VIEWS ON 7/7/05

Glued simultaneously to my television and radio on Thursday I began to 
wonder who the ultimate beneficiaries of the London bombings might be.

The 'WAR ON TERROR' needs these sort of atrocities to justify its very 
existence.  The moral justification which Al Qaeda provides the hawks of 
Christian fundamentalism, is heartbreaking.  One wonders whose side the 
bombers are really on.  Just at a time when the leaders of Britain, France, 
Italy, Russia, Canada, Germany, the USA and Japan, the last thing the doves 
of peace needed was a highly publicised bombing spree in London to 
strengthen the resolve of the hawks and war mongers.  Yet that is precisely 
what was achieved.

An Iraqi, dentist working in London, interviewed by Channel 4, was heard to 
say that over 200,000 civilians had been killed in the name of this 'War on 
Terror' in Iraq. Yes, we in the West are guilty of valuing some human lives 
above others.  Indigenous westerners killed on home turf are inevitably 
valued above foreigners killed in a far away country, whose deaths receive 
no publicity at all.  Is this right?  No.  But given the press we have, it 
is inevitable.

A Journalist from the Daily Mail was briefly seen on our television screens 
questioning policemen at a press conference in London at about midday on 
Thursday.  He asked whether any warnings of the bombings had been received. 
He then said that members of the Israeli Embassy in London had cancelled an 
external meeting, having had prior warning of the bombings.  The answer he 
was given was that the police had received no such warning.  What happened 
to this story?  Having scoured the papers from cover to cover on Friday it 
too was dead, smothered, lost without trace.

Many in the UK accept we no longer have a free press.  Many consider the 
deaths of journalists in Afghanistan and Iraq to be highly suspect.  Some of 
us know that our so-called democracy is a sham, underlined by an indentured 
and fearful media.  Without a free press, freedom's a mess.

I was glued to my television screen on 9th September 2001.  An Israeli 
politician interviewed seemed almost elated at the spectre of the twin 
towers collapsing.  His message was that this justified everything Israel 
had been saying and doing.  The day of the Hawks had arrived and he was 
exultant.  The twin towers acted as a justification for western warmongers 
to perpetrate atrocities globally.  A deal was done with Russia.  Tear up 
the Russian contract to purchase oil from Iraq, compensate them for breach 
of contract with Iraqi oil revenues - oh, and of course persuade our press 
that the 'poor Ch! echens' be re-designated as Chechen terrorists.  This all 
happened well before Beslan.  The drugging of a female journalist determined 
to try to broker a peace with the Chechens at Beslan received little news 
coverage.  Beslan, 9/11, Madrid and London; these highly publicised stories 
only serve to justify unjustifiable wars against yet more civilian 
populations in Islamic countries.  Atrocities like these raise the megaphone 
to the Hawks for War.  When will the doves of peace be allowed to speak?

Despite the fact that our press is no longer free, the excuse of WMD's for 
perpetrating the war on Iraq has been proven to be a lie.  Dr David Kelly's 
death in the wake of this news first appearing has never been fully 
explained.  No inquest was held.  The Court of enquiry, under Lord Hutton 
found, without much evidence, that he had committed suicide.  Three medical 
specialists wrote a letter to the London Evening Standard.  They questioned 
the possibility of a man committing suicide by slashing his wrists and 
ingesting co-proxamol when only a fraction of one co-proxamol was found in 
his stomach contents, with insufficient blood loss at the scene for either! 
, or both together, to be the cause of death.  Evidence completely ignored.

All our politicians know that Saddam Hussein had WMD's. Whilst this 
knowledge, put into the public arena, might have perhaps justified a war on 
Iraq it was too embarrassing to give this information the oxygen of 
publicity.  When Michael Howard was in office the Conservative Government 
had allowed the sale of the Super-Gun and Matrix Churchill to Iraq.

