The news from Manchester continues to horrify as each individual tragedy gets confirmed in all its heart-rending detail.
In my two posts in the immediate aftermath of the Manchester bombing, I concluded:
If it was a home made bomb, it was a remarkably powerful one. It would be very unusual for a lone terrorist to be able to make a bomb this powerful. It is hard to think of any incident where an individual acting entirely alone has successfully done that.
It has become plain that the reason the critical warning has been declared (which is British for State of Emergency) is that the security services believe such a powerful portable bomb almost certainly requires organisational support to build it. I was subject to accusations that I was secretly suggesting that this attack was perpetrated by the British state, in order to influence the election. It is undoubtedly true that the timing of the attack is remarkable – it came as Tory poll ratings were plummeting, Theresa May had just made the screeching U-turn or pretended U-turn on social care, and then appeared totally out of her depth in the Andrew Neil interview, destroying her “who do you trust” narrative.
In fact, nothing I wrote can in any way be construed as indicating I thought that the British state was implicated in the attack. For the record, I do not think it is remotely likely the British state was implicated in the attack. I knew a lot of senior people in the security services, and a few in special forces, and there is not a single one I suspect would do this kind of thing, or not actively seek to stop it if they came across it. I simply discount the idea.
But the election is the elephant in the room. We cannot pretend this has no impact on the election. Historians will look back at how this did or did not affect the course of the election.
I have a number of concerns. The first is that I argued that the Russian referendum in Crimea was not legitimate because you can’t have a free and fair election with troops patrolling the streets. I still hold that view about the Crimea, and I have real concerns about proceeding with the election during, in effect, a state of emergency.
The second point is that, because I rule out a British government false flag, that does not mean that I rule out the idea that the timing of the attack was an attempt to affect the course of the election. It seems very likely that it was timed to affect the election, especially when you consider that an attack from the same kind of jihadists occurred in France just before their recent election.
You would have expected an attack with such a sophisticated bomb to be part of a pattern of more or less simultaneous attacks using similar technology. That is what the security services did expect; hence the “Critical” warning. The fact there has so far been only one attack suggests to me that it was brought forward quickly to a target of opportunity due to the snap election.
There are many non-British state and non-state groups which might wish to influence the election. Remember that the very definition of terrorism is violence with a political objective. If it does not have a political objective it is not terrorism. Let me make this observation. The ideology of virtually all “Islamic” terrorism stems from Saudi Arabia. Wahhabism is fundamental to the very foundation of the rule of the Saudi royal family. Every known jihadist terrorist group, including ISIS, Al-Nusra, and Al-Qaeda, has received funding from Saudi Arabia. Here is a fascinating article by MI6’s Alastair Crooke on Wahhabism and the “duality” of the superficially hostile ISIS/Saudi relationship. Everything we know about Salman Abedi is consistent with this influence.
Jeremy Corbyn has continually criticised Saudi Arabia’s appalling human rights record and its devastating attacks on civilians in Yemen. Corbyn has vowed to stop arms supplies to Saudi Arabia. By contrast, Theresa May and her ministers have repeatedly visited Saudi Arabia and positively kowtowed to its rulers, and looked to increase arms sales to Saudi Arabia. Who do you think the Saudi ruling class, the World’s leading sponsors of terrorism, wish to win the General Election?
Furthermore a key part of the Saudi sponsored Sunni terrorist surge is support for Al-Nusra and the other jihadist rebel groups fighting to overthrow Assad in Syria. I do not support Assad, but neither have I ever thought it remotely sane to support a violent conflict to overthrow him and replace him with jihadist head-choppers. Yet the British establishment, and especially the Conservative Party, has been gung-ho to bomb Syria and help the jihadists to replace Assad.
Who has stood against the bombing of Syria and against British military support for the Saudi/jihadist agenda in Syria? Jeremy Corbyn and the SNP.
I have no doubt whatsoever the jihadists would try to influence the election, and try to influence it against Corbyn. As the great journalist John Pilger said yesterday of this possibility that ISIS are trying to influence the election against Corbyn and the SNP:
“They know how to intervene in public discourse every day and in politics every day. So that suggestion may well have a great deal of validity.”
