Anything that defies my sense of reason....

Banks against the wall

2008-09-29T20:37:00.022+01:00

What is the crime of the bank robber compared with the crime of those that own the bank?

Humanity short-sold. Coloured by numbers. For a large bonus. Northern Rock nationalised. Bradford & Bingley nationalised. Fannie and Freddy, may and might. All cost more than ever before, yet they are all worth less than worthless. Private interests bailed out by "financial socialism". Socialism for the rich, socialism for the few. Which isn't really socialism at all. Socialism for the rich few is better called fascism. All empires end. But no empire dies unless it is first killed.

The Middle Class Proletariat
The middle classes could become a revolutionary class, taking the role envisaged for the proletariat by Marx. The globalization of labour markets and reducing levels of national welfare provision and employment could reduce peoples’ attachment to particular states. The growing gap between themselves and a small number of highly visible super-rich individuals might fuel disillusion with meritocracy, while the growing urban under-classes are likely to pose an increasing threat to social order and stability, as the burden of acquired debt and the failure of pension provision begins to bite. Faced by these twin challenges, the world’s middle-classes might unite, using access to knowledge, resources and skills to shape transnational processes in their own class interest.

Source: The DCDC Global Strategic Trends Progamme 2007-2036 [PDF, 7MB]
Published by the Ministry of Defence

How to suck nest eggs: A good indicator of the reality of the "socialist" or "communist" operation of the thing called capitalism is to ascertain precisely what is being "socialised" in a "communist" way. If profits, rewards and benefits are socialised, it may well be communism or socialism. If, however, costs, debts and downsides are socialised, it's fascism.

Things can only get better

The greatest acts of financial terrorism for almost 80 years play out as banks are bailed out to the tune of billions of invented numbers while bailiffs repossess more real houses and material wealth than ever before. Banking power is concentrated and consolidated further and the working and middle class pick up the tab for the privilege.

Meanwhile, the people begin to remember that almost a million properties sit empty on prison ship Britain as Chancellor Alistair Darling makes a surprise announcement from the steps of 11 Down-down-down-downing Street....

"Darling, Boom/bust is officially over"

When you gonna learn? What you gonna do?

2008-09-22T23:11:00.014+01:00

The Middle Class Proletariat
The middle classes could become a revolutionary class, taking the role envisaged for the proletariat by Marx. The globalization of labour markets and reducing levels of national welfare provision and employment could reduce peoples’ attachment to particular states. The growing gap between themselves and a small number of highly visible super-rich individuals might fuel disillusion with meritocracy, while the growing urban under-classes are likely to pose an increasing threat to social order and stability, as the burden of acquired debt and the failure of pension provision begins to bite. Faced by these twin challenges, the world’s middle-classes might unite, using access to knowledge, resources and skills to shape transnational processes in their own class interest.

Source: The DCDC Global Strategic Trends Progamme 2007-2036 [PDF, 7MB]
Published by the Ministry of Defence

So mote it be.

On the seventh anniversary of 9/11 the New York Metro newspaper published the headline: Global Survey says 'U.S. behind 9/11". The survey results reflect a growing level of awareness and understanding throughout the world, including America, about the way in which the intrinsically enmeshed worlds of empire, imperialism and capitalism operate. This awareness and understanding of the activities of the military financial and industrial complex has been building ever apace among ever greater numbers of people since the stakes were raised somewhat after the start of the war of terror.

In many ways 9/11 was the day on which the murderous machinations of the new empire builders began again in earnest, but that is not to deny that murderous machinations of ruling class interests have always manifested themselves to varying degrees.

Some claimed that 9/11 was the day the world changed but in fact the world hadn't changed at all.

9/11 was the point at which the U.S. State began to respond in earnest and with barely a challenge to the Project for the New American Century's largely rhetorical question: "Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?" The illusion of Western democracy became an even less consensual illusion than it was previously as aggressive yet pre-ordained modifications were rapidly instituted to U.S. conservative, "neo-conservative" and "neo-liberal" ruling class ideologies. The seemingly knee-jerk but long pre-planned response to the Project for the New American Century's clarion call saw the wheels of the Military Financial Industrial Complex set in motion to cement for private interests the foundations for what State actors in various States and acting roles had themselves repeatedly termed a New World Order. Now Obama promises change so everything can stay the same.

The endless "long war", the origins of which can be traced back through as many years of human history as you are prepared to devote minutes to undertaking the research, became non-negotiable and manifested itself predominantly as U.S. / U.K. led imperialist warmongering and mass murdering in the Middle East. The irony, if not also the truth of the matter, was that the changes were driven by the sufferance of what private ruling class interests had long hoped and in all likelihood prayed for; a "catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor" that would leave no option but to force their hand into a "process of transformation" at all costs, "even if it brings revolutionary change" in the quest for the "exercise of American leadership around the globe."

With the genetically modified imperialist carrot rejected in favour of a plethora of history's most lethal phallus-shaped exploding sticks, NATO's coalition of the killing set about systematically slaughtering first Afghanistan's poor, then Iraq's poor, simultaneously decimating beyond repair each country's core infrastructure. The death toll may now be running undeniably in the millions but, when the NATO Circus of Death is in town with its unholy trinity of creation, destruction and rebirth, the clowns who are the destructors -- who also happen to be the self-appointed creationists and rebirthers -- always profit handsomely. The smartest guys in the room or, more accurately, the most organised and the most heavily armed guys in the room. The dead can't count, the bottom line always does. Even if it is rock bottom.