At the end of the first Gulf War a warehouse full of WMD's was found in 
Komashia.  Barrels of the plague, anthrax, sarin, mustard gas were piled 
high.  What did we do?  The RAF was ordered in to bomb the warehouse to 
smithereens.  No inventory was taken.  Why?  Because the containers proved 
the WMD's had been supplied by us.  Haliburton's role in selling WMD's to 
Iraq has been given wide publicity, mostly because of Cheney's connection to 
Haliburton.  I was told by an RAF serviceman, that any inventory of the 
contents of the wa! rehouse in Komashia would prove highly embarrassing.  So 
although it might have been possible to discreetly trace back all the WMD's 
sold to Iraq under our war by proxy against the Ayatollah Khomeini, it might 
be too discomfiting to admit if news leaked out.  No evidence, no news, no 
embarrassment.

The establishment will always try to denigrate those of us who make these 
sort of connections into 'conspiracy theorists' and cling to their own, 
apparently more sane position as 'cock-up theorists'.  Whereas the truth is 
that our establishments are involved in the most enormous cock-ups, which 
require super conspiracies to cover them up.  As Lord Acton said: 
'everything secret degenerates,' and we have too many secrets.

So what warning was given to the Israeli Embassy?  Who gave it?  Why were 
they tipped off when the British authorities were left in the dark?  How 
long did they have the warning?  Did they make any effort to relay this 
information to the British authorities?  Who benefited from the attack in 
London on Thursday?  Whose interests were served by the killing of ordinary 
people during the G8 conference at Gleneagles?

Unfortunately those who work at senior levels in our so called 'intelligence 
services' are incapable of asking these questions.  They are an 
unaccountable force operating outside the boundaries of competitive market 
forces, answerable to no one: surrounded by secrecy, with an inability to 
communicate effectively or efficiently.  You can bet all efforts to 
ascertain the truth about the cancellation of an external meeting involving 
some Israeli Embassy staff will be ignored.

Osama bin Laden's very existence justifies our War on Terrorism.  Without 
him, or some other monster to focus on, our politicians would have a far 
more difficult time justifying, Afghanistan, Iraq, Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo 
Bay.  I have been told by charity workers in Afghanistan that although Osama 
has been in the gun sights of military personnel they have never been given 
the authority to pull their triggers.  I would love to interview Osama.  To 
find out whether he is still working for our intelligence services and what 
such an intelligent man is doing by sponsoring terrorism which plays into 
the hands of the Hawks for War.  The anthrax attack on the ! US Postal 
system was eventually traced back, using DNA, to a military laboratory in 
Maryland.  The rug was then pulled on any enquiry into that anthrax attack.

When enquiries are papered over or abandoned we have to ask how much Western 
collusion there is in acts of terrorism.  The actions in London have only 
provided one more gag on those of us who would sue for equality of all 
mankind; to value all life equally; to bring justice to all people; to give 
a voice to the voiceless.  The London bombings did not benefit the doves of 
peace; they benefited the Hawks of War.

If we want the lion to lie down with the lamb and ensure the Hawks will 
trouble neither, perhaps it is time to raise a roar of truth amongst the 
doves.  (1,301 words)

About the writer:

Helen Pender is culturally a Christian, having been raised in the British 
traditions of Swaziland and Kent.  She is doubtful though whether God is 
wholly a Christian entity.  She stood as an independent candidate against 
corruption in Rutland and Melton at the last election.  She graduated from 
Lucy Cavendish College, Cambridge in 1998, having read English, and has 
found life as a critic of the establishment financially impossible.


Item Ends.

http://www.mason-rule.bizhosting.com

What's wrong lad?

This piece could have been written by someone normal!

Dr Boz recommends you read, your previous postings, to give your usual self 
the boost it needs.

"Maurice Kellett"  wrote in message 
news:4305eca3@212.67.96.135...

