Life, as we don't know it

I am not here.......right now :0)

I just bought an apartment in Amsterdam and am very busy dealing with all the machinations of such an event, for this reason I will not be posting for awhile and have not posted for awhile. Enjoy the archive if you're around or simply come back in a month or two!! :0)

Thanks!!!

P.S. Dear sinister intelligence agencies, please note that the placing of monitoring devices in my apartment at this time may not be a good idea, please kindly wait until I have finished the rennovations so that I may avoid disturbing, uncovering, or interfering, with aforementioned items- when carrying out my DIY jobs.

I thank you in advance for your co-operation :0)

Spies ‘hid’ bomber tape from MPs

Bugging revealed earlier plot

Timesonline


MI5 is being accused of a cover-up for failing to disclose to a parliamentary watchdog that it bugged the leader of the July 7 suicide bombers discussing the building of a bomb months before the London attacks.
MI5 had secret tape recordings of Mohammad Sidique Khan, the gang leader, talking about how to build the device and then leave the country because there would be a lot of police activity.

However, despite the recordings, MI5 allowed him to escape the net. Transcripts of the tapes were never shown to the parliamentary intelligence and security committee (ISC), which investigated the attacks.

The disclosures prompted allegations of a “whitewash” from politicians and victims of the attacks this weekend.

Last week the committee, whose members are appointed by Tony Blair and report to him, cleared MI5 of blame after it failed to thwart the attacks, which killed 52 innocent people and injured more than 700. It concluded that MI5 had no reason to suspect Khan of plotting attacks in Britain. He was regarded as “peripheral” to higher priorities.

The new evidence shows MI5 monitored Khan when he met suspects allegedly planning another, separate attack; that he had knowledge of the “late-stage discussions” of this plot; and that he was recorded having discussions with them about making a bomb and leaving the country. He was also recorded talking about his plans to wage jihad — holy war — and go to Al-Qaeda terrorist camps abroad.

Yesterday David Davis, the shadow home secretary, said: “If this is true, it completely undermines the basis on which the ISC did its report.”

Patrick Mercer, the Tory spokesman on homeland security, said: “Unless there is a proper independent inquiry, there is a danger of the committee’s report being interpreted as a whitewash.”

A committee member, who asked not to be named, admitted that it had not seen transcripts of MI5’s recordings of Khan. Instead, it had taken evidence from senior security officials and accepted their judgment that there was no reason to regard Khan as a serious threat.

The MP said that if the transcripts showed Khan had been involved in discussions about bomb-making and another possible attack, the committee had been seriously misled. “If that is the case, it amounts to a scandal,” said the source. “I would be outraged.”

Rachel North, a survivor of the bomb at King’s Cross, was shocked by the disclosure: “I am shaking with anger.

In the absence of an independent inquiry answering the public’s questions, I had hoped that those who heard the evidence behind closed doors on our behalf would find out the answers for us.

“They did not find out nor tell us the whole truth, and I feel badly, desperately let down.”

The disclosures will increase pressure for a public inquiry into the atrocity, with greater powers to demand evidence and interrogate witnesses.

The government also failed to address concerns about what MI5 knew when they were raised in unreported exchanges in the Commons last week. Davis referred to the existence of the tape recordings when he addressed John Reid, the home secretary.

“It seems that MI5 taped Mohammad Sidique Khan talking about his wish to fight in the jihad and saying his goodbyes to his family — a clear indication that he was intending a suicide mission . . . he was known to have attended late-stage discussions on planning another major terror attack. Again, I ask the home secretary whether that is true.”

Reid said the questions were “legitimate” but failed to answer them.

Kevin Barrett: Media hide truth: 9/11 was inside job

By Kevin Barrett
www.madison.com

Last Saturday, former Bush administration official Morgan Reynolds drew an enthusiastic capacity crowd to the Wisconsin Historical Society auditorium. It is probably the first time in Historical Society history that a political talk has drawn a full house on a Saturday afternoon at the beginning of final exams.