As the war without end got underway, the humanity collective began with renewed vigour its voyage of discovery, armed with little more than the innate curiosity with which it was born, a desire to start making sense of an increasingly insane looking world and a hyper-linked connection to a world in which the kaleidoscope had been shaken and the pieces were in flux.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions and the path to wisdom is beset with political dead-ends, diversions and other nefarious but carefully crafted and deliberately placed distractions. Despite all this the kaleidoscopic pieces are starting to settle and they are settling in altogether new and different ways. Ways in which projections and contingencies have long existed among our rulers, decreed as statutes by State bodies, quangos and think tanks in the event that their long-feared hypothetical scenarios are brought to life. When such chaos is brought by the greater mass of humanity to the hotly pursued ruling class order, States historically appear to favour incarnating as their ultimate brutal manifestations, naked emperors of aggression, unleashed by bodies of armed men and brought to bear against all comers, brother and sister alike.

The ride along the geopolitical learning curve has not been particularly smooth or pleasant for anyone, irrespective of race, colour or creed, but this is not to deny that some have suffered more than others. The way has been marked by many important milestones, notable specifically for the way in which they expose the gargantuan lies of ruling class ideology and propaganda. These milestones have appeared in many places, some expected but many more quite unexpected, that are more notable for the added element of surprise that they pack and the way in which they force irrevocable paradigm shifts in the political analysis, thinking and consciousness of everyone.

On 11th March 2004 the same Al Qaeda who bombed New York in 2001 attacked Madrid with a series of blasts across the city's train network. Months later it was announced:

The basic truth is that Al Qaeda does not exist and never has. Al Qaeda is a manufactured enemy who was created by the Bush Administration in order to have an excuse to wage a war for the control of the world’s oil resources. || Al Qaeda does not exist nor has it ever.

-- Joseph John Hrevnack
Pravda, 19th August 2004

Such nonsense as "“Al Qaeda” does not exist nor has it ever" is to be expected of the tool of Communist, Red Pinko propaganda that is Pravda. Therefore the statement should immediately be dismissed and forgotten. No doubt such things are also to be expected of the tools of Communist, Red, Pinko propaganda that are the Daily Mirror, the BBC and Adam Curtis.

But a more insidious and even more lethal menace lurks behind the victory of Ole Cross-Eyes. The Republicans mobilised as never before the politics of fear. They convinced a majority of US citizens that their homes and families were under immediate threat from al-Qaeda. They are not.

In fact, the BBC's admirable Power Of Nightmares series showed al-Qaeda does not exist as the world-wide conspiracy presented by US policy-makers, with commanders, cells and "sleepers" in 60 countries. In that sense, al-Qaeda is a figment of the imagination of Pentagon and CIA war gamers - but it is a mightily useful weapon for war. Not the war against terrorists but the real war against the common sense of voters - the shock and awe campaign against us.

They seek to dupe you and me into a state of permanent panic about the fantasy threat of terror striking on the Tube, or in my backyard in North Yorkshire. ONLY when we have been so convinced will we vote for the politicians who peddle these monstrous nightmares. That is the true menace of the Bush-Blair axis of evil.

-- Paul Routledge
Daily Mirror, 5th November 2004

As yet another poke in the eye for the likes of the Communist, Red, Pinko propagandists like Paul Routledge, Adam Curtis, the BBC, anti-war activists, global justice movements, the left, anarchists, the working class, anyone that cared and any other similar tools of Communist, Red, Pinko propaganda, it wasn't long before the "fantasy threat of terror striking on the Tube" -- which itself may well have been based on the BBC's own invented "fantasy threat of terror striking on the Tube" -- did indeed strike on London's Tube.

Immediately news began to break of explosions on London's underground system so too did the hysterical cries of ten-a-penny terror pundits with loose talk of the devastatingly deadly Al Qaeda terror network striking in the heart of London.

The as yet unidentified bombers had obviously forgotten that all the world's leaders against whom they might have held any number of legitimate grievances would be congregating at Gleneagles in Scotland for the opening day of the 2005 G8 summit. The still unidentified bombers apparently decided that, rather than hold those directly responsible for global injustices to account -- and with logic so perverse that it bears not even the scantest of passing scrutiny -- it would be more politically expedient to attack innocent commuters to achieve their hitherto unidentified aims.

Despite the ensuing media hysteria that followed the London bombings pertinent questions were being asked by many who had been through the mill before: How could the "figment of the imagination of Pentagon and CIA war gamers" manage to materially blow up three Underground trains and a bus? Moreover, how could they do so without the Pentagon or the CIA? Just a day later Robin Cook was to provide a few answers and leave an informational milestone as his legacy in The Guardian:

Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Al-Qaida, literally "the database", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians. Inexplicably, and with disastrous consequences, it never appears to have occurred to Washington that once Russia was out of the way, Bin Laden's organisation would turn its attention to the west.

-- Robin Cook (R.I.P.)
The Guardian, Friday 8th July 2005

According to Cook Al Qaeda did exist, but only as a grouping of mercenaries that had previously been trained and armed by the C.I.A. in what is a still ongoing battle against Communism. Yet just eight days later as the Al Qaeda suicide bomber myth was emerging to be the hugely amplified white noise to drown out all other signals The Mirror asked in an exclusive report about the London bombings: Was It Suicide?