> VIEWS ON 7/7/05
>
> Glued simultaneously to my television and radio on Thursday I began to 
> wonder who the ultimate beneficiaries of the London bombings might be.
>
> The 'WAR ON TERROR' needs these sort of atrocities to justify its very 
> existence.  The moral justification which Al Qaeda provides the hawks of 
> Christian fundamentalism, is heartbreaking.  One wonders whose side the 
> bombers are really on.  Just at a time when the leaders of Britain, 
> France, Italy, Russia, Canada, Germany, the USA and Japan, the last thing 
> the doves of peace needed was a highly publicised bombing spree in London 
> to strengthen the resolve of the hawks and war mongers.  Yet that is 
> precisely what was achieved.
>
> An Iraqi, dentist working in London, interviewed by Channel 4, was heard 
> to say that over 200,000 civilians had been killed in the name of this 
> 'War on Terror' in Iraq. Yes, we in the West are guilty of valuing some 
> human lives above others.  Indigenous westerners killed on home turf are 
> inevitably valued above foreigners killed in a far away country, whose 
> deaths receive no publicity at all.  Is this right?  No.  But given the 
> press we have, it is inevitable.
>
> A Journalist from the Daily Mail was briefly seen on our television 
> screens questioning policemen at a press conference in London at about 
> midday on Thursday.  He asked whether any warnings of the bombings had 
> been received. He then said that members of the Israeli Embassy in London 
> had cancelled an external meeting, having had prior warning of the 
> bombings.  The answer he was given was that the police had received no 
> such warning.  What happened to this story?  Having scoured the papers 
> from cover to cover on Friday it too was dead, smothered, lost without 
> trace.
>
> Many in the UK accept we no longer have a free press.  Many consider the 
> deaths of journalists in Afghanistan and Iraq to be highly suspect.  Some 
> of us know that our so-called democracy is a sham, underlined by an 
> indentured and fearful media.  Without a free press, freedom's a mess.
>
> I was glued to my television screen on 9th September 2001.  An Israeli 
> politician interviewed seemed almost elated at the spectre of the twin 
> towers collapsing.  His message was that this justified everything Israel 
> had been saying and doing.  The day of the Hawks had arrived and he was 
> exultant.  The twin towers acted as a justification for western warmongers 
> to perpetrate atrocities globally.  A deal was done with Russia.  Tear up 
> the Russian contract to purchase oil from Iraq, compensate them for breach 
> of contract with Iraqi oil revenues - oh, and of course persuade our press 
> that the 'poor Ch! echens' be re-designated as Chechen terrorists.  This 
> all happened well before Beslan.  The drugging of a female journalist 
> determined to try to broker a peace with the Chechens at Beslan received 
> little news coverage.  Beslan, 9/11, Madrid and London; these highly 
> publicised stories only serve to justify unjustifiable wars against yet 
> more civilian populations in Islamic countries.  Atrocities like these 
> raise the megaphone to the Hawks for War.  When will the doves of peace be 
> allowed to speak?
>
> Despite the fact that our press is no longer free, the excuse of WMD's for 
> perpetrating the war on Iraq has been proven to be a lie.  Dr David 
> Kelly's death in the wake of this news first appearing has never been 
> fully explained.  No inquest was held.  The Court of enquiry, under Lord 
> Hutton found, without much evidence, that he had committed suicide.  Three 
> medical specialists wrote a letter to the London Evening Standard.  They 
> questioned the possibility of a man committing suicide by slashing his 
> wrists and ingesting co-proxamol when only a fraction of one co-proxamol 
> was found in his stomach contents, with insufficient blood loss at the 
> scene for either! , or both together, to be the cause of death.  Evidence 
> completely ignored.
>
> All our politicians know that Saddam Hussein had WMD's. Whilst this 
> knowledge, put into the public arena, might have perhaps justified a war 
> on Iraq it was too embarrassing to give this information the oxygen of 
> publicity.  When Michael Howard was in office the Conservative Government 