Reynolds, the former director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis, and the ex-top economist for George W. Bush's Labor Department, charged the Bush administration with gross malfeasance, and proposed the prosecution of top administration officials.

Normally, if a prestigious UW alumnus and ex-Bush administration official were to come to the Wisconsin Historical Society to spill the beans about a Bush administration scandal, it would make the news. The local TV stations would cover it, and it would merit front page headlines in The Capital Times and Wisconsin State Journal.

Reynolds' indictment of the administration he worked for was a stunning, life-changing event for many of those who witnessed it. As the event's organizer, I have received dozens of e-mails about it from people who were deeply affected.

Despite the prestigious speaker and venue, and the gravity of the charges aired, for most Americans indeed most Madisonians the event never happened. Why? Because it was censored, subjected to a total media blackout. Not a word in the State Journal. Not a word in The Capital Times. Not a word on the local TV news. Not a word on local radio news. And, of course, not a word in the national media.

Why the blackout? Because Reynolds violated the ultimate U.S. media taboo. He charges the Bush administration with orchestrating the 9/11 attacks as a pretext for launching a preplanned "long war" in the Middle East, rolling back our civil liberties, and massively increasing military spending.

When a former Bush administration insider makes such charges, how can the media ignore them? Is Reynolds a lone crank? Hardly. A long list of prominent Americans have spoken out for 9/11 truth: Rev. William Sloane Coffin, Sen. Barbara Boxer, former head of the Star Wars program Col. Robert Bowman, ex-Reagan administration economics guru Paul Craig Roberts, progressive Jewish author-activist Rabbi Michael Lerner, former CIA official Ray McGovern, author-essayist Gore Vidal, and many other respected names from across the political spectrum have gone on the record for 9/11 truth.

Are the media ignoring all these people, and dozens more like them, because there is no evidence to support their charges? Hardly. Overwhelming evidence, from the obvious air defense stand-down, to the nonprotection of the president in Florida, to the blatant controlled demolition of World Trade Center building 7, proves that 9/11 was an inside job. As noted philosopher-theologian and 9/11 revisionist historian David Griffin writes: "It is already possible to know, beyond a reasonable doubt, one very important thing: the destruction of the World Trade Center was an inside job, orchestrated by terrorists within our own government."

A growing list of scientists has lined up behind BYU physicist Steven Jones and MIT engineer Jeff King in support of Griffin's position, as evidenced by the growth of Scholars for 9/11 Truth (st911.org) and Scientific Professionals Investigating 9/11 (physics911.net).

As a Watergate-era graduate of the University of Wisconsin School of Journalism, I was taught that exposing government lies and corruption is the supreme duty of the Fourth Estate. I simply cannot fathom the current situation. I do not understand the 9/11 truth blackout. I wish someone would explain it to me.

It is time to break the 9/11 truth blackout. Please put pressure on your local media through letters to the editor, call-ins to talk radio, and phone calls to local and national journalists.

And come see Peter Phillips, director of the media watchdog group Project Censored, who will lead a strategy session on breaking the blackout at the upcoming international 9/11 truth conference in Chicago: 9/11: Revealing the Truth, Reclaiming Our Future, to be held June 2-4 at the Embassy Suites Hotel, Chicago-O'Hare Rosemont. Go to http://911revealingthetruth.org for more information.

The event will feature presentations from dozens of 9/11 truth luminaries, from scientists like Steven Jones to intelligence agency whistle-blowers like David Shayler, and promises to be a historic, watershed event. Be there, or resign yourself to a future of endless war, lost liberty, and a craven media that cannot bring itself to breathe a single word of truth.

Kevin Barrett of Madison is a member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth (st911.org) and SPINE: Scientific Professionals Investigating 9/11 (911physics.net) and serves as coordinator of the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth (mujca.com). E-mail: Kevin@mujca.com

Gulf News Survey: People believe Bin Laden 'probably back home in US

Gulf News Survey: People believe Bin Laden 'probably back home in US

Gulfnews.com

Dubai: If you ask people where they think Osama Bin Laden was hiding, the answer would inevitably be Afghanistan or Pakistan.