Such questions persisted across a variety of newspaper reports, albeit mainly in the foreign press, right up until the timely release of the Mohammed Sidique Khan 'suicide video'. In the video Khan makes no mention of suicide, attacking London, trains, buses nor anything else that might incriminate him as a candidate for suicide or bombing. In fact, Khan says nothing that would distinguish him from anyone else who opposes the illegal wars in Iraq and Afghanistan or the Palestinian holocaust perpetrated by Israel and it is this facet of the video that is the cleverest of all. Suddenly, by extension, anyone with anti-war sentiments founded on "perceived inustices" is an extremist, a radical and, potentially, a suicide bomber. Patent, palpable nonsense which is only subliminal if you don't notice it.

In 2005 the Al Qaeda that barely anyone had heard of prior to 9/11 was then either a "figment of the imagination of Pentagon and CIA war gamers" and "[did] not exist nor [had] it ever", or a "computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA".

Three days after the seventh anniversary of 11th September 2001 on which the New York Metro published its Global Survey says 'U.S. behind 9/11' story, the notoriously right-wing tool of Communist, Red, Pinko propaganda, Peter Hitchens, undermined years of hearty propaganda work by his new-neocon-left brother Christopher when he wrote in the Daily Mail:

It's the creepy plotters who rule us we should really be scared of

There is no such organisation as ‘Al Qaeda’. The spooks know this, Cabinet Ministers know this and so do the ‘security correspondents’ who so readily trot out the spooks’ point of view on our broadcasting networks.

-- Peter Hitchens
Daily Mail, 14th September 2008

Hitchens' words marked yet another milestone along the tortuous path to figuring out how the world really works. His words as with those of Robin Cook and Joseph John Hrevnack warrant considerable further contemplation. So too do the explicit implications of those words.

Line 1: "There is no such organisation as ‘Al Qaeda’."

Al Qaeda does not exist. Nor has it ever. The Al Qaeda that attacked, killed and maimed innocent civilians and pulverised WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 with military precision on 11th September 2001 does not exist, nor has it ever. Explicitly: Some actually existing group of terrorists organised and coordinated 9/11, a group not called Al Qaeda. The group actually responsible for this atrocity has never been held to account for its actions.

Al Qaeda does not exist, nor has it ever. The Al Qaeda that attacked, killed and maimed innocent civilians in Madrid on 11th March 2004 does not exit, nor has it ever. Explicitly: Some actually existing group of terrorists organised and coordinated the Madrid bombings, a group not called Al Qaeda. The group actually responsible for this atrocity has never been held to account for its actions.

Al Qaeda does not exist, nor has it ever. The Al Qaeda that attacked, killed and maimed innocent civilians in London on 7th July 2005 does not exist, nor has it ever. Explicitly: Some actually existing group of terrorists organised and coordinated the London bombings, a group not called Al Qaeda. The group actually responsible for this atrocity has never been held to account for its actions.

The list goes on and the pattern and message is clear. The list of terrorist atrocities throughout history for which no one has ever been justly held accountable and for which the real, true and actual perpetrators have never been identified, much less held accountable, is a long one and it is getting longer by the day. In the recent history of terrorist activity on mainland Britain this list includes at least the murder of Jean Charles de Menezes whose inquest is just getting underway three years after his execution by State operatives, the 7/7 London bombings, the Manchester Arndale bombing, the Guildford pub bombings, the Birmingham pub bombings, the M62 coach bombing, and the Hyde Park explosion, among others.

Line 2: "The spooks know this, Cabinet Ministers know this and so do the ‘security correspondents’ who so readily trot out the spooks’ point of view on our broadcasting networks."

Al Qaeda does not exist, nor has it ever. More to the point politicians who profess to be our servants know that Al Qaeda does not exist, yet non-references to the grave threats presented by an entity which they know does not exist, are few and far between. That makes all politicians who talk of the chilling threat that doesn't exist little more than outright liars. They are deliberate and witting liars, fearmongers and propagandists. So great is the deception perpetrated and so long has it continued to be parroted as standard fare that the liars and propagandists are completely devoid of credibility and absolutely cannot be afforded any degree of trust any longer.

Al Qaeda does not exist, nor has it ever. Those spooky media security correspondents whose number is legion know this, yet nary a day passes when they cannot be seen touting their non-existent terror wares on TV or Dead Trees for all to see. Reports of airline terror plots planned by a fictional organisation with fictional and chemically impossible chemistry wreaking havoc and carnage on an unimaginable scale that someone managed to imagine for the purposes of propaganda and fear-mongering. All media security correspondents pushing the non-existent Al Qaeda as reality are deliberate and witting liars, fearmongers and propagandists. So great is the deception perpetrated and so long has it continued to be parroted as standard fare that the liars and propagandists are completely devoid of credibility and absolutely cannot be afforded any trust any longer.

The world of fear as everyone previously knew it is ended. All bets are off. Everything is now officially its opposite. All is lie. Now is a new beginning. The ills of the world are not directly attributable to a bearded man in a cave somewhere on the Afghanistan/Pakistan border, nor the non-existent group over which he is reported to preside, their source(s) instead lie elsewhere and are now more exposed than ever before in history. Osama didn't bust the banks, the terrorists did.

The traditional power structures and institutions of authority with their received wisdom, victor-centric historical record and world-view have yet again proven themselves to be nothing more than self-serving liars who are not fit for any other purpose. They had little credibility to start with, now they have absolutely no credibility. The media we relied on for too long to hold the rulers to account had little credibility to start with, now it has absolutely none and it cannot be trusted to do anything other than pollute the world with mindless brain-rotting 'entertainment' wrapped in the tumescent glow of the imperial powers' red, white and blue tricolor.

The terrorists are running the show. The mass media lies, covers-up and misleads the masses to allow them to get away with it. Basta!

