The revelation that undercover Met officers spied on the family of Jean Charles De Menezes after they murdered him, leaves me utterly appalled.
You have to consider this in the context of the lies that the Met assiduously spread about De Menezes – that he entered the tube without buying a ticket, that he vaulted the ticket gates, that he ran away from officers, that he was wearing a bulky jacket.
All of these were lies. In truth the poor man had entered the tube normally and legally, walked calmly and sat down with a free newspaper. He wore a short tight denim jacket. Then totally without any cause or justification from his actions whatsoever, his murderers shot him multiple times in the head. Just because his Brazilian complexion looked a bit Arab.
I can think of no category of lie worse than that told by a murderer against the reputation of their victim.
The police did everything they could to mislead the media, planting lies and encouraging stories they knew to be untrue. Personally I find it extremely suspicious that numerous CCTV cameras were found not to be working, and have little doubt that the police destroyed that evidence.
There can be no other motive for spying on De Menezes’ family than either the hope of gaining information to feed to the media to discredit the man they murdered, or to attempt to pervert the course of justice.
They did not have to worry – their were plenty of others to pervert the course of justice for them, including the DPP and above all, Sir Michael Wright, as disgusting a piece of scum as ever sat on an English bench, who directed the inquest jury that they could not return a verdict of unlawful killing. (I was delighted to find that, when I googled Sir Michael Wright, my article on him came high on the first page. Is that result tailored by Google for me, or is it general?)
The recent revelation that the Met spied on Menezes’ family sparked very little public interest. It should. It is a still more appalling outrage than the Murdoch press hacking Millie Dowler. At least the Murdoch gang had not actually murdered Millie Dowler themselves. The De Menezes family were being spied on by their son’s and brother’s murderers.
Peacewisher
“Anyone else on here never heard of “Fahrenheit 9/11″?”
Dear God. I’m sure everyone here has it beside their bed, but for the unenlightened, CAN YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN WHAT IT IS ABOUT. Why are you so afraid?
Node
“Please answer my question: are those two 911 theories you referenced the only 911 conspiracy theories that you have heard?”
Yes, what others are there? Why are you so afraid of discussing them?
God there’s an awful lot of coyness here.
I heard at the time that he worked with London transport as an electrician. Does it say anwhere on the inquest who his employer was ?
I remember also at the time, photo’s from the trains showing holes in the floor,metal bent up the way.Haven’t seen them since.
And it is fishy when suudenly there is a CCTV black out on all the camera’s that would’ve sown what happened on and off the train….as there was on 7/7.You can’t fart in public without it being filmed unless it is something of extreme importance…. then its not just one camera out of order… it’s a series,from train platforms ,busses and tube stations and tube’s themselves.I bet that company lost their contract, NOT !!
Dubai showed the world how CCTV can identify and follow murderers. Mossad in this case.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzzzTtpo8AY
The best that Scotland Yard can do is hastily arranged stills that didn’t fit the narrative… British rail doesn’t always run on time.
It was in 2005 that Conservative MP Andrew Tyrie became Founding Chairman of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Extraordinary Rendition that examined the issue of extraordinary rendition and other related issues of State criminality. Tyrie quoted the ‘right honourable’ Jack Straw MP as saying:
“Unless we all start to believe in conspiracy theories and that the officials are lying, that I am lying, that behind this there is some kind of secret state which is in league with some dark forces in the United States… there simply is no truth in the claims that the United Kingdom had been involved in rendition.”
In late October 2012 Ian Cobain, in his book Cruel Brittainia, disclosed that Britain had been advised “within days” of 11th September 2001 of the American’s plans to abduct ‘suspects’ and transport them to secret military prisons around the world. Cobain also revealed that “MI5 and MI6 officers carried out around 100 interrogations at the US prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Guantanamo’s Camp Seven didn’t officially exist for two years owing to a conspiracy to keep its existence secret, and it is there the CIA abuses and violates ‘interrogates’ its 14 choice alleged ‘terrorists’ and for which a $49 million request for a Camp Seven revamp has recently been submitted by the United States Southern Command.