But for some reason, a large number of readers surveyed online believe he is hiding in the United States.

In the Gulf News online survey done on May 7, 30 per cent of the responders said Pakistan was the terrorist's likely hiding place. Only 12 per cent said Afghanistan, while 51 per cent said it was the United States.

To double check whether people on the streets are equally paranoid and think on the same lines, Gulf News caught some unwary shoppers and asked them the question. While some people said they would rather not comment on the subject, a large number also believe he is in the United States, as according to them, Bin Laden was once "created" by America.

A Dubai resident said people think he is in the United States, "because he was working for them before", said Daniella Paderi. "And now he has gone back home." The expatriate said catching Osama was not important. "There are more important things to worry about, as the war in Iraq," she said.

Hassan Ali, an Egyptian expatriate in Abu Dhabi, said Bin Laden was most probably in Texas (home of US President George Bush). "That's where he is running his family business now," he said. "All the media fuss is make-believe. He probably has coffee daily with American officials."

Khalid Ahmad in Abu Dhabi also believes Bin Laden is in America. "I am sure they already know where he is," he said. The response changes when an European or a non-Arab expatriate is asked the same question.

Welma Williams said it is highly unlikely Bin Laden is in the United States. She said the online response was to create a feeling of fear and insecurity among the American people. "He is moving around all the time. He can't be in one place," she said. "Catching him is important. We have to examine the whole school of thought behind the terrorist acts. It is more important to understand why it happened," she said.

One expatriate who did not wish to be identified, said she does not think about such things. "Life has to go on. You can't live in fear all the time," she said.

Andy Sheekey said people thought Bin Laden was in the United States because of paranoia. He also felt it was because of a "complete lack of trust in the judicial system. Cracking down on poverty is probably the major thing that needs to be done (rather than hunting him down)". Asked where in the United States would the terrorist likely be, he said "Washington".

John Churchill Jnr. from England felt people were "misinformed" when they said he was in America. "I can't think why he would be there when he is on their number one wanted list. He would be among his people," he said.

Yasmin Ali, an American, felt Bin Laden was in Pakistan because reports say so. "If he was in the United States, he would be somewhere in the backwaters. People probably wish he was in the United States."

Gary Hansard had no idea why people would think such a thing. "It's important for the Iraqi people that he is caught," he said.

Hussain Al Saeedi, an Egyptian teacher living in Abu Dhabi, said Osama was is in Afghanistan.

Sana Shaikh, a teacher from Pakistan, said he is in Afghanistan while Larry from the Philippines said he was in Pakistan.

Mohammad Junad, a 26-year-old bank employee from India, felt that Bin Laden is most probably dead. "All the videos we see of him are all fake."

Who is behind "Al Qaeda in Iraq"? Pentagon acknowledges fabricating a "Zarqawi Legend"

Oh what a surprise!! Fancy that! The US Government creating its enemies, what an unbelievable load of............................errrgh, truth.

By Michel Chossudovsky

Abu Musab Al Zarqawi has been presented both by the Bush administration and the Western media as the mastermind behind the "insurgency" in Iraq, allegedly responsible for the massacres of Iraqi civilians.

Zarqawi is the outside enemy of America. The Bush administration in official statements, including presidential speeches, national security documents, etc. has repeatedly pointed to the need to "go after" Abu Musab Al Zarqawi and Osama bin Laden.

"You know, I hate to predict violence, but I just understand the nature of the killers. This guy, Zarqawi, an al Qaeda associate -- who was in Baghdad, by the way, prior to the removal of Saddam Hussein -- is still at large in Iraq. And as you might remember, part of his operational plan was to sow violence and discord amongst the various groups in Iraq by cold- blooded killing. And we need to help find Zarqawi so that the people of Iraq can have a more bright -- bright future." (George W. Bush, Press Conference, 1 June 2004)

The official mandate of US and British occupation forces is to fight and win the "war on terrorism" on behalf of the Iraqi people. Zarqawi constitutes Washington's justification for the continued military occupation of Iraq, not to mention the brutal siege of densely populated urban areas directed against "Al Qaeda in Iraq" which is said to be led by Zarqawi.