Future history awaits the results of how it all plays out from here-on in. A few seconds thought devoted to a comparison between the resources that States command and can mobilise on a whim, and those resources over which the rest of humanity can exercise a similar degree of precise and sustained control, may provide some indication of the way in which the odds are currently stacked.

It has been largely this way since time immemorial.

When you gonna learn?

The Middle Class Proletariat
The middle classes could become a revolutionary class, taking the role envisaged for the proletariat by Marx. The globalization of labour markets and reducing levels of national welfare provision and employment could reduce peoples’ attachment to particular states. The growing gap between themselves and a small number of highly visible super-rich individuals might fuel disillusion with meritocracy, while the growing urban under-classes are likely to pose an increasing threat to social order and stability, as the burden of acquired debt and the failure of pension provision begins to bite. Faced by these twin challenges, the world’s middle-classes might unite, using access to knowledge, resources and skills to shape transnational processes in their own class interest.

Source: The DCDC Global Strategic Trends Progamme 2007-2036 [PDF, 7MB]
Published by the Ministry of Defence

What you gonna do?

Global Survey says 'U.S. behind 9/11'

2008-09-12T16:53:00.011+01:00

Survey proves global warming has fried brains the world over

The explanation for the shocking, stunning and, frankly, chilling-to-the-marrow headline which, it almost goes without saying, has absolutely no basis in any sort of reality that any sane individual would want any part of is, of course, that everyone surveyed for the poll is a wild-eyed yelling Conspiraloon™ who should immediately be tasered and "taken to one of those secret prisons in Eastern Europe, never to be heard from again".

9/11: The "ghoulish hyena who shits on the graves of the dead" "making a living on the backs of the dead"

2008-09-11T09:11:00.016+01:00

Seven years on from 11th September 2001, Channel 4's flagship documentary series Cutting Edge hits the telescreens on anniversary night with 9/11 Faker. The opening show of the series features the story of Tania Head (pictured left, alongside 9/11 New York mayor Rudy Giuliani) the fake survivor of a terror attack who lied her way all the way up to the heady status of president of the 9/11 World Trade Center's Survivor Network. Until, that is, it was discovered that she was a shameless liar, fraud and self-publicist with a great line in cross-media marketing.

Head appeared as one of a handful of people who claimed to be on a floor above the point of explosion in the south tower, a factor -- as clearly distinct from a 'fact' as could be -- that made her story all the more remarkable, although 'incredible' would perhaps be a better choice of word.

Much of her account was posted on an Internet message board, oft-times the places that such legends are born, a message board that just happened to be the web site of the World Trade Center Survivors’ Network. It was for the Survivors Network that Head served in no lesser role than president handling, among other things, corporate donations.

Terror has always been very good for various business interests and, if the example of Head is anything to go by, very good for self-aggrandisement and self-publicity.

Along the way, Head variously claimed to have lost her fiance, Dave, or her husband by the same name, depending on which lie she was telling. She claimed to have an undergraduate degree from Harvard and a business degree from Stanford. However, neither college had any record of her attendance. Head claimed to work for Merrill Lynch, but Merrill Lynch didn't have any record of her employment either. Head claimed many other things too, all of which were little more than embellishments to the great lie.

Ultimately, it was the wealth of conflicting stories sprayed forth by Head's loose lips that would be her undoing, just as soon as anyone bothered to try and verify any of them. It is a sad reflection on the state of the modern corporate news media that it wasn't until the New York Times finally checked and blew open Head's flimsy cover as late as September 2007 that the veracity and authenticity of her story began to be challenged by other survivors.

In all it took six years before Jennifer Adams, chief executive of the September 11th Families’ Association, acknowledged, "At this time, we are unable to confirm the veracity of her connection to the events of Sept. 11". As one blogger noted, "Tania’s myth has collapsed. Brought down by investigation, reasonable inquiry, and candid disclosure of a conclusion."

Tania Head is in fact Alicia Esteve Head, so not even her name was genuine, and she comes from a well-known Barcelona business family that was implicated in the 1992 economic scandal known as the Planasdemunt Affair, a major scandal in the history of Catalonia. Both Head's father, Francisco Esteve Corbella, and her brother, Francisco Javier Esteve Head, were sentenced to prison terms (translated excerpts here, full Google translation here) for forging documents issued by the Barcelona firm BFP. Deception and deceit would appear to run in the Head family.

Channel 4 bill their Cutting Edge piece as follows.

The 9/11 Faker
C4 Thursday 11 September 2008 9pm

In the years following the 9/11 attacks, many stories emerged of triumph, tragedy and heroism. But one story stood out. Tania Head, one of only 19 people at or above the point of impact to survive, who also lost her fiancée in the attacks.

As Tania's fame grew, so, finally, did the questions. In September 2007, the New York Times published a front page article questioning Tania's account. Shortly afterwards, she packed her bags and disappeared.

Since the New York Times article appeared Head's pronouncements, which have consisted almost exclusively of "No comment", have all been issued by her lawyer, although not just any lawyer but a media and entertainment industry lawyer. When there's a media scandal to manage there is nobody better to manage it than a PR guru.

At this stage it is not known whether Tania Head wrote a book 'which fitted into a burgeoning genre of "misery memoirs"', addressed the United Nations, or whether she had dinner with the UN Secretary General at the height of her infamy.

Luckily, the sort of immaculate deception perpetrated by Tania Head only happens in America.

Who is Morgan Tsvangarai's Guardian ghost-writer?

2008-06-27T15:35:00.013+01:00

Yesterday the Guardian published a letter by Morgan Tsvangarai, "leader of the Movement for Democratic Change in Zimbabwe", which urged international leaders to back their rhetoric with military intervention.