In light of these revelations it’s worth re-considering Jack Straw’s words:
“Unless we all start to believe in conspiracy theories and that the officials are lying, that I am lying, that behind this there is some kind of secret state which is in league with some dark forces in the United States… there simply is no truth in the claims that the United Kingdom had been involved in rendition.”
For the avoidance of doubt and in Straw’s own words, everyone was right to believe in the rendition and torture “conspiracy theories”; right to believe “that the officials [were] lying”; right to believe that “[Jack Straw was] lying” and, further, right to believe “there is some kind of secret state which is league with some dark forces in the United States.”
Another so called conspiracy theory was, in a relatively short period of time, exposed as a conspiracy fact. Better still, we have in the words of Jack Straw official confirmation of the existence of a “secret state” that operates hidden from public view, thereby making the age old “conspiracy theory” about the existence of an international Secret State, officially, a “conspiracy fact”.
J7 Update
Anon: CAN YOU PLEASE use GooGle and stop shouting ! Or are you unenlightened ’bout that too ?
Donny
Just tell me. Why are you so shy?
Khan
We all see and hear things we are not supposed to know. We are not supposed to know that ISIS/ Islamic Emirate took permission for attacking Mosul and Baghdad from the Chief intelligence officer, Barzani’s son, of Kurdistan, the Israel-affiliated Chief intelligence officer of Jordan, from US intelligence head, from William Hague FCO, and of several heads of banned Islamic groups.
We only know because the Israeli -backed PKK leaked the info.
So we are not supposed to know that the Islamic Emirate is a tool for the creation of the Greater Israel in the lands of Syria and Iraq. We are not supposed to know that Israel regards Kurdistan and Afghanistan as belonging to the lost tribes of Judaea after Allah dispersed them for their idolatry and brutality.
We are not supposed to know that the warring Jihadists have massacred thousands of practising Muslims in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, Libya, and Africa on the basis that they were deficient in their practise of Islam. We are supposed as Muslims to respect their brutal violence on a basis of trust in the same way the English are supposed to respect the police’s brutal violence on a basis of trust.
Political Islam and the Zionist West are the same thing. Live with it. Put up with it. The way to put Islam and truth up. so far as I’m concerned, is not to hope that the enemies of Islam are going to do it for you. Political Muslim leaders are beyond stupidity and so are the Zionists. We have to make another plan to show the real nature of Islam through the ways of our prophet peace be upon him.
The Companions of our prophet were not permitted to remain in Mecca under a political agreement with their enemies, the idol-worshippers. But every boy in the Benefit Britain mosques is chatting about when they went and when they plan to go to Syria.
oh we weren’t supposed to know that either.
They are supposed to emigrate to a place that is run and controlled by Islam. Hence the need for Israel to create such a place, to legitimise jihad (their use of Jihadists to carve out a Greater Israel for them) in the eyes of the Muslims.
This is all very old stuff, and well past its sell-by date. I was being promised the Arab spring and Caliphate 12 years ago by those who knew about the Zionist plans. Now that we see the mountains of destruction in those Muslim countries, Political Islam is finally exposed as a total fraud and a waste of time.
For a start, there’s the “magic arab” theory. Briefly, this proposes that 4 regular US domestic flights were hijacked by 19 muslim fanatics, armed only with box-cutters and under the control of a fiendish matermind in a cave in Afghanistan, who managed to evade all security and take control of said planes, which they steered with pinpoint precision into WTC and the Pentagon.
Before you laugh I should point out that there is actually some evidence to support this theory. It was briefly run past us on September 13, but isn’t referred to much these days. Curiously, those who propose this particular theory are often in my experience the least likely to know or remember what the evidence actually is and are most reluctant to discuss the matter.
Seems the CCTV on the London underground, and on the occasional bus, has a habit of breaking down at key moments…
For a comprehensive discussion of the events of 9/11 this is worth your time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DOnAn_PX6M
Google result:
“Craig Murray – Blog Archive – The Disgraceful Sir Michael Wright, A …”
Fourth entry on the first page for me. That’s my first Google search today. My router was off overnight so so it should be my first search from the IP address I was assigned half an hour ago. My browser had no Google cookie to submit.
What did you enter in the search bar? I should be fully equipped with surveillance tools from Google, and it would be interesting to compare notes.
“For a start, there’s the “magic arab” theory.”