Coalition forces are upheld as playing a "peace keeping role" in consultation with the United Nations. The Western media in chorus has consistently upheld the legitimacy of the "war on terrorism". It has not only presented Zarqawi as a brutal terrorist, it has also failed to report on the Pentagon's disinformation campaign, which has been known and documented since 2002.

Pentagon PSYOP Zarqawi Program

In an unusual twist, the Washington Post in a recent article, has acknowledged that the role of Zarqawi had been deliberately "magnified" by the Pentagon with a view to galvanizing public support for the US-UK led "war on terrorism":

"The Zarqawi campaign is discussed in several of the internal military documents. "Villainize Zarqawi/leverage xenophobia response," one U.S. military briefing from 2004 stated. It listed three methods: "Media operations," "Special Ops (626)" (a reference to Task Force 626, an elite U.S. military unit assigned primarily to hunt in Iraq for senior officials in Hussein's government) and "PSYOP," the U.S. military term for propaganda work . . ." (WP. 10 April 2006)

The military's propaganda program, according to the Washington Post, has "largely been aimed at Iraqis, but seems to have spilled over into the U.S. media. One briefing slide about U.S. "strategic communications" in Iraq, prepared for Army Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the top U.S. commander in Iraq, describes the "home audience" as one of six major targets of the American side of the war." (WP, op cit.)

An internal document produced by U.S. military headquarters in Iraq, states that "the Zarqawi PSYOP program is the most successful information campaign to date." (WP, op cit).

The senior commander entrusted with Pentagon's PSYOP operation is General Kimmitt who now occupies the position of senior planner at US Central Command (USCENTCOM), responsible for directing operations in Iraq and the Middle East.

"In 2003 and 2004, he coordinated public affairs, information operations and psychological operations in Iraq -- though he said in an interview the internal briefing must be mistaken because he did not actually run the psychological operations and could not speak for them. Kimmitt said, "There was clearly an information campaign to raise the public awareness of who Zarqawi was, primarily for the Iraqi audience but also with the international audience."

A goal of the campaign was to drive a wedge into the insurgency by emphasizing Zarqawi's terrorist acts and foreign origin, said officers familiar with the program. "Through aggressive Strategic Communications, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi now represents: Terrorism in Iraq/Foreign Fighters in Iraq/Suffering of Iraqi People (Infrastructure Attacks)/Denial of Iraqi Aspirations," the same briefing asserts . . .

It is difficult to determine how much has been spent on the Zarqawi campaign, which began two years ago and is believed to be ongoing. U.S. propaganda efforts in Iraq in 2004 cost $24 million, but that included extensive building of offices and residences for troops involved, as well as radio broadcasts and distribution of thousands of leaflets with Zarqawi's face on them, said the officer speaking on background . . .

The Zarqawi program at the Pentagon was run concurrently with a related operation "led by the Lincoln Group, a U.S. consulting firm, to place pro-U.S. articles in Iraq newspapers, according to the officer familiar with the program who spoke on background." According to The Washington Post, however, there was no relationship between the Pentagon's PSYOP program and that run by the Lincoln Group on behalf of the Pentagon. (WP, 10 April 2006)

Disinformation and war propaganda are an integral part of military planning. What the Washington Post fails to mention, however, is its own role in sustaining the Zarqawi legend , along with network TV, most of the printed press, and of course CNN and Fox News, not to mention a significant portion of the alternative media. Disinformation regarding the War on terrorism has been fed into the news chain by a limited number of "top feeders":

A relatively few well-connected correspondents provide the "scoops" that get the coverage in the relatively few mainstream news sources - the four TV networks, TIME, Newsweek, CNN - where the parameters of debate are set and the "official reality" is consecrated for the bottom feeders in the news chain. In other countries, this is what is known as propaganda - or, put less politely, psychological warfare. ( Chaim Kupferberg, The Propaganda Preparation for 9/11)