Why I am not running
Morgan Tsvangirai

My people are at breaking point. World leaders' bold rhetoric must be backed with military force

...
Our call now for intervention seeks to challenge standard procedure in international diplomacy.
...
We envision a more energetic and, indeed, activist strategy. Our proposal is one that aims to remove the often debilitating barriers of state sovereignty, which rests on a centuries-old foundation of the sanctity of governments, even those which have proven themselves illegitimate and decrepit.
...
We do not want armed conflict, but the people of Zimbabwe need the words of indignation from global leaders to be backed by the moral rectitude of military force. Such a force would be in the role of peacekeepers, not trouble-makers. They would separate the people from their oppressors and cast the protective shield around the democratic process for which Zimbabwe yearns.
...

All well and good and some moral justification for yet another U-SUK led invasion of a far off land for profit. Except, today, Tsvangarai's article no longer exists on the Guardian web site, although it is cached here. And, while the article itself has disappeared, that didn't stop its central meme -- that of Tsvangarai calling for military intervention in Zimbabwe -- making its way into the Washington Post.

More curious still the little twist in the story that Morgan himself has added to what appeared to be his call for a invasion of Zimbabwe:

An article that appeared in my name, published in the Guardian (Why I am not running, June 25), did not reflect my position or opinions regarding solutions to the Zimbabwean crisis. Although the Guardian was given assurances from credible sources that I had approved the article this was not the case.
...
By way of clarification I would like to state the following: I am not advocating military intervention in Zimbabwe by the UN or any other organisation.

A number of questions arise about the original alleged Tsvangarai article in yesterday's Guardian, here's a few of them.

From whence did the original and now removed Tsvangarai article come?
Who were the 'credible sources' that advised the Guardian Tsvangarai had approved the article?
How did the Guardian verify the article's approval?
Who at the Guardian approved the publication of the original article?

Thus far, the Guardian has offered no explanation as to how an article by Morgan Tsvangarai managed to pass all its vetting and editorial processes to appear in the paper, only to be denounced the following day by its apparent author as not reflecting his opinion or position regarding what is to be done in Zimbabwe.

If you were still labouring under the misapprehension that the majority of the 'news' is in fact actually 'news', rather than a considerable amount of propaganda presented as 'news', perhaps you might want to reconsider your position.

In the meantime, the Guardian has a little explaining to do.

R.I.P. George Carlin (12 May 1937 – 22 June 2008)

2008-06-24T02:10:00.005+01:00

George Carlin is dead. Long live George Carlin.

6w:42d:1008h:60480m:3628800s

2008-06-23T17:13:00.008+01:00

"I find it strange that people in the UK are arguing today whether it is humane to detain someone without charge beyond 28 days, e.g. up to 42 days, when I have already been detained without charge for nearly four years.

Such debates are smokescreens to hide the real injustices that are happening in Britain today."

-- Babar Ahmad,
Britain’s longest detained-without-charge detainee

David 'Double-tap' Davis caused something of a stir when he resigned his position as MP following the House of Common Criminals' vote on Secret Inquests, Inquiries and secret jury-less trials. In the cloud-cuckoo land of political, temporal and spiritual mythology, Davis is now Bailiff of Her Majesty's Three Chiltern Hundreds of Stoke, Desborough and Burnham.

In the customary method of political theatrics the Commons Criminals' Counter Terrorism Bill 2008 vote was dressed up as a vote on the benefits, to the State people, of locking people up for 42 days without charge. (Actually, that's slightly incorrect. The State has no plans to lock "people" up, only "terrorists". "Terrorists" aren't "people". Don't ever forget that.) "Terrorists" against whom, the imposition of 42 days detention without charge would suggest, there is no evidence sufficient for the State to bring a successful prosecution, even under the ever more inclusive "anti-terror" laws and increasingly lax evidential demands. Ergo, the requirement to detain people "terrorists" without charge for six weeks. The irony is lost on no one that the "anti-terror" laws are passed by those who preside over all the nuclear technologies, explosives, bombs, machine guns, pistols, chemicals, black pepper, armies, navies, air forces, police, incarceration centres, and so on. Never mind the instruments of imperial global fascism, beware brown-skinned people with CDs they've never looked at, containing information published by the U.S. government.

The practice of locking people up without charge was once known as internment.

"It is no exaggeration to say that at the time of the arrest there was not one shred of admissible evidence against Barot. The arrest was perfectly lawful - there were more than sufficient grounds, but in terms of evidence to put before a court, there was nothing. There then began the race against time to retrieve evidence from the mass of computers and other IT equipment that we seized. It was only at the very end of the permitted period of detention that sufficient evidence was found to justify charges. I know that some in the media were sharpening their pencils, and that if we had been unable to bring charges in that case, there would have been a wave of criticism about the arrests. Barot himself of course eventually pleaded guilty last year and received a 40-year sentence."

– DAC Peter Clarke

Historically, the need for internment has been justified as a means by which the State can pretend to protect its citizens from whichever human or sub-human threats it tells everyone it faces. In recent times internment in its many guises has saved us all from Communists, Anarchists, Jews, Nazis, Italians, blacks and the Irish. More recently, now that its forerunners have served their propagandistic purpose been neutralised, we need internment detention without charge to save us from the impending Muslim caliphate. History contains numerous examples demonstrating the liberal use of internment by States fearing for their legitimacy, credibility, authority, and ultimately their survival. However it is dressed internment is the ideal solution for the purposes of suppressing dissent and grass-roots political opposition organised against ruling class barbarism. Of the first world war Historian Margery West noted about Britain's policy of internment that by 1916, 'the Isle of Man' had become one huge enemy prison camp' and internment arguably seems to the method of choice by which States protect themselves from the consequences of their own actions, with large numbers of people 'disappeared' from circulation in the servitude of ruling class political interests.