Security issues traditionally play well for the right in an election. At time of attack there is a tendency to rally to authority figures. Rather than a very inadequate politician under fire, the Prime Minister has been able to appear in an entirely unchallenged setting as a figure of patriotism. Let me be 100% clear. It is not that May has done anything wrong; it is just that these effects are what the terrorists are probably counting on.
So in our hearts we must never forget the unfortunate victims of this bombing, so young and with so much talent. We must remember the horribly maimed as well as the dead, and ensure they receive all the support they need. We must condemn without ceasing the disgusting violence that destroys so many lives.
But we must also do something very difficult. We must press in our heads a reset button. We must remain entirely rational in considering the political choices before us, and not allow the incident to affect – in any direction – our political calculation on how to vote. Otherwise that is a major victory for the terrorists.
Craig, two things puzzle me.
Lots of the media have interviewed Phil and Kim Dick, who reportedly were standing 30 feet from the bomber and “were blown off their feet” by the blast. If it was a nail bomb – or even if it wasn’t – how could they have survived unscathed? I’m curious that no journalist has wondered.
Also, as far as I know, none of the media has made any reference to the part Britain played, alongside France, in trashing Libya in 2011. Is that because it’s regarded as completely irrelevant, or is it in order not to embarrass the Conservative?
I think your second question is quite simple. The entire media supported as cheerleaders the attack on LIbya, so they are not going to admit it was a disaster. In fact there is still almost no coverage of the total mess Libya now is, and certainly no admission of responsibility.
On your first point, no I am not suspicious, you do get random effects like this.
Without going into detail, it’s been suggested that this wasn’t a conventional high explosive like Semtex, and its blast effect was probably less, while it still acted as an effective propellant for the shrapnel. There are other indications that this was the case.
Thank you. I wasn’t implying anything, I was just puzzled. Phil Dick is a big man and he said that afterwards “there were nuts and bolts all over the floor.” I understand that there can be odd random effects, but it still surprises me that as old a hand as Jon Snow didn’t comment that Mr Dick and his wife had survived without a scratch. Maybe he was too focused (or thought that the viewers would be) on the story they had to tell about the victims.
Random effects of this kind are indeed quite common. The shrapnel effect could have considerable gaps in the pattern. Even professionally designed and manufactured bombs and grenades do this. Plus the effect of intervening bodies. 30 feet is quite far. The shrapnel would have fanned out a lot by that point, many going into the floor or over the heads of the people nearby. At that distance it is also possible that the two were knocked off their feet before much of the shrapnel reached them. Without a hard outer case to build up pressure some blast would be ahead of the shrapnel at this range. I am not any kind of expert but have taken an interest in these kinds of things. That is my take, but for whatever reasons you find many people close to explosions if this type who are not hit by any shrapnel.
Yes, the entire media and even the Liberal party. Why were there no marches as there were against Iraq? I thought there would be more not less. Was it because there were no ground troops, or because of the media.
Why do people not remember you don’t go to war unless you have to.
I even heard postgrad ethics students saying it was an ethical humanitarian intervention.
30 feet in this kind of crowd probably equates to four or five people away.
Basically the projectiles would have been halted by the people between them and the bomb but they would still have been hit by the air shock wave.
And as regards your first paragraph, Jiusito, in my readings of details of previous atrocities I have noticed this account of events before. And far more than once. As you say-no journalist has ever wondered, apparently. I would be delighted to be proved wrong.
I do not believe that this vile act was in any way orchestrated by the current Government, but the timing is very convenient for the Prime Minister.
She is undoubtedly looking to exploit the fallout and will be hoping for some kind of Falklands moment to save her neck. Perhaps this will backfire as people are made aware that the cuts to Police, Army, NHS and other relevant services will be highlighted. History may well judge that Austerity came back to haunt them.
It’s breaking news right now; she wants NATO to bomb Libya, or it was “breaking news” because the story just got pulled from the Guardian. Another of her U-Turns perhaps?