> had allowed the sale of the Super-Gun and Matrix Churchill to Iraq.
>
> At the end of the first Gulf War a warehouse full of WMD's was found in 
> Komashia.  Barrels of the plague, anthrax, sarin, mustard gas were piled 
> high.  What did we do?  The RAF was ordered in to bomb the warehouse to 
> smithereens.  No inventory was taken.  Why?  Because the containers proved 
> the WMD's had been supplied by us.  Haliburton's role in selling WMD's to 
> Iraq has been given wide publicity, mostly because of Cheney's connection 
> to Haliburton.  I was told by an RAF serviceman, that any inventory of the 
> contents of the wa! rehouse in Komashia would prove highly embarrassing. 
> So although it might have been possible to discreetly trace back all the 
> WMD's sold to Iraq under our war by proxy against the Ayatollah Khomeini, 
> it might be too discomfiting to admit if news leaked out.  No evidence, no 
> news, no embarrassment.
>
> The establishment will always try to denigrate those of us who make these 
> sort of connections into 'conspiracy theorists' and cling to their own, 
> apparently more sane position as 'cock-up theorists'.  Whereas the truth 
> is that our establishments are involved in the most enormous cock-ups, 
> which require super conspiracies to cover them up.  As Lord Acton said: 
> 'everything secret degenerates,' and we have too many secrets.
>
> So what warning was given to the Israeli Embassy?  Who gave it?  Why were 
> they tipped off when the British authorities were left in the dark?  How 
> long did they have the warning?  Did they make any effort to relay this 
> information to the British authorities?  Who benefited from the attack in 
> London on Thursday?  Whose interests were served by the killing of 
> ordinary people during the G8 conference at Gleneagles?
>
> Unfortunately those who work at senior levels in our so called 
> 'intelligence services' are incapable of asking these questions.  They are 
> an unaccountable force operating outside the boundaries of competitive 
> market forces, answerable to no one: surrounded by secrecy, with an 
> inability to communicate effectively or efficiently.  You can bet all 
> efforts to ascertain the truth about the cancellation of an external 
> meeting involving some Israeli Embassy staff will be ignored.
>
> Osama bin Laden's very existence justifies our War on Terrorism.  Without 
> him, or some other monster to focus on, our politicians would have a far 
> more difficult time justifying, Afghanistan, Iraq, Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo 
> Bay.  I have been told by charity workers in Afghanistan that although 
> Osama has been in the gun sights of military personnel they have never 
> been given the authority to pull their triggers.  I would love to 
> interview Osama.  To find out whether he is still working for our 
> intelligence services and what such an intelligent man is doing by 
> sponsoring terrorism which plays into the hands of the Hawks for War.  The 
> anthrax attack on the ! US Postal system was eventually traced back, using 
> DNA, to a military laboratory in Maryland.  The rug was then pulled on any 
> enquiry into that anthrax attack.
>
> When enquiries are papered over or abandoned we have to ask how much 
> Western collusion there is in acts of terrorism.  The actions in London 
> have only provided one more gag on those of us who would sue for equality 
> of all mankind; to value all life equally; to bring justice to all people; 
> to give a voice to the voiceless.  The London bombings did not benefit the 
> doves of peace; they benefited the Hawks of War.
>
> If we want the lion to lie down with the lamb and ensure the Hawks will 
> trouble neither, perhaps it is time to raise a roar of truth amongst the 
> doves.  (1,301 words)
>
> About the writer:
>
> Helen Pender is culturally a Christian, having been raised in the British 
> traditions of Swaziland and Kent.  She is doubtful though whether God is 
> wholly a Christian entity.  She stood as an independent candidate against 
> corruption in Rutland and Melton at the last election.  She graduated from 
> Lucy Cavendish College, Cambridge in 1998, having read English, and has 
> found life as a critic of the establishment financially impossible.
>
>
> Item Ends.
>
> http://www.mason-rule.bizhosting.com
>
>
>
>