During the 'great war' little attempt was made to distinguish civilian from military prisoners. In the great 'war on terror' -- ironically the single biggest coordinated and ongoing series of acts of mass terror ever witnessed, whose self-justifying proof of 'success' is a death toll fast approaching that achieved by the Nazis, there is no distinction between civilian and military prisoners. In the 'war on terror' all captives are military prisoners and Guantanamo has set the Mengeleian standard, a standard that has yet to be destroyed like the cancer that it is.

David Davis, raised by a single-mother on a council estate, as legend has it, may well have been sincere about his stance on 42 days, but it didn't stop him voting for 28 days detention without charge. Nor did it inspire him to do much about the steady creep of fascism during his tenure, except riding the tired old terror ticket gravy train along with just about everyone else. In fact, scratch the newly revealed 'liberal' 'libertarian' David Davis and, lo and behold, you find a traditional Conservative authoritarian fatherless paternalist who would happily lock up your children. For their own good, you understand.

Davis' stunt has resulted in follow your establishment-leader demagogue turning into a follow your establishment-dissenter demagogue, whether it be David Davis, Home Office lawyer Director of Liberty Shami Chakrabarti or any other figure that jumps on the Fast Moving Consumer Good that is the David Davis for Freedom cross-media marketing PR bandwagon.

Of course, everyone would rather have a small part of them which believes that there is a degree of humanity entrenched somewhere in a system that seeks to preserve itself above all else. While the notion of a benevolent 'Nanny State' might save everyone having to think about organising any alternatives for themselves and everyone else, considerable evidence consistently indicates that the contrary is nearer the truth.

If Davis' dissent is fickle fakery - which it is, little more than an apolitical, single issue, populist stunt in which Davis spat the proverbial dummy - then the follow up is precisely what has been delivered: A cross-party coalition of apolitical nothings who think the 'ex' SAS serviceman Basher is a rather nice, freedom-loving chap. Nothing changes but everyone gets a glimmer of the light at the end of the tunnel. Unfortunately, the glimmer being seen is from a light that was turned off a long time ago, owing to financial considerations. Illuminations never come from the crowned.

"All the world is a stage, and all the men and women merely players. They have their exits and entrances; each man in his time plays many parts."

Shakespeare hit the nail firmly on the head and nowhere is it more applicable than the bread and circuses of the political theatre.

If you ignore the socio-political class roots of the origins of the apparent dissent, then Davis has struck a blow for freedom. Which he hasn't.

If there were to be a serious political backlash, it would have to come from the organised masses of the general public in the form of mass-strikes, civil disobedience and inventive ways of surviving despite the best efforts of the State to suppress the backlash. However, if there were to be a serious political backlash from the general public, well, the "anti-terror laws" are all in place to deal with that "grave exceptional terrorist threat" and precedents have been set that allow the State to extra-judicially execute everyone from foreign nationals to nice middle-class legal types. That's what you call "covering all the bases".

So, Davis / Chakrabarti / hysterical world-and-his-hysterical-wife / fight for freedom theatrics aside, the alleged 42-day detention vote has left us with:

Secret inquests
Secret inquiries
Secret jury-less trials
Lest we forget - 42 days detention without trial, even though Babar Ahmad has been locked up for four years without charge and Harry Roberts is now in his twelfth year of detention without charge, despite having already served a 30-year life-sentence for his crime.

Quoting from the brief Antagonista Manifesto at the top left of this blog:

"When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty."

For anyone to expect that duty of resistance to be presented in any legitimate way from within the system is, at best, naive.

Operation Crevice - "7/7 trial" reprise

2008-04-24T14:05:00.010+01:00

Since posting Spring/Summer 2008 Terror Season is Open, the article has been updated as and when information of note from the "7/7 trial" has come to light. The information posted in today's update is worthy of greater prominence and wider distribution, so here it is with few amends:

Crevice / 7/7 Who's Who by another name

Precious little is being reported from the first trial in three years resulting from Sir Ian Blair's "largest criminal inquiry in English history", ignoring (for now) the testimony from U.S. prison provided by FBI informant and supergrass Mohammad Junaid Babar -- who coincidentally provided 'evidence' in the Crevice trial being, as he once again was, the prosecution's 'star witness' -- and the conclusive proof of guilt provided by undercover surveillance footage of men walking past a kebab shop and a photo of the inside of Omar Khyam's bedsit.

"Reporting restrictions", similar to those decreed while the Operation Crevice trial was underway and which barred publication of information and photographs of the accused, has again been imposed by the State. Consequently, there is a dire lack of coverage of the "7/7 trial", perhaps because if the fullness of the events were to be reported, people's minds would boggle that a prosecution was even being brought against three men sightseeing in London.

