one of the 5 main pillars of Islam. Mess with them and expect the house to fall down.

It seems there are a million and one opinions given when a million and one sources are asked, many which are different.

Are these variations acceptable? And what role do out own insights and opinions play in the decision making process i.e. Shouldn't we not take more responsibility for the conduct of out own religious practice rather than asking theologians etc?

From my experience of asking Christian scholars many are embarrassed to call a spade a spade and try and avoid serious discussion which usually would have significant meaning should the debate be pursued to a conclusion. Muslims tend to be either very ridged (admirable to a point but bad when they have espouse a very questionable point) or they tend to be secularists - abandoning the practicalities of God being the ultimate source and reference of knowledge (relying on man-made fallible thoughts/laws etc). I've not asked Jews about this yet, but I have a precognition that they would clam up, although one Muslim researcher I know seems to had been very engaged with Jewish theological discourse with Jews in the Prestwich area of Manchester.

I think all this indicates the need for a unified Islamic council to discuss and conclude global decisions – a responsibility once chaired by the Caliph.

I'm going to contact them and put these questions to them, but what's your opinion?

P.S. If your interested...
European Council for Fatwa and Research
19 Robuck Road
Clonskeagh
D14
Ireland
00353 1 2080000
Shiekh Hussein Muhammad Halawa

www.wamy.co.uk/bd_ask.htm

Having gone through a dodgy patch, Al Jazeera (English) has once again come up trumps with yet another if its ever interesting human stories featured on its "Witness" program.

The latest one featured a short retrospective personal film called "Child of the Commune." Made by a young Dutch woman whose mother joined the Bhagwan Shee Rashneesh commune in the 60/70's. Bhagwan Shee Rashneesh later become known as Osho.

Bhagwan Shee Rashneesh otherwise known as Osho.

The mother rejected living in 'normal society', rejected regulation and embraced what she thought was freedom, including of course free sex; the kind of thing that the image of the "hippy" was built around. She took her daughter with her. In the film, the young woman (then about 13) expressed a sorrowful childhood because of the commune.

In discussions with her mother, the issue of freedom came up and it was apparent that the mothers persuit of freedom, it was at the cost of imposing a regulation (unfree) life for the child, but at the same time the elements of guidance throughout childhood that she needed were not provided. At one point, the partly regulated partly free social circle, resulting in the bedding of the girl when she was 13, becasue the commune had impressed upon her that it was the way things were supposed to be. She felt she couldn't speak out.

The mother in persuit of freedom actually revealed a very interesting point. She said she obeyd some rules becasue it was her choice to obey them. Her freedom became encapsulated with others seeing the same 'freedom'. This reveals the essence of freedom, that freedom still contains regulation. And as the young lady shows, freedom has a price which is often not apparent.

I will blog more on the intersting story of Bhagwan later.

Analysis 4:

This post concerns the callous murder of Jean Charles deMenezes, a man not guilty of any crime. It uses the BBC's reporting of the story. The coverage of JC's murder is a travesty of journalism so I'm going to try and redress the imbalance somewhat and put my own 2 pence forward too.

E-mail this to a friend Printable version 

Met sought suicide bomber advice 

Jean Charles de Menezes: Followed to station 
Last Updated: Friday, 5 October 2007, 12:29 GMT 13:29 UK 

British police worried about suicide bombers were advised by Israeli security forces, a court has heard. 
A 'kill-first,-get-criminal-govt-to-whitewash-after" force was advising the British police about suicide bombers? I wonder what the advice was? Can we have it published please? In its current absence, let me use my psychic powers to guess. *puts index finger and thumb on forehead*, aaaah. Something's coming though. page 1: If he's Palestinian, kill him. If she's a Palestinian, kill her. If they look like Palestinians, kill them. If they help Palestinians, kill them. *rubs forehead and pincers more strongly *... page 666 last line very short line. It simply says "Kill."

A senior officer told the Metropolitan Police's trial over the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes that the Israelis warned of new terror tactics. 
Now how would they know what tactics British "bombers" would use? Isn't that strange! OK let’s do what the BBC does and just not bother to think about any of that. Instead lets focus on the new suicide bombing tactics? Lets see... No bomb and/or no suicide? You know, suddenly it all makes sense.

They warned suicide bombers had developed devices that could be more easily concealed about the person.
Why is this statement so vague? What exactly were these devices? Where exactly were they to be contained? Did the Brits have to told suicide bombers would try and hide their bombs? Were reports of concealed devices (e.g. suicide belts) unknown before the Israelis issued this 'advice'. Clearly, this point and its deliberate vagueness is yet another lie popped from the very large stack. "No sir, its a matter of national security. We cannot divulge details in case ummm...errrr... ...the terrorists get ideas. *cough*

Let's consider they are talking about suicide belts. Let's also recall the official Swiss cheese lobbox of the 7-7 and 21-7 "events". In it, rucksacks and large tupperware containers were used for bombs and non-bombs respectively, NOT suicide belts or any other device "easily concealed about the person". So again this advice was trash. Absolutely NO devices of the sort advised about were used. How much did this advice cost? Who authorised this course. Why was it authorised? Since when have the British been strangers to terrorism? The Brits are experts in it - from both directions! Just ask that two man SAS death quad that was captured in Basra recently.



SAS terrorists

I see no reason why the godless Khazars illegally administering and ethnically cleansing Palestine were advising British police, unless of course it was to advise them on how to kill with impunity and ignore basic ethics and scribes law. One could, with greater validity say that a potential bomber could have the explosives in their shoes, Richard Reid style - date: 22-12-01, JC's killing date: 22-7-05. Yet the British death squad never even considered shoe bombs, showing YET AGAIN, that the 'advice' on concelaed devices is an utter lie.

This lie is synchronous with the defence strategy. To try to make another pin-prick of doubt in the hope that all the pricks will summise to a twinge of doubt and hopefully escape prosecution as they have managed to over the murder of JC. And people still parrot that British justice is the best in the world. It would be hilarious if it weren’t so damn tragic.

The Met denies breaking health and safety laws in relation to the Brazilian's death on 22 July 2005. 
The Met has something in common with the worst of criminals, they both commit serious crimes and afterwards lie come hell or high water afterwards in order to get away with their crime. Only the greatest of criminals are the hypocrites wearing uniform.

Two elite firearms officers shot the electrician seven times on a train at Stockwell Underground Station fearing he was one of the men responsible for the previous day's failed suicide bombings.
Yes, well done BBC. Paint it as if it was a sudden event. It's OK that you left off the delay between one death squad member killing him and then the other one, not to be denied the necrophiic pleasure rush of the kill.

Asif Hanif and Omar Sharif attacked an Israeli bar in 2003 
Correction: They are claimed to have done it. I don't see any trial or independent enquiry - did you? The story of that event is also full of questions, and this is of NO relevance whatsoever, other than for the BBC to show a few Muslim sounding names, portray them as terrorists, and to show that poor little tyrannical state of Israel is just a tragic victim as it always is when the BBC discusses it.

The prosecution allege the Metropolitan Police put the public at risk by allowing their suspect to travel from his home to the station before they intervened.
It's a pity that's all anyone can manage to throw at them. Given the absence of having to answer murder charges, at least something is better than nothing, but please remember, there should be no weakening in the resolve to make people in the Met (and wider establishment) be in the dock for murder, including those 52 murdered on a Tuesday morning in July 2005. And have you noticed the word “alleged” is only ever used then in discussion of the prosecution, but never about the responses of the defendant?

The Metropolitan Police say that officers did their best in extraordinary circumstances - and that while the shooting was a mistake, it was not a crime.
And where is the BBC challenge/analysis or scrutiny of that statement? This is the fundamental role of Journalists to question EVERYTHING the ruling class puts out. The correlation between 
the strengthening fascism pursued by the government and the appalling lack of journalistic professionalism, is certainly no coincidence.

Giving evidence to the Old Bailey trial, Detective Inspector Andrew Whiddett of the force's Special Branch said the Metropolitan Police had taken steps to prepare for a suicide bomber attack.
No you didn't you lying tosser! You took NO steps to stop a suicide bomber attack. What you did do I believe is take steps to kill an innocent man and try to excuse it afterwards. You scumbag. And even the appallingly amateurish and utterly dangerous events, draped in spin show your "preparation" was none of the kind.

Det Insp Whiddett was the Operations Room officer with responsibility for surveillance teams who first identified Mr de Menezes. He was seen leaving a block of flats linked to one of the failed bombers. 
Aaah. So this is one of the prime people that should be facing charges of Murder and incompetence. It seems, and I may be wrong, that the more guilty they are, the more they spin and the more rubbish they spew forth.

Those steps included consulting Israeli security forces which had the most experience of dealing with such attacks, he told the court.
Yes, mention the death teams of Zion when in trouble. Tried and tested me old son. So let us know what was discussed, when, were these 'steps' referenced against international law, and of course, were they referenced against British law? Who authorised these consultations? How much did they cost? Can we see the documentation issued from this consultation?

The Israelis had met Met police officers in the months leading up to the July 2005 suicide bombings on London.
Boy oh boy, I bet they did! And I'll wager they did quite a few other things in the run up to July 2007. In addition to doing a number of other things, I wonder if they installed some kind of magic early warning device which alerted that sinister Nazi BB Netanyahu.

In the briefings, said Det Insp Whiddett, Israeli security chiefs had demonstrated how suicide bombers had developed new ways of carrying a bomb that "may not be apparent". 
Come on then, tell us. Tell us that before that briefing which you can show us documentation or videos of, how new this information was to British operatives. 

Both the 7 and 21 July attackers used bulky bombs in rucksacks, but Mr de Menezes was not carrying anything on the morning of his death.
No!!! What were called the July 7th "bombers" were said to have had bombs in their rucksacks, and I'm unaware of any independent inquiry that identifies these man as being bombers. Secondly the July 21 men didn't bomb anything nor could they have bombed anything. Once again the BBC shows why it is known as a house of propaganda.

Det Insp Whiddett told the jury that Israeli officers had briefed the Met on one attack carried out by two British men.
Dear lord. Israeli, Israel, Israeli Israel. Israel Israel Israel. Is there no escape from that 60 year old concentration camp?

Asif Hanif and Omar Sharif attacked a Tel Aviv bar in 2003. The bombs used in that attack included "sheet explosives of a military kind concealed about the body more effectively than the traditional home-made suicide belts and vests," said the police officer.
So??? What does this have to do with anything? Is someone suggesting that JC had any connection whatsoever to these alleged "sheet" bombers? Did JC have these NEW FEAR TERM: "sheet bomb(s)" on him? Did he have any bomb on him? Did he have a tupperware container of chapatti flour on him? Was JCdM a terrorist? No. So obviously this statement is one more example of the utter rubbish the murdering police and those conspirators in the establishment spew forth to cloud the clear-cut issue that the British assassination squads were let off the leash for a few minutes that terrible day. We must also ask: Was any procedure put in place to check for explosives e.g. Was his flat checked with sniffer-dogs and forensic teams when we was seen leaving the flat? No, of course not. Because it would mean they would have to plant explosives or one could prove they knew there were no explosives there that day. Did they check the correct flat? No again of course not because of the same two reasons. It would have given a reason for them not to slaughter Jean Charles. FACE IT, HOW MUCH MORE DOUBT CAN YOU HAVE THAT IT WAS JC HIMSELF THAT WAS EARMARKED FOR ASSASSINATION THAT DAY?  One more thing, what is this crap about military sheet explosives anyway?  MILITARY explosives yeah? From whose military did they come from? How did this military info get to these supposed bombers? And is someone seriously suggesting that from the time these MILITARY explosives were first formulated, up to the time that these MILITARY explosives were commissioned by the MILITARY, up to and including the time these MILITARY explosives were somehow magically commandeered by the BRITISH based Hanif and Sharif, which is probably going to span at least 2 year period and probably more like 5 (R&D) that the British police and counter-terrorism branch were in complete ignorance of such MILITARY equipment, so much so that the "kill first, laugh later" Israelis and to advice the British forces about this? Boy is there a strong smell of something very unpleasant coming from the mouths of these murderers.