What is ‘magic’ about hijacking a plane, MJ? Clearly you do not believe the planes were hijacked, so it is fair to ask what you do believe. Don’t be shy, lay it out. I promise you there is absolutely no reason to be afraid. Variety is the spice of life!
Anon. One can only guess you’ve hit your head and forgotten how to spell Habbabuk.
Lwtc247
Please inform readers what your name stands for.
Anon, there are very few moderation policy rules here at Craig’s, but not diverting threads onto 9/11 is one of them, which could explain why you’re not getting answers. Here, this might help:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farenheit_911
is it spelt BBCHijack?
I was inviting someone remind us of the evidence supporting the hijack theory, which is perhaps the most commonly held theory and therefore deserves a little scrutiny before we move on to other ones. It’s not a trick, there is some evidence to support the theory. Don’t be shy, lay it out. I promise you there is absolutely no reason to be afraid.
Ba’al Zevul, 3:12 pm; my search string:
Sir Michael Wright
or CCTVHabit?
Anon 26 Jul, 2014 – 2:39 pm
“Yes [those are the only 911 conspiracy theories I have heard], what others are there? Why are you so afraid of discussing them?”
I’m not afraid of discussing them, in fact I would enjoy discussing them with someone in good faith. However, you don’t qualify. Your claim is implausible, like someone claiming the only thing he knows about Tony Blair is that he is a committed Christian.
Most of us come here to discuss things in good faith. The honest exchange of beliefs is a powerful mechanism for clarifying thought. Several people pooling their opinions and knowledge can lead to a deeper understanding for all involved, including onlookers.
For some reason a few like to disrupt this exchange, probably for diverse reasons – ideological; attention-seeking; to protect those that the truth might damage. Your claims are blatantly dishonest so you’re not ideologically motivated, and I can’t have a discussion in good faith with the other two types. Therefore, I will not discuss my 911 beliefs with you, except to say this : some people try to inhibit understanding of what happened that day by disrupting discussion about it.
Clark
“Anon, there are very few moderation policy rules here at Craig’s, but not diverting threads onto 9/11 is one of them, which could explain why you’re not getting answers.”
Bollocks, Clark. All sorts of crackpots here have been suggesting conspiracy theories regarding 9/11 and 7/7, I’ve been asking for clarification. The idea that I’m not getting answers because they’re sticking to the rules having previously broken them is laughable, as you well know.
Node
Why won’t you discuss your ‘9/11 beliefs’? I’m not disrupting discussion about it, I’m encouraging it. What do you believe?
The 9/11 thread has been reopened for comments. Further 9/11 discussion here will be deleted.
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/01/the_911_post/comment-page-10/
Craig,
Oh dear,
Your chums on here, the btl commentators, are a bunch of fruit loops.
That is quite sad, for your own commentary deserves a bit better than this.
Nice one, MJ! There’s also that conspiracy theory that after 10 years of sanctions, inspections, and the gradual starvation of his people, Saddam Hussein had Weapons of Mass Destruction.
There was even a more outrageous version of the WMD theory that said these WMD could hit us in 45 minutes. Rumour had it that this was displayed on the front page of the most popular paper in Britain, so some thought must have been true.
Thankfully, none believes these conspiracy theories now, but the same storytellers are still at work. Well. you can fool some of the people some of the time…
With the search term “Sir Michael Wright” Startpage delivers Craig’s 2008 article as the third result.
“There’s also that conspiracy theory that after 10 years of sanctions, inspections, and the gradual starvation of his people, Saddam Hussein had Weapons of Mass Destruction”
Any conspiracy theory worth the name will be based on at least one piece of evidence. On that basis the WMD theory doesn’t qualify for the label.
“There is only one thing in life worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about.”
Oscar Wilde
I guess the current version of “Anon” is one of those trolls or shills that Edward Snowden talked about originating from one of our great spy agencies to disrupt dissent in blogs such as this.
Personally I think it is fine to talk about these individuals and their intentions but never to make the mistake of entering into dialogue with them or answering any of their facile questions especially when the answer is only a few mouse clicks away on google.
LOL, MJ
Wasn’t there some evidence about Saddam getting yellowcake from Nigeria. Apparently looked very suspicious to many. Could even be used as the payload (!)