So for general edification, research purposes and anyone following the so-called "7/7 trial", here are the handles of various people ensnared by the crack Crevice sting and who also feature in the "7/7 trial" story, even though you might not have known it until now. Courtesy of J7 and S over at Eco Postie:

"Abdul Haleem / Halim" = Kazi Nurur Rahman
"Abdul Rahman" = Anthony Garcia
"Abdul Waheed" = Waheed Mahmood (Also known as Abdul, Esmail or Javed)
"Ausman" = Omar Khyam
"Azhar", previously referred to as 'Unidentified male 3' = Azhar Shazad Khan, the brother-in-law of "Ausman" / Omar Khyam.
"Hamza" = Jawad Akbar (cousin of Nabeel Hussain, found not guilty)
"Imran" = Zeeshan Siddique
"Ibrahim" = Mohammed Siddique Khan
"Khalid" = Salahuddin Amin (tortured in Pakistan with the tacit approval of the British State)

Note: For those who would suppress information in the servitude of State interests over and above the interests of us all, all the information above is already in the public domain, just not compiled in any one particular place. Until now! Enjoy. Join the dots. Do your own research.

Weekend spot the difference competition

2008-04-19T01:28:00.006+01:00

Compare:

7/7 accused 'joined weapons camp'
....

"Zubair [Mr Shakil] fired the Ak-47 and the light machine gun," said [Mohammed Junaid] Babar.

Guilty! String him up! Contrast:

Schoolchildren to be offered weapons training
....

Children at comprehensive schools will be asked to sign up for military drills and weapons training under new plans to improve classroom discipline.

And the moral of the story is?

Abu Izzadeen & Co. convicted

2008-04-17T19:30:00.014+01:00

Trevor Brooks, also known as Omar Brooks, but perhaps better known by his 'radical' 'Islamist' handle of Abu Izzadeen, has been found guilty of funding and inciting terrorism at the end of a three and a half month trial. His conviction could see him facing life in prison for daring to speak in a 'free' country that is now more repressive than your average third world dictatorship.

Izzadeen faced trial alongside six other defendants, all of whom were charged with fund-raising contrary to Section 15 (1) of the Terrorism Act 2000. His co-defendants included:

Abdul Rehman Saleem, 32, convicted of inciting terrorism overseas but cleared of fundraising for terrorists,
Omar Zaheer, 28, cleared, no verdict reached,
Abdul Muhid, 24, convicted of the fundraising count
Shah Jalal Hussain, 25, convicted of fund-raising in absentia having done a bunk, warrant out for arrest,
Rajib Khan, 29, cleared, no verdict reached, and
Simon 'Suleaman' Keeler, 36 - Another in the long list of white, British converts to Islam who manages to find their way to the top of the radical Islamist list. Keeler was convicted of the same two charges as Izzadeen and today became the first white British 'Muslim' to be convicted of a 'terrorist' offence. Compare and contrast with Iqra bookshop worker and ex-SBS serviceman Martin 'Abullah' McDaid and James 'Mohammed Yacoub/Yaqub' McLintock, better known as the Tartan Taliban.

Brooks, Saleem, Keeler, Khan and Ibrahim Abdullah Hassan, 25 were also charged with inciting terrorism overseas, contrary to Section 59 (1) (2) (a) of the Terrorism Act 2000. Izzadeen faced a further charge of encouragement of terrorism contrary to Section 1 of the Terrorism Act 2006 on July 2, 2006.

Izzadeen is perhaps most famous for describing the events of 7th July 2005 as "mujahideen activity" which would make people "wake up and smell the coffee." He is also reported as saying that American and UK troops would rape and murder in Iraq which, as we all now know, is in fact the case and adds another two crimes to the long list of war crimes perpetrated in Iraq for which Tony Blair and the State's gang of war criminals -- actual terrorists by deed as opposed to terrorists whose only crime is having a big mouth, or possessing an item of literature -- have yet to be tried.

Izzadeen is widely reported as having 'shot to fame' in September 2006 when he heckled the then Home Secretary Herr Doktor John Reid, right on cue, at an invite-only State propaganda event held at a top secret location in East London. Darcus Howe, writing about Trevor Abu Omar Brooks Izzadeen and the Reid 'incident' in the New Statesman, noted:

“[the] clash was staged by Reid and his cohorts at the Home Office. They organised the meeting, Abu Izzadeen was invited in advance - his performance guaranteed - and the press was alerted to film and report the confrontation.”

Below is a video of the 'altercation' which you are advised to watch closely, specifically noting the protracted (in)actions of the 'security' operatives in red shirts, as well as the actions of the tall, suited, open-shirted man holding a radio who stands by the windows alongside the world's smallest policeman.

For further detail about this incident, Izzadeen and 7/7 as "mujahideen activity" see: If links back to UK or US sources are revealed.

Shortly after Reid and Izzadeen's highly amateur dramatics, ‘Gorgeous’ George Galloway — he who most vocally will not countenance the notion of any ‘theory’ that doth possess the remotest whiff of ‘conspiracy’ — wrote an open letter to the Home Secretary about what had happened alleging that, “There are only two conceivable explanations as to how this man, at this sensitive time, was allowed to hijack your Potemkin Village performance today.”

Dear Home Secretary,

I have been watching open-mouthed the altercation you have provoked in East London with your ill-judged, patronising and provocative foray into territory you clearly barely understand. There is much that will be said about the child-like - Patricia Hewittesque! - performance you gave your audience. I want to concentrate on the altercation.

The man who harangued you - Abu Izzadine - is a well-known and violent extremist from an organisation your own government has proscribed. Yet he was allowed within punching distance of the British Home Secretary. How ? Why ?

This is the same man who led a group of fanatic thugs in the brief “hostage-taking” of myself and my daughter and several innocent members of the public during a general election meeting last year. This is well known to the Special Branch and senior police officers in East London - the very people in charge of your security today.

This man has appeared on many occasions on television and in the press as a dangerous extremist who has praised the terrorist attacks on July 7th and 9/11. His comments were amongst those adduced in your own government’s case for the proscription of the Al Ghuraba organisation.