The case continues.
Unlike the life of a young Brazilian.

 

Her tears on thursday were sincere, people do get overwhelmed by emption at times, but once they started, I feel they were rather ‘sustained’ and then played upon.

And of course with the customary worship Muslims bestow upon 'their' usually terrible 'leaders' hundreds of thousands were on the street to see her and that headscarf she "wears", which after many years of practice seems to fall off with suspicious regularity - not that there's much difference when she puts it back on again.

Perhaps next Eid someone can send her a new one...

shrink wrap

And true to form, wouldn't you know it, a bomb goes off and kills innocent people. Now Bhutto like Pervez Musharraf (someone spoonerised his name to read Perverse Mooseshaft, which although 'strained' somewhat, is kinda appropriate, given what happens when the US male moose lets out it mating hoot.) is in the same kind of danger and Musharraf was in, so both of them can try and kill more people according to the PNAC plan they've signed up for,

Once again the Pakistani people are being duped like most other peoples across the planet by having a new face but living under most of the same most significant rotten policies.

She seemed to spend an awfully long time in the UK even though she was officially in exile in the Gulf. I wonder then if like many UK Pakistani people she had many dreams of home yet once there will realise the dream was far better than the reality. Expect Benny to be piling up the air miles!

Benny gets to "...one.." on the countdown for when her headscarf
is due to fall off. Yeah, I know, at least she "wears" one

David Icke posts the following headline on his site
(at http://www.davidicke.com/content/blogcategory/30/48/) :

Tuesday, 16 October 2007
9/11 investigator David Ray Griffin calls for global government

What??

Click here to watch ...

The link goes here:

Ickes headline is terribe. People reading it will think that DRG is calling for the kind of global government David Icke is quite well known {in certain circles} for opposing. And if you actually watch the interview it is very different.

But does Icke qualify the statement? No. Instead he panders to tabloid techniques, instilling a negative idea in peoples minds and then tries to give himself the

‘get out of jail free card’ by allowing him to say “hey, I provided the link so people can make their own minds up” Well sorry David, you can’t deny you’ve seeded the negativity towards DRG. You should have commented on it. Especially when you have read quite a bit about mind manipulation.

 

Trying to get a job on the Mirror or something Dave? You certainly seem to trying to build up a suitable portfolio.

 

David Ray Griffin has done wonders to expose the lies of 9-11, it’s immediate and longer term consequences. Nobody has don’t more than David Ray Griffin to expose the lies of the 9-11 Commission report, Nobody has none more to destroy the official version of events in a clear way without the need to believe in other highly speculative theories. He is among a handful of people who has debunked the debunkers and inspired others, high profile people as other ‘nameless’ people, to question 9-11. He is a man of highly admirable intellect and wisdom.

 

I am rushing like mad right now – I have to go somewhere in about 2 minutes so I’ll post the rough transcript of what DRG says, and I’ll come back later to edit and comment further on it.

 

-------------------------

  

Lady is the congregation: "If there is a world resurgence of Abrahamic faith, uniting Christians, Jews and Muslims in allegiance to god and the truth, will there still be the desire and a need for nation states or will these fail into obsolescence?"

   

To which DRG starts his reply saying

 

"Well I think and many people think now the nation state is obsolete. There’s a lot of writing on this over the last 20-30 years, and one of my many heresies is I believe we need to move towards global democracy. Now for many people this just scares the ‘beJesus’ out of them, but when you think about it, we believe in Democracy we believe, that ruling on behalf of the people and letting the people determine policy - at least to determine the leaders who will determine the policy is a good thing. If it's a good thing within a nation why not as the world as whole... There is no overall guidance to the planet that is elected... The only overall guidance to the planet is provided by the rich and the powerful.

 

So America {the US} now sees itself, has seen itself for some time, as really the global government. so we have the right to go into any country we want to, to do anything we want to, because we are the global government, but we were not elected. I believe we do need global government to deal with a whole bunch of really really terrible problems...the  ecological crisis  we have done nothing, essentially, since we knew about it almost 40 years ago and it all has to do with this, and with {when} the Soviet union declined, disintegrated, many people were saying well now we get a peace dividend, all this money we were putting into the military affairs we can now use for health education welfare and the ecological crisis, so what did the ones who don't want to happen do? They started jenning(?) up new wars we had the gulf war - we attacked them, and then we had 9-11 and the complete global war on terror. So where do we have the chance to get away from focusing on human vs. human relations  and deal with overarching issue of our time, can we as a civilisation learn to live in harmony with the life of{on} the planet in a way that is sustainable and just deal with

 

Unless we can get rid of the present system which came into existence probable in the 15th 16th 17th centaury which is radically new wave for? the planet there in nothing that fits into the fabric of the universe, in fact it has turned out to be a very terrible way to do it there is not much hope for out planet so that’s another one of my hopes, that out of 9-11, people will see, this is what this kind of structure leads to. It leads inevitability to empires and then empires inevitably want to get more, and create false-flag operations"

-------------------------
Well, I don't have much time as usual, but in the same way, that what DRG is advocating above should NOT be a cause for people and so called 'truthers' to worry about neither is this...

Chávez’s Plan for Development Bank Moves Ahead : The idea by Hugo Chávez, Venezuela’s president, to create a Bank of the South to finance regional development projects is moving forward, aided by the tacit approval of Brazil, which has South America’s largest economy. But Chavez is far more popular among the 'alternative' community and people don't criticise such 'illuminatist/globalist/NWOist' trpe moves. This is the headline Icke gives about Chavez's plan...

Wednesday, 17 October 2007
South American nations to launch bank as rival to IMF
 'Venezuela's leftist government is leading Brazil, Argentina and other regional economies in creating a new bank with the ambition of casting off unwelcome oversight by the IMF and World Bank. The idea was first announced by Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez last December as part of his crusade against US influence and international financial institutions that he says are merely "tools of Washington".'
Read more ...  

Poor Show Ickey...

In a previous post, I asked the question why the MET chose that particular photo of Osman and de Menezes? Well here's a new composite the defence should employ to show how they got so bloody confused that day. It is made of pics the BBC posted on its website of Osman.

Enjoy... {before the pigs blow your brains out!}

Here's a bigger one...

Naomi Wolf

This highly articulate and respectable lady has been taken some unreasonable heavy blows recently, and her gender seems a common point of attack.

It is said she is a feminist. Is it true? Or is it said as a 'put-down' only because she is a woman? Do people feel threatened by her femininity? Is gender just a smokescreen to detract from the message she's putting out there? I don't know. Reading a few comments on a few sites about her makes the think this is a real possibility or that maybe, 'truther fatigue' has set in, perhaps temporarily, leading truthers into disrepute. Some have also put her aparent Jewishness up for target practice, failing completely to realise that its not Jews that are the problem here!

Whatever, ALL efforts to do what we can to achieve something that's never been done in the history (or history I think I know of) of man, must be welcomes. What has never been done? To stop and reverse the plummet into fascism, which eventually gets so strong the only way to stop it is by revolution or war by an outside nation(s). And ALL efforts do include those marches and speeches which we know now get ignored by the swine in Westminster (but does rub off, I hope, on the rest of the population).

Listen to the words. Forget the Breasts.

You can catch a few of her videos if you google for them. Here's two:

Her Lecture, entitled "Paths Towards Fascism" by ICH, (webhosted at
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18570.htm)
certainly has been given one of the largest headlines I've seen on ICH for a while.
Talk by Naomi Wolf author of "The End of America: Letter of Warning To A Young Patriot" given October 11, 2007 at Kane Hall on the University of Washington campus.

and...

2) Naomi Wolf Schools Stephen Colbert on The Rise of Fascism in America [VIDEO] - Posted by Adam Howard at 12:30 PM on September 28, 2007.
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/63860/

BBC reports: DNA pioneer Dr James Watson claims black people are less intelligent than white people.
I don’t like racists, but I also don’t like thought police. Let this man do his talk for pity's sake. Let people {hear} what he has to say rather than through the BBC. Let him explain why he may hold this view. {Then,} LET US DECIDE if we believe him or not. Screw the thought police!

If what he says is racist, then far better that the public (those who can be bothered to bat an eyelid at this 'story') know this, rather than it being in the shadows.
Is he saying Black people are stupid? I doubt it but I presume that's the way quite a few people will see it. Is he saying white people have an average IQ of 101, yet the average black person has an IQ of 100? Is he saying any difference in IQ (- actually a stupid way to measure intelligence) is void of social factors like education, pre-schooling, discrimination in libraries, life and so on?
Come on.

-----------------------------

p.s.

Sadly I think I need to clarify this point. Racism is far too wide and far too loaded.
Actually I believe just about everyone is racist. I think we all make instant decisions based on the colour of people skin or other physical appearance, culture as we do about their clothing, orthodontists skill (+ price!) and so on. The question is whether you let those impressions continue to form/shape you after you get to know them and whether you tarnish ALL similiar peoples with a claim that is illogical. It has been said that Africans have great rhythm and so on. Is that racist? Does it mean whites have less rhythm? Does that mean whites are less superior?

The racism I don't like is when any initial pigeonholing leads to unequal opportunities, hate, taunting, suspicion and so on, not the default and potentially trivial racism I'd say most of us have when we see people of difference racial appearance. Then of course, following closely we have social prejudice from social difference {strongly but not exclusively linked to race}, religious prejudice from religious difference {again strongly linked to race} even prejudice from culinary differences {Frogs legs, garlic French, Rice eating Asians, Roast Beef Brits, MuckDonals USans etc).

It isn't a simple issue but a very interesting anthropological one which is surely good to discuss.

CNN reports that Russia has intelligence that there is an assassination plot against Putin invlving his trip to Tehran.

Wow! If genuine, this is explosive. Surely Russian intelligence will be trying to determine the source of the plot. What's the guess that the US is trying to do what the Zionists did when they killed Archduke Franz Ferdinand in 1914 leading a trail of footprints back to Moscow? If an attempted assassination of Putin who commands enormous popularity would carry MAJOR impliations! Russia is very likely to declare war against any party involved. If it was a nuclear power, then Russia would launch a war against that states most powerful nuclear free ally.

And what do the Iranians have to gain or any other Muslim group for that matter? NOTHING.

This is a CLEAR warning shot across the bows of the ZUSUK NOT to even think about a false-flag.

