In the last decade, now 7/7 has dropped out of this statistic, only one person has been killed in the UK by an Islamic terrorist attack. Let me repeat that. In the last decade, one person has been killed in the UK by an Islamic terrorist attack. That unfortunate death was Lee Rigby.
Rigby’s tragic murder illustrated how easy it is for terrorists to commit an outrage. Two very disorganised Nigerian nutters murdered him with knives. Unfortunately, if a couple of nutters decide to go at someone on the street, they have a high chance of success.
Which is why you would have to be a lunatic actually to believe MI5’s repeated claims during the last decade that there are thousands of dedicated terrorists out there, fanatical determined and organised, but in a decade of constant effort they have succeeded in killing nobody else. There were, MI5 claim, six actual terrorist plots this year but fortunately MI5 saved all of us.
If you believe MI5’s stories, there are two possibilities. The first is that we have security services of a quite incredible efficiency, able to foil random terrorism, generally regarded as near impossible. The second is that we have thousands of dedicated terrorists of such incredible ineptitude that they can’t manage to kill anybody, even when they could choose any random undefended target in the entire UK and any method from knives to poison to hit and run to shooting to bombs, and don’t mind losing their own lives in the attempt. We have rubbish terrorists.
There is of course a third possibility – that these thousands of dedicated terrorists and these scores of foiled plots in the last decade were inventions, or at least the grossest exaggerations, by the security services. A number of fantasists have indeed been convicted and jailed. But the only, single, potential attacker in recent years who actually possessed a viable bomb was a British army soldier with a hatred of Muslims. And naturally he was not counted as nor convicted as a terrorist. Terrorists are Muslims.
The famous “liquid bomb plot”, in which it eventually transpired, unreported by mainstream media, that there were in fact no bombs and no plane tickets and the suspicious chemical found in baby bottles was Milton sterilising solution for baby bottles, is perhaps the best example.
But of course, lots of people are convicted of terrorism. Indeed law after law has stretched the definition of terrorism so far that I am almost certainly guilty of it just by publishing this blogpost. Meanwhile the Government is concentrating on bullying universities and students to ban speakers who say exactly the kind of thing I am writing here, speakers who protest against the detention and harassment of Muslims, and the continued policy of bombing Muslim countries and killing civilians.
Because there is almost no Islamic terrorism in the UK. It is virtually non-existent. It is not the true reason the corporate state wants ever more surveillance power, ever more restriction on freedom of speech and even, in universities, freedom of thought. Do not be fooled. Fight back.
Clark
“Republicofscotland, 8:23 pm, I try to remain open-minded, but not so open-minded that my brain falls out.”
_____________________
I loved that! May I use it from time to time, please?
Habbabkuk, you certainly may xx
Clark
OK you may not be a self content you may be on a journey to enlightenment, whatever, you have given up the struggle.
I don’t like to state something as fact until I am certain, there are plenty that will some with very little evidence, thats what they do.
***** MODS – Whilst I remember please remove the Rigby address 10.41 *****
The job is to first expose the corruption then have in investigated and prosecuted lawfully. That is my goal. And I can only do a little bit but I can do it effectively. If you are knackered by it I don’t blame you for taking a breather but don’t discourage others.
PeterBeswick, I haven’t given up. I just leave the detailed investigation to those who are more suited to the task, and cite important but less-known facts when they are relevant.
Maybe Spivey has some elements of the truth – even a stopped clock is right twice a day – but he definitely muddies the waters with invented disinformation, so personally I ignore his “revelations”, and I warn others about his “methods” (remembering how much time I wasted on red herrings myself).
Peter at 10.32 – re the last paragraph – I’ve tried reading this backwards, forwards and sideways, but nope – makes no sense. Can you translate for the thickos here?
Peter Beswick: Far some being “self contented pricks/cunts”, as you persuasively argue, people who try to be open minded cannot simply go nodding their heads at every conspiracy theory they read online. Offering nothing but abusive language is not going to change the opinion of anyone at all, and I’m surprised anybody could be silly enough to think it would.
*
RoS: It doesn’t make one anymore truthful than the other, however it’s a matter of opinion, Spivey has considerable traffic and a higher rating than Craig, they keep coming back for something Glenn, and if you read the comments and the forums, it’s clearly not to deride the man, as some would like.”
You think truthfulness is simply a matter of opinion? Fascinating.