There are only two conceivable explanations as to how this man, at this sensitive time, was allowed to hijack your Potemkin Village performance today.

Either our police and security services are so fantastically incompetent that Bin Laden himself might have slipped in to beard you at your podium. Or someone somewhere wanted to engineer precisely this confrontation to show you in a certain light and to portray the Muslims of Britain in the most aggressive violent and extreme way possible, as a justification for the utterly counter-productive policies you are following.

Which is it ?

Because, as you know, I am not a believer in conspiracy theories I am leaning towards the first explanation. If I am right then yet again the Metropolitan Police have proved almost comically incompetent. The sight of a small, slight, helmeted police officer being dwarfed by a giant ranting fanatical thug - talk about a thin blue line! - as all that stood between you and a violent attack will certainly have provided food for thought and encouragement to the country’s enemies. Yet again the justification for continuing in office of Sir Ian Blair must be called into question.

But if I am wrong, and this all turns out to have been some Nixonian “dirty tricks” operation..then of course the questions raised are much more profound and dangerous

I await your response with interest.

Yours sincerely
George Galloway MP

Quite what the outcome of this communication was, is unknown. However, as William Ehrman, Director General (Defence & Intelligence) of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office memorably proclaimed:

"Dealing with Islamist extremism, the messages are more complex, the constituencies we would aim at are more difficult to identify, and greater damage could be done to the overall effort if links back to UK or US sources were revealed."

Without doubt those links back to UK or US sources are being steadily and ever more rapidly revealed for anyone that cares to look, not only in the UK but in Canada, Australia and the U.S. UK instances are being revealed on an almost daily basis, especially for anyone keeping an eye of Spring/Summer 2008 terror season court reports relating to ongoing alleged 'terror' trials.

The Canadian equivalent of 'Islamist extremism', as designed and directed by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and not Muslims, is amply revealed in this excellent video documentary.

For the US equivalent of 'Islamist extremism' in which "links back to UK or US sources were revealed", the latest reference point is the case of the Miami / Liberty City Seven where charges were brought in relation to an alleged plot to attack Chicago's Sears Tower. It transpired that:

The entire situation was concocted by the government. The warehouse was paid for by the FBI, and the defendants moved their operations there at the suggestion of an undercover informant who was also paid by the FBI. The swearing-in ceremony was led by the informant — who at another point also suggested a plan to bomb FBI offices in Miami.

"The case was written, produced and directed by the FBI," defense attorney Albert Levin said in his closing arguments.

Source: Time Magazine

Ehrman and the FCO's much-feared revealing of "links back to UK or US sources" aren't reported directly. There is, however, more than enough publicly available information contained in the world's news reports for anyone with a desire to make sense of the nonsense to start joining the dots and discovering for themselves the hidden hand involvement of State and security services.

Do your own research.

New Banksy artwork hits the streets walls

2008-04-16T01:48:00.011+01:00

The cheeky but elusive plaything of the middle-class art pretender, the graffiti artist Banksy, unveiled a new piece of artwork that passes comment on Britain's surveillance society. It is the second piece of Banksy artwork to appear in as many months. Last month the piece below appeared on the wall of a London chemist shop:

Banksy celebrates 60 years of Israel

There are many ways in which the image of children raising and pledging allegiance to the plastic bag flag of ~~Israel~~ Tesco could be interpreted, but it takes a touch of real genius to dumb commentary down to the level that the mainstream media did. News stories reporting on the appearance of the graffiti held that, "It was interpreted as support for the growing campaign to ban free plastic bags." Of course it was. Banksy 'backs ban on plastic bags'. What else could it be?

In a book displaying some of his work, Banging Your Head Against a Brick Wall, Banksy writes how "We can't do anything to change the world until Capitalism crumbles." Whether Capitalism crumbles, or destroys itself -- as it is in the process of doing via a global economic crisis that requires the robbery without limit of the taxpayer, in tandem with 'wealth' creation through the invention of endless yet worthless money -- or whether Capitalism is smashed by the greater mass of humanity that seizes the enduring moment of Capitalism in crisis to overthrow once and for all the system that enslaves it, remains to be seen. Either way, it is clear to all that the personal and private interests of States and Corporations no longer offer any viable or tangible solutions for people or the planet.

Yet the daily diet of mass media mental floss has deleted from history Banksy's wealth of work that contains an inherent anti-capitalist bent and perverts his artistic statements to conjure a world view where there is nothing to worry about other than the annihilation of plastic bags. In the world of media darlings and art snobs Banksy has recanted his anti-Capitalist stance. He is committed to ridding the world of the plastic bags Capitalism produces in order to render the world a better place. Which is, unsurprisingly, utter rubbish, even if Banksy's work, which he donates freely to communities, is changing hands in private monied circles for stupid amounts of cash.

Banksy's latest work rails against what the media term the Big Brother society. Like the 'Nanny State' before it, the familial tag of Big Brother somewhat nullifies the harsh reality that the unbounded implementation of technologies of political control by State and Corporate entities represent. Even if you've read Orwell. The omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent tools of oppression, the prospect of which Hitler would have salivated at, are no longer invasive, intrusive and offensive monstrosities, but instead are divested of their true horrors.

Hello and welcome to Britain. It's only subliminal if you don't notice it.

Below is a similar sized piece that Banksy never quite got around to finishing.

Perhaps he might have finished it if he hadn't given up on anti-Capitalism.

American Idiots

2008-04-16T01:47:00.001+01:00

A little light relief in Red, White and Blue.