Ref:http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/FWWarchduke.htm

Analysis #3

The batallion of lies surrounding the assassination of Jean Charles de Menezes trickles
out slowly as the Met is in court charged with Health and Safety breaches. It should of
course be superceeded by murder charges. Well, don't give up hope just yet, hope is
all we have left.

What follows is a commentary on the BBC reporting of the the trial. A labour of necessity
so these pigs know their case of lies is being revealed to the public.

Last Updated: Wednesday, 3 October 2007, 16:13 GMT 17:13 UK

Menezes police: We did our best
Obviously this is BS. The death of JC was totally avoidable.

Commander John McDowell was 'gold commander' on 22 July 
The police commander who launched the surveillance operation which ended in the death of Jean Charles de Menezes has told a court: "We did our best." 
Slightly inappropriate choice of colours. I suggest "brown commander

Commander John McDowell told an Old Bailey jury he thought constantly about what could have been done differently. 
And the fruits of such "constant" thoughts are? You see, even if you do believe this mans claim (I don't), then it's not likely any such conclusions will be forthcoming. They could only work against him. Funny how the perverted legal system we have would have worked towards making a "med evil head chopping hand chopping suicide bombing Islamist Muslim" type chappie be detained in effective solitary confinement, subjected to psychological stress until he capitulates into self incrimination. Guilt, of course, being a side-show. However, 'brown leader' is not quizzed at all even though his ideas might have been able to stop the 'mistake' scenario they put forth.

One easy and crucial thing which could be done differently, is not to have tell your firearms teams to act as a death squad for the day by telling them the potential suspect was "up for it". This is a repulsive statement. Firearms officers know such a description is a licence to kill, there is no obligation to take the man alive. They also know that if they kill. the system will close around them to shield them from any consequence, other than perhaps, a mild public ticking off, then its back to work as usual. Oops, silly I almost forgot. Not only do they not face any consequence for their deadly actions, they get sent on bloody holiday for it too out the taxpayers expense. Perverse isn't it?

His team was working under "difficult circumstances" on the day the innocent Brazilian was shot, Mr McDowell said. 
Does that mean it's OK to kill an innocent man and lie your arse off about it afterwards, or to remain silent when you see your "superiors" lying their evil little arses off? I want to know what exactly how easy they expected their "national security" jobs to be like? Such a stupid and irrelevant reply from McDowell really exposes their dereliction of duty, acute unprofessionalism and criminal negligence. People like McDowell should be answering questions like: "and how do you plea to the charge of murder before you today?" 

The Met Police denies breaking health and safety laws when it mistook Mr de Menezes for a suicide bomber in 2005. 
Deny deny deny, but GUILTY GUILTY GUILTY!

Mr de Menezes, 27, was shot seven times by two firearms officers at Stockwell Tube station on 22 July 2005. 
Yes, two officers! and there was a gap between the shootings, the first set of bullets being to JC's head. Do those facts not disturb you?

Four hours 
Mr McDowell was the "gold" commander who dispatched a surveillance team to Mr de Menezes' block of flats, believing failed 21 July suicide bomber Hussain Osman lived there. 
He MUST tell us and release the audio recordings or transcripts of his instructions on that day, or else he is assumed to be continuing the deliberate torrent of lies and deflection they police have been spewing forth over the last two years.  

<blockquote> I remain of the view that I and we did our best that morning to mitigate what was clearly a threat to the public in very difficult circumstances </blockquote>
 - Commander John McDowell 
If that's you "best" pal, they you are utterly crap at your job. Resign you piece of scum.

The gold commander has overall responsibility for the strategy of a major operation. Below him are silver and bronze commanders who manage tactical and operational decisions respectively. 
So along with those that pulled the trigger, the visible face for prosecution rests with the brown command

Mr McDowell told the trial on Wednesday: "I have since that time constantly thought about what other potential tactics or strategy might have been available to me because of the outcome of this tragic set of circumstances. 
See above about his proclaimed mental cogitations.

"I have done that on a weekly, if not daily, basis. 
Yeah right. I'm sure the way your desire to have a dead man that day just eats you right up.

"I remain of the view that I and we did our best that morning to mitigate what was clearly a threat to the public in very difficult circumstances." 
It is rather peculiar that someone who is so convinced of his correctness would keep thinking about the machination of that day. Surely Mr MsDowell isn't lying to us. No! Cant be! And when the stupid sausage says "clearly a threat" we KNOW he is lying. JC wasn't a threat and they knew at this stage that the 22-7 bombs were anything but bombs. And when he says they "mitigated" the threat, it highlights his belief that extra-judicial killings is a legitimate way to reduce the {non} threat  

Clare Montgomery QC, prosecuting, asked why, despite Mr McDowell launching the operation at 4.55am, the firearms team had not been briefed and sent to the flats by the time Mr de Menezes left for work more than four hours later. 
You know its strange. There is not one aspect of 9-11, 7-7 (parts of the misterious 21-7) or 22-7 that cannot have some hugely significant question asked about it. This case is no exception. So we are being asked to believe that it will take between 4 hours before a death squad can be assembled should a 'terror event' occur in London some time in the future. And don't forget this is just 15 days after a number of bombs were detonated in London. Past history shows the British are masters of shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted - just look at the IRA bombings e.g. Immediately following the City of Londonbombing inApril 2003 there was high level and sustained security in place for ages afterwards.  Yet 15 days after 52 people were killed and what some said was the worst terrorist attack on UK soil ever, and just 1 day after the authorities came to believe Chapatti flour could kill others, it took 4 hours to dispatch a bunch of trigger happy death wishing freaks. BS!

If they had been in place, the Brazilian could have been challenged before he had a chance to board the Tube, where officers were to stop him "at any cost", Ms Montgomery claimed. 
Indeed. Even if one entertains their 'mistake' point of view, it still shows their actions were despicable. Stopping his "at any cost" is confirmation of the snap description of the suspect being "up for it" - obviously... Kill him at the first opportunity. 

Composite: Defence created image to show identification problems 
See comments on that here.

Asked by Mr Justice Henriques if this four-hour delay was an "acceptable passage of time", Mr McDowell said it was the "quickest time that that team could be assembled and deployed with all the considerations that were bearing upon us that morning". 
So there isn't a team that is on standby 24/7? See previous comments about timing.

The judge then asked: "Could that have been done differently?" 

Mr McDowell said: "With hindsight, it is entirely conceivable it could have been." 
Wait a minute, McDowell said "I remain of the view that I and we did our best" Now he is saying it could have been better. Hindsight is utterly irrelevant because clearly now he knows things could have been better. 

'Not relaxed' 
The Special Branch officer in charge of the surveillance teams, codenamed Alan, told the court the delay was "totally unacceptable".

The officer, who was an acting detective chief inspector at the time, was asked by Ronald Thwaites QC, defending, if there had been a "relaxed regime" about the need for teams to get to the flats. 

" We never faced a suicide bomber or a manhunt of this significance in police history "
Det Ch Supt Timothy White 

"No, it was totally unacceptable," Alan said. "That was not my understanding. 
It was also not acceptable that the surveillance team did not push the boat out to make it clear to other parts of all this operation of death that there no no positive ID regarding the man they were following. You know. It would not be unknown to employ a blame game between two factions so that it become very difficult to positively identify a crime had where the axe must fall. If each section of the Met were to highlight/blame independent aspects of the murder then of course the presiding judge is going to form an opinion that it was a coming together of factors to which no one is to blame that caused this scandalous outcome and hence no action will be taken but procedures must be tightened up next time. While of course such anomalies can occur in unison, its abundantly clear that these anomalies are because they are lying about the whole thing. 

"Commander McDowell wanted the resources deployed as soon as possible. That was clear. There was no relaxed regime. It was immediate, really." 

The silver commander on the day, Det Supt Jon Boutcher, told the trial that without firearms support, none of the officers at the flats could have stopped a suicide bomber. 
Revealing again that the way they were go to stop these men who can strip down a bag of flour blindfold in 30 seconds, was going to be by kill first, ask questions later. Why is nobody following up, the implications of what these killers say?

The judge asked him: "Was there anything or anybody there to prevent a genuine real bomber getting into the transport system?" 

"At the location, no," Det Supt Boutcher replied. 
The judge has found more gross negligence.

Manhunt 
Detective Chief Superintendent Timothy White, who gave authorisation the night before for firearms to be used to detain the suspected 21 July bombers, also gave evidence on Wednesday. 

He told the court that the pursuit of the failed bombers was the most dangerous operation police had ever been involved in. 
No it wasn't because there were no suicide bombers, you lying worm.

"We never faced a suicide bomber or a manhunt of this significance in police history," Det Ch Supt White said. 
Once again the old spider-sence is tingling here. Why the massive hunt for men they KNOW could not kill anyone? It is my belief the fear level had to put into maximum spin, in order to make the existence of one man cease to become a reality. It would be the only way they could ever hope to try and get away with it. Blame it on the fog of "war" - a fog made up by a few at the top.

He was asked by the judge if there were circumstances under which the suspects might not be immediately arrested. 

"With public safety paramount and the positive identification of a suicide bomber, we'd do our utmost to detain that person," he replied. 
He didn't answer the question, because the answer was "We will murder on the slightest whim, not accountable to the court, outside the law and as we damn well please.

The case continues.
As do the lies.

Analysis #2 of the Murder of Jean Charles de Menezes

The Health and Safety trial currently taking place at the Old Bailey in London, sees the London Metropolitan Police (the "Met") in the dock, and is likely to be the only way we will get close to the truth regarding to the murder of an innocent man. The man is of course Jean Charles de Menezes, a young Brazilian. On this blog, Living with the Conspiracy 24/7, I will comment and raise questions about that trial which the BBC reports. These comments and questions must be answered if we ever want to live in a decent society, {today, we are very far from that ideal} and if this poor man is to get any sort of justice. My comments are in blue and follow on from BBC statements.
[See part 1 here]
 

BBC: Last Updated: Tuesday, 2 October 2007, 17:32 GMT 18:32 UK

Menezes police 'poorly briefed'

Composite: Defence created image to show
identification problems
See my article analyzing this composite here.

Firearms officers who shot Jean Charles de Menezes thought he had to be stopped "at any cost" because they were not properly briefed, a court has heard.
Unless there were briefed to kill this man, then quite simply they murdered him on their own volition and must be sentenced. If they were following orders, then those issuing those orders did so illegally as there was no indication that the selected targets would take yet more bags of dangerous chapatti flour onto the streets of London. Either way, someone is guilty of murder and MUST stand trial.
.
An Old Bailey jury heard he died on a Tube because of "obvious confusion" between police tracking him in 2005.
The end result or acceptable outcome of confusion cannot be murder. It is barmy to allow the possibility that murder can be absolves because of confusion. Are there no guidelines to follow in such cases? Do those guidelines verge on the side of caution and the preservation of human life?

Clare Montgomery, prosecuting, said commanders did "too little, much, much too late" to brief armed officers.
She is being generous. One can understand her need to avoid the wider conspiracy and stick to the narrow remit of health and safety breaches. Which of course is a great pity, not just for Jean and his family but also for justice/.