Do you know the well known huckster Alex Jones? Sprivey is a wanna-be AJ type. He wants to be talked about, he loves the fact that people are gullible enough to believe every word he says.
Personally, I’m pretty sure Alex Jones is a CIA asset. He’s there to discredit any genuine undertaking by the secret services, because nobody would take his ravings seriously. Everything is a “false flag”. No amount of proof is sufficient. His followers become misinformed, deluded, and discredit themselves as genuine critics of the State, which is exactly what the CIA wants.
He rides the bereaved, such as in the Sandy Hook massacre. We’ve been through that extensively enough here. But in claiming “false flag”, he (and all his believers) are doing the gun lobby’s dirty work for them.
Back home, look what you’ve done to yourself. Beswick too. You have seriously undermined your credibility by sticking so faithfully to that lunatic Spivey. Shout about that all you like, but that is what you have done – with no gain to show for it at all. It’s divisive, and undermining. Good work Spivey, MI5 and so on.
Rose
Sorry quite a bit came out, some of it quite complex is there an element I can start with?
eg the truth is emerging could go into a couple of chapters, ask away
I will continue to say that I said Netanyahu was in London on 7/77 in answer to a question for as long as I continue to be asked about that. If somebody wants me to stop repeating this, he has only to stop asking me why I said that.
If it is true that Blair was “entertained” in Washington by the male prostitute Guckert/Gannon (as Guckert/Gannon boasted) on the night before the day when Dr. Kelly’s dead body was found, he might well have been influenced into going along with the cover story of Dr. Kelly’s death.
7/7, of course, not 7/77. Oh, for an editing function!
Why do you thing bLiar needed an inducement to go along with Kelly getting suicided?
The 1001 tales of Miranda
PS
English is a highly redundant language people will know what you are conveying or mean, no point to correct yourself. Blogging is an on the go operation, so no one expects proof read publications.
I was thinking more of a stick than a carrot. Blackmail, in other words.
FAO Lysias
from here
Two points about Kelly.
1- His last phone call was to a journalist in US from a telephone box before he went missing! Who was this journalist and what did Kelly tell him/her?
2- Soon as his body was found no less than defence secretary called on Mrs. kelly and was there in her house for a bout two hours. Why?
bLiar soon after the Iraq war purchased John Gielgud mansion, for three million pounds (then) his prime ministerial salary was not that much to even cover a mortgage for that kind of money.
Kelly died and he knew he will die, in fact he had told his acquaintances; “if these two countries go to war I will end up dead somewhere!”
Kelly could have single handedly stop the Iraq war! US needed UK to legitimise the rush to war by defer to the British wisdom to sell the war to the US
hamburger muncherscitizens. bLiar only brought legitimacy to the table and nothing else, therefore Kelly could have stopped him dead in his tracks given the depth of the anti war feelings in UK.What do you think?
Have you researched this particular angle at all?
Peter at 11.29. Thanks – all I would ask is that you express your heartfelt opinions coherently.
I expect as a political activist you will have read Orwell’s journalism; if not, do read his Politics and the English Language essay. It was written in 1946 and the examples of bad writing he gives are of course of the time, but the points he makes are just as relevant now.
For example “self contents” and “cyber entropy” are meaningless phrases and convey nothing.
Fed up
Craig made the same mistake years ago, The war started in March Kelly died in July
The phone calls don’t come into the equation, Hune’s (days later) visit was part of a “charm offensive” honestly I know it hard to believe but Mrs K was persuaded to do her “duty”
Rose
I am not a political activist, I haven’t read Orwell, I haven’t read any books other that technical texts since leaving school (a long time ago)
Self Contents and cyber entropy have very important meanings but not to you and I can’t be arsed to explain them.
You have your beliefs, I’ve got mine. My emotional outburst had the desired result.
You wont understand, don’t worry.
Also, many people in the UK believe the ‘Rigby murder’ was a hoax. As for the ‘liquid explosive’ that was supposedly going to be produced on the plane, it would have been impossible to make, as it takes hours and needs refrigeration (perhaps the ‘alleged bomb maker’ was going to smuggle a portable fridge onto the plane, then spend hours in the toilet making his ‘bomb’ (after getting his passport and plane ticket).
Bit like some joker trying to light a fuse in his shoes, in full view of his fellow-passengers in adjoining seats, or of Hani Hanjour performing impossible aerobatics flying a Boeing into the Pentagon, having not been able to competently fly a Cessna a few months before – I won’t say ‘you couldn’t make it up’, ‘cos someone obviously did!