But the Met's defence said prosecutors were describing events in "near ignorance" of how police operate.
This is atrocious behaviour by the defence. They know full well they can hide their procedures behind guaranteed state secrecy so this claim can never be challenged. One could also ask, but hesitantly given the previous sentence, how does he know she is in ignorance? Wouldn’t the defence lawyer need to know how the police operate in order to ascertain his stated opinion?
If he does know, then even them, how does he know Ms. Montgomery doesn’t know? She too might have briefed! Her "near ignorance" is a red-herring because any health and safety breaches by the death squad member that day and those directing them, is not consequential on Ms. Montgomery’s ignorance (or otherwise) of police procedures.

The Metropolitan Police denies breaking health and safety laws when it mistook Mr de Menezes for a suicide bomber.
Because them murdering an innocent man doesn’t matter! But why is the BBC writing this ‘mistook’ version without the slightest challenge? It is simply parroting the proven liars in the Met and being mainstream media influences the people to believe this line. And if like me you believe they deliberately killed him.. Well, it’s just more crap onto the large steamy pile.

Completing the prosecution's opening statement in the unprecedented trial, Ms Montgomery said the firearms teams assumed that whoever was followed from a stake-out would be their target.
This is correct. The death squad was told the targets were ‘up for it’ meaning of course anyone would understand to mean if they could they would, if trapped in a corner, take the ultimate route - Kaboom! Therefore kill them before they get the chance.

As they later rushed towards Mr de Menezes sitting in a Tube carriage at Stockwell station on 22 July they were prepared to shoot because they believed by then he was a suicide bomber.
Prepared? Prepared to shoot? It is my belief that “they were going to shoot” is a far more accurate description.

In fact, she told the court, inconsistent and unconfirmed reports, combined with confusion in the control room, meant that nobody knew if the Brazilian was the suspect or not.
We need a lot more description of this confusion. How come this confusion came about? Who was in command? Who was negligent in allowing this confusion to occur? What guidelines are there about command and control centres and how they are to be run?

"Up for it"
Police investigating the failed suicide attacks of 21 July had linked one of the bombers, Hussain Osman, to the same block of flats where Mr de Menezes lived.
The 21-7 attacks were not suicide attacks. Unless the intention was to douse someone with beaten eggs, coat them with chapatti flout and fry them for 2-3 minutes just until they turn golden brown. This is a false argument in an attempt to justify extra-judicial killing.

“All that stood between London and the bombers thought to be at 21 Scotia Road were the untrained and sometimes unarmed surveillance officers” said Clare Montgomery,
Prosecuting.
It is an utter damnation that people of this experience would be given this task IF the 7-7 bombers and the 21-7 chapatti bombers were genuine. I propose amateurs were assigned because only one set of professionals were needed – those in the death squad.

But the court heard that when Mr de Menezes left his home, surveillance officers could not confirm if he was their target or an innocent commuter.
How come.? What pictures were made of the suspect? If they knew where chapatti master Osman lived wouldn’t they have known his flat number and therefore HAVE BEEN SURVEILLING HIS FRONT DOOR?????, not to mention have marksmen teams and sophisticated electronic eves dropping equipment focused on his flat? What could be more serious that would stop such teams from doing this on Osmans flat? Again, because it didn’t matter. Only the hit teams mattered. Looking at this in a wider context, it is totally fantastical to think that there would not be others to back up and try to ID this man (JC) as he left his flat. It is also impossible that there would be nobody stating behind in case they were tailing the wrong man, as it is utterly unlikely that having left the flat, then a raid team would not have burst into his flat looking for evidence. TOTALLY UNBELIEVEABLE.

At the same time, firearms officers had been told to prepare to confront a bomber "up for it". Officers took this briefing to mean they would need to prepare to shoot dead the suspect to stop him "at all costs" from entering the London Underground network.
Exactly. The meaning of “up for it” is beyond dispute. But who made this statement? What evidence was it based on? A large number of circular bread shaped objects falling from the skies of London? Perhaps the ‘party-popper’ like detonators were more dangerous than at first realized. More seriously, this tells us that these guns INTENDED TO KILL THE TARGET when they left. Nothing else was on their minds. This is illegal. Prosecutions must result. We edge nearer to the scum who realised JCdM needed to be assassinated. The person that made this “up for it” needs to be shipped by private plane to some dungeon in Syria, to be put in stress positions, standing up for over 8 hours a day, blasted with heavy metal music in a dark room while naked. Water boarded and so on until the inevitable confession is forthcoming. Sure it’s not reliable, but hey, since when have we had to dispense with political expediency? This man is is a key figure in this deadly game.

But at this point the firearms officers were four hours late to the operation, she said, leading to confusion over who was in charge in the critical moments before the shooting.
It is beyond reason that the chain of command for such a serious situation, given the potential stakes, not to have been established beforehand. There was surely a central command that had the authority to direct operations. Again, there will be guidelines on this and should they be breached then charges of negligent homicide should be filed at the very minimum.

"There was obvious confusion from the outset between the three groups of officers - those in the operations room, the surveillance officers and the firearms officers," said Ms Montgomery.
Alas Ms Montgomery, allow me to clarify. The Defence is relying on a defence of repeated, sustained and unerring human fallibility to get away with murder, and in doing so, they leave themselves open to a minimum prosecution for H&S regulation.

When one of the surveillance officers tried to clarify what to do if required to "contain" the suspect "all he got was a shrug of the shoulders", she said.
Words can’t describe the appropriate contempt for these players in murder and conspiracy.

"Prosecution wrong"
But in his opening defence statement, Ronald Thwaites QC said the death was a serious mistake - but not a crime.
Not a mistake. The word begins with ‘m’ alright but it ain’t "mistake"!

“The prosecution have started with the benefit of hindsight - and hindsight turns everyone into a brilliant problem solver” Ronald Thwaites QC, Defending.
ALL Prosecuters and ALL defence teams enter court with the benefit of hindsight you bell end, and your irony of your statement of brilliant problem solver isn’t lost in context of your bell-ended self Mr. Thwaites

He said the prosecution relied upon the benefit of hindsight and completely failed to appreciate the unprecedented challenges that police faced during the suicide attacks of July 2005.
A “challenge” or job strain, cannot be allowed to result in the murder of innocent people. The fascist legislation and state spy network pre-July 2005 was surely good enough to be effective, if it was ALLOWED to be effective

"The prosecution are attempting to dictate to the police how they should be doing their job and they are doing so from a position of near ignorance," he said.
Well Thwaitey, that the murdering an innocent man occurred, and two others were ‘close’ to getting shot (but strangely enough weren’t killed) is hardy a good sign that the police don’t need to be told how to do their job. I’d hesitate to call it ignorance that proclaims “police duties should not result in the innocent being assassinated”

"It would have the effect of putting handcuffs on the police and seriously impede their effectiveness in combating serious crime."
Thwaitey you plonker, JCdM wasn’t a criminal! What is it about that statement you don’t seem to understand. Plus, I rather think use of handcuff is appropriate, don’t you? Given that a most serious crime was committed. In such circumstances, it is customary is it not, to requite those suspected of involvement in the said crime, to be cuffed, brought to trail and sentenced appropriately.

Commanders feared that the 21 July bombers could blow themselves up in a block of flats if cornered by police - just like terrorists who struck Madrid in 2004.
You mean as the silver tounged Spanish authorities ‘say’ they did, backed by the mainstream media, but that’s a whole other conspiracy theory for another day perhaps. So, the choice here is, they blow themselves in their flats (or end up breaking the world record for the biggest chapatti while doing attempting to do so in the process), or have the potential to kill hundreds in a tube station, because nobody has mentioned that he would be shot (if the death squad was there at the time) just outside his flat. But premeditated murder by British forces didn’t happen in Sapin/Gibraltar either That too was because of challenges and confusion.

Mr Thwaites said this meant police had only one option - to devise "preliminary" tactics and allow officers to use their judgement as events unfolded.
Wrong. The options open to the police were those standard operating procedures which would have been formed part of these ‘mens’ training. Or of course, that option was a living breathing, funny functional “Shoot to Kill” policy. Which was it Thwaitey?

He attacked the prosecution's case that the officers should have done more to establish if Mr de Menezes was the bomber by showing a composite image to the jury of the Brazilian and Osman following his eventual arrest.
Aaaaah. The composite image. A most dirty and deceptive piece of work, which runs paralled to the standards of the Met and its pack of killers. Care to lend any comment to my post covering that issue Mr. Thwaites? And besides, perhaps it is a bit rich to expect gun wielding assassins, who we have already found out were going to kill, come hell or high water, to identify who it is they want to pump several bullets into on two sessions.

He asked: "How can the police be criticised for their lack of certainty about the identification of Mr de Menezes?"
UPDATE: NEW TERROR ALTERT!! Here’s the latest picture (we think) of the man that’s been seen with a peculiar interest in Chapattis. Seen frequenting the Al-Bilal Restaurant and seen looking a bomb shopping lists featuring a choice of Chapatti, Nan, Keema Nan, Perhwari Nan. Beware, he’s “up for it.”

After he’s slain, We’ll issue this composite:

Caption: See? No difference! He's just got a 'mad-eye'
that's all or a hangover. P.S. he uses prostitutes.
P.P.S he is an illegal immigrent. P.P.P.S we are
facing unprescident challenges and really, we dont
actually give a toss who this guy is, not that you
should ctriticise us for it. Whatever, he's 'up for it'

{Ed: Google images wasn’t available! but even so... }

!!!

Mr Thwaites said all facets of the prosecution case demonstrated their lack of understanding of police procedure in the middle of a crisis.
You don’t need to understand the death squads, you don’t need to understand the lies, the cover-up to know someone was targeted for liquidation and that’s exactly what happened.

"The prosecution have started with the benefit of hindsight - and hindsight turns everyone into a brilliant problem solver," he said.
With one exception perhaps Mr. ‘up for it’ bell end.

"A serious mistake was made in shooting him. But not every mistake is a crime."
Well, belly, this one is.

The case continues.

Al Gore has moved to Blackburn Lancashire.

Word has it, he’s been looking for some synchronicity between his lifestyle and the hypothesis he’s putting forward in his global warming lecture and as John Lennon told us, there are 4,000 holes in Blackburn Lancashire.

You don’t have to be a scientist to be able to debate global warming, but of course it’s rather valuable especially when the topic gets technical e.g. mechanisms and rates of CO2 cycle, effect of the sun and most importantly, HOW THE DATA IS ANALYSED AND PRESENTED. Al Gore is not (as far as I know) a scientist. Mind you, having being in politics, he’ll not be unaccustomed to selling a 6 for 9!

What’s your view? Do you also think, as I do, that 90% (or whatever % you like to represent a hefty majority) of people who express an opinion on global warming, are simply regurgitating what they’ve heard by the MSM without first processing and weighing up the for’s and against’s in a logical and reasonable way?

Now I hate the exploitation, corruption, subversion of politics, destruction, killing and pollution the many of the western oil companies are embroiled with, as I hate the wars they are connected to, and dislike of the modern lifestyle, constructed upon ‘cheap plentiful oil’, but I sincerely believe the impact WE and INDUSTRY are making towards global warming is far less important than the impact from the Sun, should it be going through a period if variability/instability. The Energy output from the Sun is so MASSIVE that it would take just a miniscule variation in that output (positive gain) to have significant cause global warming. A quick scan of celestial reports over the last few years will reveal an unusual period of heightened instability. The earths magnetic field is said to be weakening, may also somehow influence the heating mechanism of the earth.

Anyway, what exactly has Mr. Gore done? Does standing up in front of people
to crack an ‘ice-breaking’ joke about he ‘used to be the next president of the /United States’ and then proceeding to talk for an hour or two drawing upon someone else’s multimedia presentation actually warrant a Nobel Prize? While sitting before him is an audience that puts up green to get in on being green and want value for money – to be wowed by Al.

Perhaps it’s one of those occasions when those short listed are all crap but just that he’s the least crap, the kind of thing that frequently happens at the Oscars and occasionally in the Booker or Turner prizes.

Please do not misunderstand. Our outputs are likely to contribute to any global warming problem, but surely we are whistling in the wind. If it is US that’s the problem, we need to change. But are you seriously telling me you will adjust your lifestyle to leave a carbon footprint the same as the 4-5 billion people or so that live in conditions far less polluting than your self? Come on. Turning down the central heating from 24 to 22 pacifies your conscience, but really your as near ‘carbon dirty’ as before. Most of us are fooling ourselves. And you can bet your bottom dollar that becoming Greener or Green is NOT at all likely to benefit the poor and developing nations. Not on your Nelly.

P.S. Wonder how Gore explains this:

Scientists have found evidence that tropical Atlantic Ocean temperatures may have once reached 107°F (42°C)—about 25°F (14°C) higher than ocean temperatures today...between 84 million and 100 million years ago in an era when dinosaurs roamed the Earth.

or this:
"Global Temperature and Atmospheric CO2 over Geologic Time"

Sadly, I simply can't be arsed to spend more of my weekend trying to fiddly about squeezing the diagram above into 500pixels, so please here:
http://mysite.verizon.net/mhieb/WVFossils/Carboniferous_climate.html yourself and see the original graphic and read the whole page. TQ.

P.S. Al, who knows, if only at that AIPAC meeting, you didn't come across as being incincere when you tried to sell your buy their vote. Oh well.

UPDATE: Tue 16-10-07

Gerd Leipold, the executive director of Greenpeace International, pointed out to Al Jazeera that there was little doubt Gore had become more effective as an environmental campaigner since he left US politics.

Leipold might be confortable with tha becasue now Gore seems to be working in favour of Leipold's agenda, but should Gore's actions now whitewash his past? When he was VP and won the US Presidential in 2000, but Rove corruption of the US voting system helped by $Diebolds fraudulent "voting" machines, Gore bit his environmental tongue (assuming it he had one before he became jobless) becasue he had to pnader to big business. Just like Big Al fawned to AIPAC reassuing the Zionist entity that it could continue its parasite-host relationship unabated.

Gore is an opportunist. I see little or no sincerity behind the man. Like Jodas Kohn, sorry, the public package known as John Kerry, Gore's abandonment of his claim was asinine.

The quote from Leipold came from:
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/800DD334-3959-4440-ABC2-C2A571F924BA.htm
and in the same report, The Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research website, Oberg pointed to Gore's roles as vice-president to Bill Clinton, the US leader between 1993 and 2001. In that role, Gore was part of an administration that bombed Kosovo, in what was then Yugoslavia. {and we havent mentioned the depleted uranioum yet}. Later the same administration bombed Afghanistan and Sudan, in response to an attack on its embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in August 1998.

Again like Kohn, sorry, Kerry, He only criticised the war plan of Bush, not the actual war itself. He was even more gun-ho than Bush, proposing an extra 30,000 troops, which strangely is what Bush did later in the surge. Kerry thought that by being more viscious, the war would be better. i.e. The more Iraq's that ended up dead, the more "successful' the war would be.

Well messers Gore and Kohn, sorry! John Kerry, your horrible actions and desires haven't gone unnoticed.

Before you read any further… take a QUICK look at this picture. Try and remember your thoughts.

   

 

Scroll down for commentary.

                           

Keep scrolling down

                            

       

My instantaneous reaction on seeing the photo was that there may
(v.v. slight!) well be a case for not being able to make the correct ID between JCdM and Hussain Osman, I was surprised with my initial thoughts as I am a critic of the BBC and a fierce sceptic of the powers that be and their scurrilous stories especially of July 2005. I also take a position of default disbelief towards any images the BBC (the governments mouthpiece extraordinaire) or the ‘establishment’ put forward, until that is, such time when I believe that pavement railings do actually merge through peoples heads and that only 25% of so called ‘terrorists’ have a face – just about! But my negative mindset against ‘officialdom’ and MSM ‘news’, did not prevent my initial impression which actually leant towards the official ‘accidental’ killing story. Moments afterwards, however, my questioning mind came to the afore.

 

The caption that appears with the photo, says “Composite: Defence created image to show identification problems.” Note it was the DEFENCE that made this image. And of course they are going to go process the pics to support their case in tune with the previous bunch of lies and sewage that characterizes them so well.

 

Maybe you’d disagree with my initial impression and you thought they were very different, but for those that think there is a lingering similarity, please continue to read this post.

 

In a previous blog entry, I had created my own composite graph of FTSE and gold price. In the process, I rejected some pre-finalized versions, as I felt the stretches and position of overlay I made, didn’t present a fair picture (actually it was easier to ‘enhance’ my point than detract from it). So, it wasn’t as straight forward to accomplish and there are obvious room for distortion when doing so.

 

So when I came across this composite of JC and Hussain Osman immediately I was able to recall my experiences of making a composite, and then started to notice some points for concern.

 

1) The faces seem to have been scaled to have the same hairline to chin distance. The chance of both men having this similar attribute is surely not likely, and if they are in fact different, then the photos have been adjusted to make them look similar.

 

I have split the composite and mirrored each side and made my own composite of the whole face of these men (Yes, I know this too will not be an accurate reflection of both mens face as each dise of everyones face is in face not symmetrical, but until I get proper photos, this is the best I can do). Here’s the result:

 

 

Do they look so similar now?

 

How about if I adjust the ‘length’ of each mans face?

 

 

Obviously I have switched the position of each mans face, but why not? There is nothing sacred about putting JC always on the right. Do these two men look the same in set 2?

 

 

How about Now?

 

I could go on. Why are the hairstyles of both men not shown? And remember it’s likely that the mug shot of Osman was taken after he was imprisoned. I wonder if he looked the same before; beard, hair length etc. Did Hussain Osman have his hair shaved by is captors before this picture was taken? Why not use an older pic such was what he looked like on 21-7 (if he did actually look different)? Same for JC – why not use a different pic? Given the lies and demonization of JCdM, is it unlikely the police might have shaved Osman’s hair to look like a pic of JCdM?

 

The next point is the symmetry of faces. If you examine a picture of your face, you will notice the left hand side is not the same as your right, your eyes might be at different heights, your ears might be slightly different, one side of your face might ‘droop’ more than the other. The pic the defence made, gives JC’s left side and Hussain Osman’s right side. I wonder if the opposite side of each mans face was used then glued together, would it have made the men look less similar, more similar or give no change. Do you think the graphic artist doing this only did one side without looking at the other combination? Do you think there wasn’t a suit/spook looking over his should saer saying “can’t you do something to make it look a bit more similar”?

 

I am aware that my mug shots fall foul of not being a true picture what each of the men actually look for the same reason of asymmetry, whereas my mug shots portray perfect symmetry, but it’s the best I can do and is surely not more disreputable than what the Met’s defence team have done.

 

We could play around with contrast brightness and other Photoshop-like goodies. But I don’t think there’s much point. I believe from this simple analysis, demonstrates that the composite photo the BBC has shown (and made?), photos which only show HALF of each mans face, are a gross distortion which steers (deliberately?) people to giving credence to the official story that he was accidentally killed.

 

Finally, why if Jean Charles de Memezes had to be shot, as clearly, they have expressed in no uncertain terms, and of course when JC posed no threat at all, then why weren’t the subsequent people were rounded up – those actually were the men on the wanted list, visited with the same dual bullet session treatment?

 

And If like me you believe 7-7 was a government operation killing 52 of their own people, and that it is out of this world that a bunch of chapatti flour people would be so lunatic as to even simulate that 2 weeks later. Then, if like me you discount both events as being the work of the dark forces at play, then you simply cannot sustain thir argument that they murdered of JCdM to prevent terrorism, because they knew exactly the nature of that transpired on 7-7 and 21-7. That is IF the commanders of the slaying of JCdM were operating independently of those who orchestrated the 7-7 killing and the 21-7 hoax.

   

“Hi Hussain.”

“Excuse me, do I know you”

“No but I know you. Listen. Listen carefully. Here’s the deal. I don’t kill you and brutalise your family {names listed} in fact I can help you. I’ll even ensure after all this you’ll all be protected and get a hansom reward. All you have to do is walk around a bag of Chapatti flour and puff a cloud of it near some public transport around London . Pretend to be a suicide bomber. Later, you might see that we’ve killed someone, but don’t worry, I’ll make sure no harm come to you. Trust me.”

“What? What kind of scum are you? Who the hell are you? Get away from me. I’m calling the police”

A badge is shown and a subtle pulling back of a jacket reveals a holster

“Hussain, I’m afraid you have little choice. You wouldn’t want anything unfortunate to happen you your little sister {name} now would you? Its chapatti flour, nobody will get hurt trust me Hussain. Trust me.”

 

This of course would never happen because the British government is perfect and never does bad things and never kills people and never goes to war and is never corrupt and is benevolent and is loyal and is just and is the best government in the whole wide world, and in the solar system and in the galaxy and in the universe.

 

IMPORTANT UPDATE: I've just spotted something VERY NASTY because its VERY SNEEKY!!! 

I think I know why JC's face is shown in the right! If you look at the Osman half of the pic, you see a shadow! This shadow has only now just caught my eye, and I've been looking at this pic for what must be cumulatively over half an hour already. And the shadow is rather big and only on one side! The shadow is due to Osmans ear, meaning the light source is coming from the top right of the pic. That is why JCdM's face is on the right because the minds expectation will necessarily be to see a lighter shade of skin in that location - being closer to the light. The effect of this will be lessen the importance and/or impact of Osmans darker skin - your mind is likely to accept that darker skin is not because Osman is a different person, but because his face is in the 'shadow zone' and therefore the picture is but one man so you are more likely yo believe the Met lies. I almost missed the subtly of it. You sneaky murdering bastards! Screw you! Rot in hell!

 

What follows is a commentary using the BBC reporting covering the heath and safety legal case arising from the savage slaying of Jean Charles de Menezes. It is the best we can do to find a) the official story of the his murder and b) to get at the truth.

The BBC is guilty of extreme prejudice towards the government and wider establishment (not surprisingly as it’s a governmental organization). But it is nonetheless useful to use it for analysis as the establishment never challenge its findings (unless some rogue journalist actually manages to discover and broadcast something newsworthy, like Andrew Gilligan when he TRUTHFULLY exposed the lies of the government in sexing up an Iraq report, and did well to highlight the role of one of its main architects of that tome of deceit. Yes this war criminal is of course the evil bastard Alistair Campbell. Pity the murderous thug didn’t drink himself to death as if he did, over one million Iraqi’s would have been more likely to be alive today.)