@Bob Smith : “the flaw in your logic is that fitting such devices …….would hand the state an instant means of tracking every vehicle on the road in real time, which is a huge wet dream for everyone on the Thames embankment”
There is no harm done to personal freedoms and human rights with police being able to track vehicles, which if driven inappropriately are dangerous weapons. Vehicles are not the occupants. Even if a vehicle could be tracked by a speed control device (this would require additional transponder-type features in each vehicle) it would still provides no evidence as to whom is in the vehicle.
PeterBeswick : “You wont understand, don’t worry.”
Aww, dude… you’re just so – like – deep, man…
Info. I put up a link to that company on Company Check. It was deleted as well as messages from Clark and me saying hello to each other. Very draconian these Mods.
“Mary, it may be that this thread is being hammered by something pretending to be web-crawling indexing software – a little bird told me that a previous thread about the secret services got that treatment.” Clark.
So, they appear to have sufficient resources to be able to waste time attacking the blog of an entirely peaceful whistleblower and leaving muddy footprints in his lobby as a threat. Fine. Then they do not require any extra power or resources, since they are able to spend OUR money undertaking this type of harassment rather than surveilling criminals and terrorists. Where exactly is the ‘accountability’?
“What kind of twat would go to the office every day and help kill or destroy lives of the people who pay their wages, and enjoy it?” peter beswick
Actually quite a few people. Most of the City of London/Wall Street, in fact. It is normative.
But I know what you mean.
They are here. Watching. Now. They spy with their very big eye.
This was the Facebook page of the ‘Team Lee United Forces’ unregistered charity, but all references to the charity have been removed since they announced they were awaiting their charity reg. no. (which presumably never arrived).
https://www.facebook.com/teamleeunitedforces
The only remnant of the charity on there is this pic at the bottom of this page:
https://www.facebook.com/teamleeunitedforces/photos_stream?tab=photos_stream
Suhayl Saadi, 10:27 am:
Suhayl, we mustn’t assume that GCHQ do this themselves; remember that outsourcing is the order of the day – even Snowden was hired from a private company. It may be just that an over-enthusiastic private contractor hammers any thread anywhere that seems critical of the secret services, and then submits a suitably inflated bill based upon the total number of threads attacked.
Suhayl / Clark
I must say that I haven’t noticed the last few threads being “hammered” by anyone looking as if they’re with the security services and the like.
It’s true however that there has been heavy traffic from a couple of (seeming) newbies – eg, “Peter Beswick”, “Clown Posse” and a couple of others.
Are you suggesting that these characters are really agents of the state?
Mary
I should have imagined it’s not so unusual for planned charities to fold and not to be proceeded with for a variety of reasons. There are probably new entrants into the charities field, and departures from it,every day of the week.
I believe the number of registered charities in the UK number is in the tens of thousands (correct me if I’m mistaken).
How to Neutralise the Effectiveness of an Anti-Totalitarian State Blog. 10 useful tips.
Manipulate the output by diluting the major threatening themes by 1) infiltrate and influence output, 2) Attach endorsement by known “nutters” / baby killers ( Icke was one of the best but saturation use neutralised him), 3) Promotion of external harmful publicity attached to blog host or influential contributors (IC’s)), 4) Create competing blogs and promote more public acceptance to output. 5) Blackmail host, bribe or coerce with threats to change tack. 6) Publicly discredit host / IC’s – destabilise them, 7) Disable host / IC’s. 8) Disrupt output through hacking (overload input attacks, false inputs etc) 9) Feed false intel (Strawmen), 10) Limit output with legislation.
Its no wonder Mi5 need more money, if there were real terrorists goodness knows how much money they would need. Control is everything, lose it and they lose the ability to rule.
Habbabkuk 11:38 am; you don’t notice it because the site’s system administrators do a very good job of hardening the server against such attacks, which are orders of magnitude more intense than any normal commenter could achieve. I assure you that such attacks are real, and that threads on certain subjects seem to be the target – anything about Julian Assange, for instance. However, their origins, and indeed why anyone bothers making attacks that ultimately prove ineffective, remain mysterious.
Habbabkuk, such attacks don’t usually try to post comments. They just make request after request at high speed, wasting processing power in an apparent attempt to overload the server.