I will also be blogging on subsequent BBC reports time permitting.

  

BBC: 1-Oct-07

Police 'failure' in Menezes death 

Jean Charles de Menezes was killed by firearms officers

Correction: He was assassinated. The fudge ‘was killed’, suggests the possibility of an accidental event and actually detracts from the horror of what actually happened. 

Police firearms officers killed Jean Charles de Menezes and risked the lives of Londoners in a catalogue of errors, the Old Bailey has been told.

It heard the Brazilian was shot seven times because of "fundamental failures" in Metropolitan Police planning.

The case is on the dereliction of a health and safety is, sadly then one cannot really expect a criminal case to establish the guilt of the scum that murdered JCdM. As such terms like "fundamental failures" necessarily have to form the focus of the trial. 

One armed officer put a gun into a colleague's chest and a Tube driver was chased down a tunnel.

 

The force denies breaking health and safety laws when it mistook Mr de Menezes for a suicide bomber in 2005.

As it denies EVERYTHING it is guilty of because it NEVER does anything wrong as if it is Godlike in its operation. 

Opening the unprecedented trial of the force at the Old Bailey, Clare Montgomery QC, prosecuting, said that the Metropolitan Police was subject to the same health and safety obligations as any other employer or public body in the UK.

Absolutely, but the Met simply don’t believe the law should apply to them. They are ‘special.

 

 22 JULY 2005: EVENTS

0455: Bomber Hussain Osman linked to address

0600: Surveillance team reach flats

0933: De Menezes leaves flats

0939: Tailing officers unsure who he is

1002: De Menezes reaches Stockwell Tube

1005: Armed police take over

1008: De Menezes reported shot

 

These laws were there to ensure public safety, she said, but a "shocking and catastrophic" failure to stick to a clear strategy to apprehend one of the 21 July 2005 bombers had left the public at risk of being blown up and ultimately led to Mr de Menezes' avoidable death.

 

"It was the police operation itself that invited the disaster that occurred," she said.

 

"We say that the police planned and carried out the operation so badly that the public was put at risk and Jean Charles was killed."

I wouldn’t be so generous. I believe the operation was a huge ‘success’ for them as it is my personal belief they wanted to kill him. Because the events the day before were so surreal and so his murder the day after. 

Ms Montgomery said that in fast moving events, detectives had identified one of the suspected 21 July suicide bombers, Hussain Osman, within hours of the botched attacks.

How did they do this? To do this within hours, truly, is an immense achievement. Anyone spot the similarity to the ‘identification’ of the 9-11 suspects? 

They linked him to a small block of flats in Tulse Hill, south London which was also the home of Mr de Menezes.

Again, I want to know how this was achieved as I need reassurance to know this story, a miracle of efficiency isn’t a fabrication.

 

<blockquote>The fact the police ended up pointing a gun at another police man and mistaking a terrorised train driver for a bomber gives you a clue as to just how far wrong the operation had gone <blockquote><small>
Clare Montgomery QC</small>

Not only that, but it shows they were only interested in killing one man. For there is a complete lack of a plausible discriminating reason as to why they should only kill JCdM yet leave the other two men alive when clearly they display some degree of belief that the other men had some involvement with JCdM.  

But when Mr de Menezes left his home and was followed, neither the officers on the ground, nor those in operational control at Scotland Yard, were certain of his identity.

I cannot believe they were not certain he was their target. If they were not sure, then there would still have been an team left at Tulse Hill making sure the actual suspect was not still in the flats. Was there a team left there? How many men were on duty in the surveillance op? What were the operatives doing that remained behind at the flat? I want to hear a record of their communications. I want to see the guidelines pertaining to surveillance of suspects and the assessment reports of these surveillance training. 

One spotter told commanders it was "ridiculous" to ask him for a "percentage certainty" that the target was Osman.

This is utterly nonsensical. The spotter MUST have been briefed as to the appearance and characteristics of the suspect. He would have known that comms were likely to ask to confirm when the suspect was on the move etc. It shows the utter lack of professionalism or that a patchwork quilt of excuses has been sewn together in order to cover the grave crime that occurred. 

"By comparing the photo of Jean Charles with a photo of Hussain Osman, you may understand why some of the officers at least thought Jean Charles might be Osman," said Ms Montgomery. "None of them said he was definitely Osman."

Then how could they have let a primed firearms team go in and kill a man they didn’t know was the suspect or not? Ms Montgomery because she is not investigating the killing is forced to entertain some of the illogical lies of the day and of course inevitably lead her to say some unavoidably daft things at times. I want to see which photos were shown to these spotters? Where did the photos originate from? Show me, because I accuse you to a deliberate killing. I don’t believe the Mets lies for one second. 

This uncertainty continued until the very last moments of his life when commanders at Scotland Yard and firearms officers on the ground make a series of rapid decisions which dictated who was going to try to arrest the electrician, the court heard.

I want to see the guidelines and legal authorisation allowing police to use lethal force in these circumstances such as what those guidelines say about when the suspect clearly isn’t an imminent threat and what officers must do if there is any doubt as the identity of a suspect, both in the surveillance and firearms context. 

Scotland Yard's operation room was noisy and staffed by tired and drained staff, the court heard. More and more officers were crowding in as news of the operation spread.

Really? I want to know the duty roster for that day. I want to know who was authorised to enter the operation room, who actually was in the room, when the entered and when they left. I want a headcount of who was in the room. I want to know where they were, I want to know what they were doing / what their function was. Again, I want to see the documented procedures relating to operations rooms.   

As surveillance officers sat near Mr de Menezes on the tube, firearms officers "burst" onto the platform, said Ms Montgomery. One surveillance officer, codenamed 'Ivor', alerted them to Mr de Menezes' position.

How did Ivor know they were firearms officers? If they were uniformed then that’s understandable, but how did the killers know Ivor was the spotter and how did he alert the death squad as to the position of JC? Given that later (9^th Oct) Ivor nastily flouted that JC was taking anti-surveillance measures, then he would have alerted control as to this fact and would have been very cautious personally, or cautioned by comms, that JC would have therefore been likely to be highly alert as to any other suspicious(surveillance) activity going around him. Ivor was afterall, close enough to JC to pin him. JC surely would have noticed and therefore Ivor’s story seems unlikely. And why would the firearms team be uniformed when they thought JC was likely to set off a bomb? The sight of a uniform would be a cue to detonate any bomb. Remember, they said they killed him to ensure he didn’t detonate a bomb, so then why wear uniform? And if they were not in uniform how did Ivor ID them? If they were in uniform, it’s likely they were following standard operating procedures. So lets see them procedures and what they say in relation to the other pigs ear proceedings they claim happened that day. What about crowd issues? A number of problems rise if a large amount of people were present that day. Lets have the CCTV and audio comms of that day please. Come on prove to me your not lying. Terrified driver

"As the armed officers entered the train, Jean Charles stood up," said the lawyer. "He was grabbed by 'Ivor' and pushed back into his seat.

 

"Two firearms officers leant over Ivor who was holding Jean Charles and [one] put his pistol against Jean Charles' head and fired. He was shot seven times and died immediately."

He was pushed INTO HIS SEAT? How does this explain the blood pool on the floor? Why are his shoes off? Why is his head a long way from the pool of blood on the floor? eye-witness reports that he was on the FLOOR! [1]

 

At the same time, one of the armed officers physically dragged 'Ivor' onto the platform while holding a gun against his chest. Ivor shouted he was a policeman and heard more shots in the carriage.

I can picture the man who pumped the extra shots into de Menezes’ body as being overcome with hate and riddling his body with more bullets to satisfy that hate. A bit like that British forces cameraman in the British base in Basrah where British troops grabbed a bunch of Iraqi kids, took them into their base and proceeded to know 7 bells out of them, much to the sadistic pleasure of the British cameraman The extra shots constitute an unnecessary use of firearms in a public place so in relation to this court case, he is guilty, in addition to being guilty of murder. 

Terrified, the tube driver fled his cab - but was chased by another armed officer into the tunnel.

So Ivor and the driver were not killed but JCdM was. Why? What possible reason did these officers have almost shoot Ivor or the driver? How come they were confident these two other men were not going to detonate a suicide bomb. A likely answer is they knew others were no threat because they knew JCdM was no threat, but no matter not, their orders were to ensure JCdM never lived to see another day. 

Ms Montgomery said: "You may think, members of the jury, that the fact the police ended up pointing a gun at another police man and mistaking a terrorised train driver for a bomber gives you a clue as to just how far wrong the operation had gone."

 

[1] One eye witness reported hearing shouts of "Get down. Get down. Get down." and that Menezes "looked like a cornered rabbit, a cornered fox - absolutely terrifed. He half tripped and was half pushed to the floor".

Source: http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1738613

Additional summary of the murder: http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/seymour100805.html

Turkey has withdrawn it ambassador from Washington and the worlds mainstream media is busy hyping its own declared ‘chill’ in relations between the two, broadcasting pictures of ‘mentally enslaved’ Turks, protesting at how the US is peculiarly recognising the great crimes of some dead dude, Enver Pasha, who blew his genocidal death kiss across to the Armenian people.

How comical to see this charade played out when in fact these two nations are like twin sisters. Both are very friendly to the godless tyranny occupying Palestine, both are fiercely secular nationalist countries, both have poor human rights records to identify the point of this article, both are instrumental in the partitioning of Iraq.

Strangely, and utterly conveniently, a ‘PKK bomb’ (false-flag almost certainly) strikes, and purely to good US fortunate, Turkey starts talking about formally invading Northern Iraq (There are reports that they are already in northern Iraq, albeit mostly static, confined to bases, waiting to the ‘big day’). All this just happens to coincide with the fact that the US’s plan for the take over of Iraqs oil is failing spectacularly thanks to the glorious Iraqi freedom fighters who show astounding courage and success in delivering a military defeat upon the invading slime who illegally invaded and devastated their country.

To smoothen the partition of Iraq, close Zionist buddy, Turkey, in order to minimise the Muslim backlash (and thereby risk losing secular Turkey back to a centre of God fearing Islam, fuelling the growing Muslim voice for the restoration of the Caliphate) needs what its Zionist circle regard as internationally sellable justistification to annexe N. Iraq, placing its rich oil fields in the hands of the Turks, whereupon it will be easily brought to Haifa, and as a bonus, allowing the Turks to gorge itself upon Kurdish blood in the proves. That genocide will be fine however. Don’t worry. Turkey is ‘our’ buddy. So just like Saddams alleged genocide of the Kurds, the Turkish bloodbath will similarly see London, Paris and Washington utterly silent because our man does the biz. This time, however, we aren’t bearing gifts to Turkey in the form of nasty chemical weapons that people like Donald Rumsfeld and Doughlas Hurd gave to our old favourite strong man, Saddam, Hussein.

With Zio buddy Turkey in the North of Iraq, the US killers can concentrate on the south, training their corrupted death squads (who happen to be Shiites) which a number of respected analysts [Al Jazeera’s, much respected Jasim al-Azzawi and Hoda Abdel Hamid] say exist under the name of the Badr Brigades, being under the control of the Shiite cleric Hakim.

(English) Al Jazeera's Jasim al-Azzawi

(Englsih) Al Jazeera's Hoda Abdel Hamid

The death squads are to eliminate the Sunni resistance that is hammering the USUK invaders into the ground. Keeping the Iraqi resistance (Sunnis) busy, the US plans to direct operations from its permanent base(s), conducting defence of the pipelines and the bases themselves from Iraqi puppet intelligence and US airpower. The US cannot defend these bases and pipelines with it’s (defeated) standing (buried!) army.

The attempted split of Iraq was always going to be their plan. It’s what they have always done – use borders to secure political control. Turkey is simply putting in yet another star performance.

UPDATE: 13-Oct-07: Al Jazeera correspondent Hoda Abdel Hamid, is in Northern Iraq today and reports the Turks have been building roads in northern Iraq for a number of months now. It's clear why.

Breaking news: Turkish Tanks Attack Iraq

UPDATE 2:
Turkey already has 7 bases in Northern Iraq 25 km inside Iraq, left there since 1997. It is also reported that these bases can easily be beefed up. Here's what Hoda reported a few days ago: Attacks on Iraq intensifying recently: Feb 5 attacks, 23 artillery shells, 21 attacks 171 artillery rounds. October (so far) 6 shells.

And Assad is giving support to Turkey. Wow. Well done Assad. You are showing your true colours. You want rid of the Kurds from Syria too (about 10% population) so you would support a new Turkish violation of International law and another genocide. Well done Assad. Tell me, wasn't Syria also one of the cuntries that took in rendered people and tortured them for the sake of the US and UK? You've got your admires well charmed Mr Assad.

You know, every day since becoming aware of the crimes of my country, I think to myself 'It's not possible to loathe it any more', yet almost every other day, I come across more lies and acts of horror that the vermin in Westminster and the establishment they serve, deliver upon the world. Really, it is astounding.

They hordes from hell are relentless in their lies and attempted canonization into their order (i.e. demonization) of the horrifically murdered innocent man Jean Charles de Menezes (JCdM).

We had stories of him being an illegal immigrant, of using prostitutes and so on. Now we get this unquestioning BULLSHIT from the BBC...

Title: Menezes 'acted in suspicious way'
Note the title isn't:
Police claim Menezes 'acted in suspicious way'
Neither is it:
Officer…. claims Menezes 'acted in suspicious way'
Neither is it:
Latest lie: Menezes 'acted in suspicious way'
nor::
New lie against innocent Brazillian murdered by British killer cops.

Once again the BBC through its spineless corrupt journalism help propagate another outrageous lie against JCdM which has the purpose of excusing a assassination and a fiendish crime.

Listen to this: “Ivor”, an undercover officer who held Mr de Menezes as he was being shot multiple times in the head, told the court how he had earlier seen the Brazilian get off a bus in Brixton town centre - and then very quickly rejoin it.

Does that sound spooky to you? Just like a movie. But wait, did Ivor tell us that JC headed off towards “Brixton Underground Station - but after 20 metres turned back when he saw the station was temporarily closed. “ No, he didn’t. That was left to the BBC[1]. Whose senses, observational powers and alertness should have been on maximum overdrive and noticed a tube station closes? Yip, our Ivor.

Ivor continues, “Criminals employ anti-surveillance techniques”. Listen you apologist for murder, As JCdM was innocent, he couldn’t have been employing “anti-surveillance techniques”. You filth! Do you have no training that states words to the effect of “confirmation of a suspect can be assumed when a number of the following “anti-surveillance techniques” are employed…” Because there has to be a mechanism to distinguish guilt beyond reasonable doubt that the suspect being pursued is in fact guilty and not an innocent member of the public was, especially when the suspect is to be snuffed out later.

“He was dressed almost identically to the suspect and carrying a rucksack.” – WHAT?
What suspect? How did the lines of communication between JCdM and this mythical rucksack man get crossed?

IT’S UTTER BOLLOCKS!

I will blog on this case soon, listing stinging questions and demands for information on a number of aspects of the case.

[1] http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7035620.stm

A USan truth hero. Superb my old son. Superb!

Mr. Moulton Steel did a marvelous job at trying to spread the word of US terrorism to Shoppers in Wal-Mart of all places! He made various announcements over the PA system.

Check out that link (clik the pic) and watch the Video featuring this great young man of courage and conviction. Listen to these great public announcements:

"Attention Wal-Mart Shoppers. 9-11 was an inside job. Google WTC 7 came down in 6.5 seconds. Thank you."

"Attention Wal-Mart shoppers. Google Operation Northwoods. 1962 Plan to carry out Terrorism. Thank you."

"Goto Inforwars.com or Prisonplanet.com to get more information about government sponsored terrorism."

"Never before in the history of the world has the modern steel structure collapsed from fire. Google Operation Northwoods, WTC7 and terrorstorm."

"Project for the new American Century is a neo-conservative think-tank which has members containing including Dick Cheney and Jeb Bush."

"Can I get Dick Cheney to the Front Please. Dick Cheney, you are wanted for the Crimes of 9-11."

Quality! This is what we need to do - encourage the vast numbers of people who haven't a clue about 9-11 and 7-7 and Iraq and... to start enquiring about the governments use of terror and false-flags for advancing their evil agenda.

To 'Mr. Moulton Steel', may God reward you and those like you.

Update: I should say Mr. Moulton Steel did this act in Clagary, Alberta Canada, and so is more likley to be a Canadian citizen, not a USan. A wise choice perhaps or he might be wearing an orange jumpsuit sitting in chain-link cage in occupied Cuba, being tortured right now

A week shy of 2 months ago, I made a post entitled "Stock markets crash (but will recover - again)" In which I said the 'crash/panic/end' {choose worrysome term} was a hoax. I said this becasue the price of Gold was still relatively low, and that the 'markets' would recover. For this I was called astonishingly naïve Despite requests for an explanation as to why this thought was naïve. I got no response.

So, it's compo\etition time. See if you are as naïve as I.
Guess whats happened the the stockmarket?
To assist, here's a little clue...

Yes. Astonishingly naïve.

Now look at gold. The markets are recovering but the price of Gold is reaching new highs.

When the system is purged and the Indians have given up most of their gold to buy that new equivalent of a morris minor and have to pay through their nosr for bread and the cardboard box for the nights kip, and with most of the chinese too, then, after all the reaping, will come the REAL crash.

One strange thing: Gold before 9-11 was VERY CHEAP. Why?

UPDATE:
New combined chart:
.
Here I've taken the Gold trend (black) and overlayed it on the FTSE trend (blue) to try and mant them shadow each other. The height at which I overlated gold was is not therefore quantified. But up until about May 07 you can see some good correlation. But after that the relative share price to gold price was quite high. Then, early May, gold becomes relatively cheaper than shares. Now If you think the sub-prime thing is a hoax does that chart lend creedence to that assertion? Well... Yes, I think it does. You sell your shares to buy the cheaper gold from May until August then you leak POTTY stories about sub-prime worries. Then AFTER the share price crash and when there are bargains to be had and gold jumps in price, you sell the gold to buy the shares again at VERY LARGE PROFIT MARGINS. Now, as I've said, Gold is the big mamma of wealth. So, there is one more stage to go... The Price of gold relative to shares must plummet again so that the shares can be traded BACK IN AGAIN for yet more gold. If my little throey is correct, then expect to see the price of gold fall again. The price of gold used to telephoned in by one of the Famies of the International bankers (oooh how strange) Now it is done differently - what level of manipulation - who knows. So, all this shows a double harvest. The economy can easily be talkied up and is boosted by an expansion of the money supply.

How boost the money supply? - What better way to talk up the ecomony than for the BoE to say NR investments are Guarnteed. 2-4 billion of withdrawls come back in. And the NR pays huge amounts of interest back to the BoE! Classic! And of course you make NR pay the money into a 'trust fund' that the BoE 'looks after' a lot of it as a 'new security regulation'. Anyone know exactly what the deal between NR and the BoE is over these extraordinary guarntees by the BoE are?

Hey presto by just expending some air, investors return and the Share price rockets. The shares are turned back into gold some time later. And it didn't cost the Govt a penny. All the BoE had to do is hatch some devious plan that in the worst case senario, will result in the BoE NOT having to guarntee the NR's investors. How can that be achieves? You sell NR to a FOREIGN company before it collapses. A FOREIGN company that knows it can go on a spending spree of NR's last remaining cash until the bell tolls. So angry investors are left pennyless while the foreign owners (actaully Brits who opened an offshore shadow company) drive around London in the latest Mercedes.

Ever wonder how people so filthy rich so quick when after 50 years of hard work you only have a crappy pension to keep you worried till the end of your days if it will last long enough (If you were lucky enough not to have Maxwell or more recently Brown steal it if from you) while others are living the life of Riley?

So Panic like hell if NR gets sold off to a 'foreign' company.

UPDATE: Having confidently asserted a visible hoax was being played out, the sublime sub-prime hoax, and for that, I apologise again for being "astonishingly naïve", becasue today, 11 October 2007, we can see the FTSE is a WHOPPING great, insummountable 64.9 points behind the highest value it has ever been, despite the "Global Credit Squeeze" which was impossible to solve, by say, restructuring in loans, or their classic trick - extending credit, or the other dozen or so unheard of ways in which to satve off economic armageddon. Lets just ignore the fact that the UNITED STATES supra-hoax, is not a UK hoax, not to mention that the link to British banks to this instantaneously appearing bad loan problem is pretty slender. Lets also close our eyes to the NEW DOW JONES INDUSTRIAL AVERAGE which is at record highs, as are the Asian markets.

Magic.

Index Value: 6,689.20
Trade Time: 6:53AM ET
Change: 56.20 (0.85%)
Prev Close: 6,633.00
Open: 6,633.00
Day's Range: 6633.00 - 6697.60
52wk Range: 5,821.70 - 6,754.10
(source: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=%5EFTSE&t=1y&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=)

In the US (unsurprisingly), yet another killing at the hands of cops has taken place. This time killing their own.

Scum cop trigger happy cop
can't pull trigger any more

The man killed was a 20 year old cop, Tyler Peterson, a nasty piece of scum who had just shot ank killed a number(4) of other people beforehand. However, it is far from clear how he was in turn shot by what seems like a Forest County sniper.

I remember some years back, another man who stole a M60 tank, was deliberately killed after the tank had become immobilized.

It's time that it was made illegal for cops to have firearms and that only civilians can bear arms and form militias as stipulated in second amendment of the US constitution, because cops must not be allowed to have the power to dispense the ultimate sentence.

We in the UK have evil killer 'cops' too. 2 years ago, they deliberately assassinated an innocent man (who I believe was suspected of having information relating to the UK governments killing of 52 people in London, July 7th 2005). These killer 'cops' protected from prosecution by utter scum within the UK establishment, including mass murderer Tony Bliar, and Ian Bliar who reeled of huge lies and disinformation to cover up their dark crimes.

Jean Charles De Menezes. An Innocent man, murdered then demonised by British killer cops.

Noam Chmosky's been a bit slow lately.

But, he has come up trumps in his article supporting what I've proclaimed for a long time now (which in turn was partly inspired by the fantastic Channel Four report called "Mark Thomas: Weapons Inspector "Mark takes on the role of UNTHOM weapons inspector, and sets out to find WMD - not in Iraq - but in Britain and the US"[1] You can watch it and download it here: http://www.indybay.org/uploads/unthom.rm)

{Update:
It is also good to see Ray McGovern (ex-CIA intelligence analyst) start to criticise the Zionist lobby having in the past made me angry at what seemed like a deliberate reluctance to address the problem. His article is entitled: "So Who’s Afraid of the Israel Lobby?"
- See also: Unmasking AIPAC, By William Cook. Also, very pleasing indeed is the Mighty American Historian, Howard Zinn, coming into action against the Zionist filth that is the singlemost greatest danger to ALL good people on the planet. Howard has written a brief letter "Overcoming Zionism : A Message from Howard Zinn on behalf of the Committee for an Open Discussion of Zionism". From these heavyweights starting now to criticize Zionism , I bet the scum are getting nervous.}

{Update to the Update:
McGovern still has a LONG, LONG way to go and still is poor at connecting the dots (always puzzling for an intelligence Analyst}. He like most people think that the US is the big chief and Isreal is the little beggar boy. NO! That is totally wrong. The US political class have NO power in the US becasue they do NOT control the finances. It is the usual suspects - the International bankers who are the masters. The last dot is to join up them to the Khazer converts and the money lenders old. Now, what is that link? ummm... errr...}

The Nuclear powers that signed the NPT are criminal states. They are in open, thick-skulled defiance of International treaties and therefore international law. And they upgrade/renew their weapons. Remember the disgusting French Nuke tests a few years back in the South Pacific? Leaving a never ending source of deadly pollution and a huge zone of aquatic mortality in its wake? Funny how they didn't test it in la mer off the coast of France. And then there's Russia’s latest missiles and warheads and the British ones as well as South Korean developments to make a nuclear warhead (I have little doubt those procedures are on going) and forgotten about Australia - Although I have heard NOTHING on the matter, I could well believe their have their own nuclear program {Australia is a global source of Uranium}

How to stop these mad bastards from threatening to destroy the planet? I don't think we can {theres a prophecy to be fulfilled}, but that shouldn't stifle the forthcoming revolution, which currently is in the "Inform" stage.

Do NOT tolerate your government having these weapons.
We need: TOTAL NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT NOW!

[1] source: "TheDossier" http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/video_cover-ups.htm

Marion Jones. Pretty, and a wee bit scarey

The enigmatic Grace Jones - also pretty and VERY scarey

She's After reading a post on Cool Amie's site which mentioned steroids etc in sport, A puzzling question struck me.

If Marion 'six pack' Jones was taking performance enhancing substances, then how come she was NEVER found guilty of doping? All winners of races must submit to a mandatory drugs test. Wasn't she ALWAYS clean?

The story goes her coach (involved with a number of other drugs cases in the US BTW: personally, I'd like to see any remaining Carl Lewis samples re-examined, then re-examined again) gave her drugs without her knowledge.

How then was it NEVER detected?

Athletes have lists of substances they are not allowed. The metabolites of these substances can be analysed for. Doesn't the fact that she never tested positive fot these substances, i.e. they were never in her urine etc, mean that she was never taking compounds that were banned on that list?

If she took other substances that were not on the list (e.g. Fried blobfish) and her performance was better than if she was eating coco-pops, then she wasn't breaking any rules.

P.S. Wasn’t Linford Christie was a drugs cheat - twice over? I don’t recall much fuss over him.

Linford - post drugs bender?

Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi has
always insisted he is innocent

1) Lockerbie bombing.

Those good souls who don't believe at the drop of a hat what our beloved[sic] government tell us, and those good people who actually scrutinise the issues at hand, often in the process hooking the writhing maggots embedded in 'the system', have for YEARS been asking hard hitting and relevant questions about Lockerbie.

The lack of continuity and/or logic, in addition to reports by witnesses and those involved, has revealed highly damning and criminal acts perpetrated by those very same establishment worms. Example: that the CIA planted evidence - the circuit board, and now the DOCUMENTS relating to the circuit board seem like a CIA forgery! All this has been in the minds of many for ages, and this was information that was ALWAYS in it's own right, strong enough and significant enough to act upon.

Now however, that the MSM are grudgingly asking these questions, all those slime bags who taunted, ridiculed and ostracised those who refused to accept the government lies, begin to 'question' simply because it is in the mainstream media (MSM) and not for any other reason, as MOST OF THESE FACTS, QEUSTIONS OR LOGICAL INFERENCES ARE NOT NEW.

You scum! You finger pointing jerks. Where is the apology? Where is the shame, the embarrassment? Where is the humility?, more importantly - HAS THE LESSON BEEN LEARNED? It hasn't has it? Yet another set of lies and frame-ups has been proven (before you adored ‘MSM mind filter’ started looking at it) but you still continue to make peoples lives difficult and appear stand-offish to those who don't just stop at questioning Lockerbie, but other issues like 7-7, 9-11, Oklahoma, Samarrah and Basrah. People who demand the full unadulterated truth, and consequently justice for, the whole range of Government lies and murderous black-ops.

Read here: 'Secret' Lockerbie report claim
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/7023397.stm
so your MSM mental prison guard will authorise you not to believe everything you are told.

Now... Let's start asking about the strange suitcases, the drugs and the CIA's involvement in the international narcotics trade, the US Republican party and those who control them. where did that circuit board come from? Where did the documents relating to the circuit board come from? Who supplied it etc etc etc. Who messed about the luggage trollies / loading bays? What companies or individuals were responsible for baggage and/or airport security? COME ON, where's the follow up! Like WHO forged those "oil Contracts" about George Galloway, Who forges the Niger Yellowcake documents. WHO WHO WHO???

The nasty red faced BBC - scrub that; the BBC is far too arrogant to show embarrassment, have the nerve to go on about political expediency that Libya was put in the dock, WHEN THEY INSTANTY DISPLAY THE SAME MANIPULATION/EXPEIDENCY in their accusations about Syria and Iran.

For heavens sake! You goldfish idiots cant even learn when in the same LESSON. Yeah I'm angry!

But wait, there's more...

"No court is likely get to the truth, now that various intelligence agencies have had the opportunity to corrupt the evidence," he told the BBC.

Which what the 'intelligence' agencies have become. They don't gather intelligence any more, they MANUFACTURE it. Intelligence is politicized!

Not only that but...

The review board, however, insisted it had "found no basis for concluding that evidence in the case was fabricated by the police, the Crown, forensic scientists, or any other representatives of official bodies or government agencies".

So it was by accident that these circuit boards turned up. It was regrettable that traces of circuitry just happened to have an affinity for Megrahi's clothes. It was unfortunate that baggage was strangely left unattended.

Where the hell is 'V' when you need him?
{ - He's in our minds. We keep him locked in there!}

Rachel Corrie. A selflsess and brave American who lost her own life protecting others.
She was horrendously crushed to death when a member of the Israeli oppression force
(a.k.a. Israeli army) to kill her. 17 March 2003

Israel’s Toy Soldiers

By Chris Hedges

10/01/07 "ICH" -- -- If you are a young Muslim American and head off to the Middle East for a spell in a fundamentalist “madrassa,” or religious school, Homeland Security will probably greet you at the airport when you return. But if you are an American Jew and you join hundreds of teenagers from Europe and Mexico for an eight-week training course run by the Israel Defense Forces, you can post your picture wearing an Israeli army uniform and holding an automatic weapon on MySpace.

The Marva program, part summer camp part indoctrination, was launched in Israel in 1981.  It allows participants, who must be Jewish and between the ages of 18 and 28, to fire weapons, live in military barracks in the Negev desert and saunter around in an Israeli military uniform saluting and taking long hikes with military packs.  The Youth and Education Corps of the Israel Defense Forces run four 120-strong training sessions a year. 

Read more at Information clearing house. ICH - Here!

Hi Stef and all. Turns out the laptop drive was dying, and I've lost 30Gb of data/research!

I brought it to a small 'joey' shop (most small PC shops are full of Joeys - I know, I used to run one, and I include myself as one of the Joeys!) They weren’t able to fix it, despite having a de-toothed laptop on a display shelf, accompanied with a MS wordart A4 printout saying "We can fix Laptops". Oh Humm. Well one good thing that came of it was a rather interesting software CD they left in the drive. Ha ha! Previously in that same shop, I saw some customers taking what I presume was a repaired PC. Lo and behold it made the characteristic rattle of a loose screw inside the case. Classic!

In desperation, I asked Packard bell / NEC for an estimate. After 1 1/2 days they replied and said it would cost more than a new reasonable spec laptop.

I took it to another "Morgan" kind of shop for an estimate. They advised me not to repair it. It has a number of other faults... Cracked screen, dead CDRW, dead battery. In the end I had to resign myself to the fact it had died.

The 2nd hand laptops of the spec I needed were sold out (work demands I have a certain spec), so DAMN, I have to buy a new one. What a horrible feeling. My boycott needs to be breached through necessity. I didn't take that step lightly. So I bought the lowest Spec (still pretty powerful!) so that INTEL / AMD and hence the US treasury would only benefit minimally from my purchase. The Boycott continues. Unless absolutely necessary, I will maintain that boycott. The moral prohibition of solidarity goes on. I had to buy it. One major piece of work was compromised already and over the next few weeks I've got other major targets to fulfil. I can't do it on a slowmo computer.

But this new lappie is annoying. Buttons in new, worse places (delete far from arrow buttons). I also keep touching the large mouse pad and losing cursor focus! {well that was until I found the shortcut to disable it} and its got bloody MS VISTA on it!!! - Eeeeeew! I'm way to old to want to get to learn a new operating system - AGAIN! I've been trawling my way through it franticly searching for "Windows Classic" settings where ever I can find them. These tabs things and the location of the connect button! Ugh! And the dialer - There are about 3 different dialer settings/windows that come up and its a lot slower to connect to the www than it was under XP with my lovely dialer shortcut. Vista is a pain.

Re: Internet set-up:
It was very embarrassing to have to call tech support to get my internet settings re-established. After probably taking me trough some setting and having a quiet chuckle in the back of his mind at my technical stupidity, the teccie told me to restart my PC to enable the settings to set. After 2 minutes of looking and failing to find an obvious restart option, dragged out by a few well timed 'errrrs' and 'ummmms' on the way (in a likely frivolous attempt to make him think I was actually doing something), I had to admit I couldn't find out how to turn the bloody thing off!! Then came the killer: "You could press Alt-F4." Aaaaaah. How embarrassing! My panic made me forget such a simple thing. I was nearing pulling out the damn power cable and then taking the battery out!

*groan*

Actually, I USED to know quite a lot about computers. Now I declare to the world: I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT COMPUTERS. I AM A (near) MIDDLE AGED TECHNO IDIOT WHO DOESN'T DESERVE TO HAVE A COMPUTER. I HAVE BECOME ONE OF THOSE OLD FOGIES WHO USED TO MAKE ME CRINGE BECASUE THEY COULDN'T MOVE THE CURSOR USING THE MOUSE!

My sunset has started!