It appears that she wants “The World” to bomb Syria and Iraq. I thought we’d already done that.
Read more at: https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news/politics/theresa-may-calls-world-join-forces-combat-terror/
@ Dr Awesome MD May 25, 2017 at 10:14
‘In the Light of African Liberation Day Imperialist Rats Will Run Away’:
https://www.blackagendareport.com/african_liberation_day_under_neocolonialism
‘….In 2011, the late Libyan leader Moammar Qaddafi was in the crosshairs of the imperialists’ gunsights. An April 2, 2011 e-mail to Clinton explains frankly and bluntly why he was targeted. “[Libya’s 143 tons of gold] was accumulated prior to the current rebellion and was intended to be used to establish a pan-African currency based on the Libyan golden Dinar. This plan was designed to provide the Francophone African Countries with an alternative to the French franc…”
The e-mail goes on to explain: “French intelligence officers discovered this plan [for a pan-African currency] shortly after the current rebellion began, and this was one of the factors that influenced President Nicolas Sarkozy’s decision to commit France to the attack on Libya.” The explanation doesn’t stop there: “According to these individuals Sarkozy’s plans are driven by the following issues: a) A desire to gain a greater share of Libya oil production; b) Increase French influence in North Africa, c) Improve his internal political situation in France, d) Provide the French military with an opportunity to reassert its position in the world, e) Address the concern of his advisors over Qaddafi’s long term plans to supplant France as the dominant power in Francophone Africa.”…..’
I wonder where that gold is now? Probably the same place the Ukrainian gold is – spirited out of the country in secret.
It’s also suggested the gold-backed dinar was to be the currency chosen by Gaddafi (I understand he was encouraging other African nations in this also) to replace the petrodollar. Thus, oil which had previously only been available for purchase using dollars, would henceforth be available for purchase using dinars. This would have the, for America, hugely unwelcome effect of reducing demand for dollars and increasing demand for dinars. Dollars become less valuable, dinars become more valuable. Many suggest this was really why Gaddafi had to go.
Smith
“I do not believe that this vile act was in any way orchestrated by the current Government, but the timing is very convenient for the Prime Minister.
She is undoubtedly looking to exploit the fallout and will be hoping for some kind of Falklands moment to save her neck.”
______________________
While regretting that this terrorist attack is being put into service for electoral reasons by some on here, I think that argument and the thinking which underlies it can cut in two ways.
It may help the Conservatives (the security / law and order argument).
But equally it could be argued that it could help Mr Corbyn and Labour (the argument that it is the West’s actions in Libya and elsewhere which are the root cause of such attacks and that Mr Corbyn will not permit such actions in future).
It
As always an inciteful blog on the current situation. The Tory government and Tory press will use this tragedy to manipulate the situation to their advantage. Please don’t let them sway your opinion.
They have swayed me to strengthen my resolve against them.
They are using it, And It’s a good thing to keep pointing that out. This is the kind of people who want us to vote for them? I don’t see how people can’t be swayed by that fact alone.
Typo – “non-state groups which might wish to do influence the election”
This blog has the finger on the pulse of politics , look forward to future posts as more information is available, thank you.
I hope you’re wrong, Craig. I think perhaps because this has been so horrific, almost on a Beslan scale, that it’s off the political charts. If anything, it could be a foundation stone in a new consensus. The ‘dementia tax’ started it with Theresa May’s remark that she’d spend ‘billions on the NHS’ – cheers for that, luv, any idea how many? A few, some, lots – come on, give us an answer!! Also, lost in the midsts of mirth was Diane Abbot’s car crash about twelvty thousand new police officers. Both highly comedic answers but both also now being taken as funding commitments. Whoever wins there’s gonna be shed loads piled into the NHS and now the cops too.
As regards troops on the street and armed coppers everywhere – meh, i’m not sure anyone’s really that bothered. Everyone whinges about the cops but it’s mainly bluster; I certainly haven’t noticed anyone claiming they’re politically biased.
I’m a Tory, have been all my days but i’m picking up an enthusiasm amongst socialists of all ages that I haven’t heard for ages. Sure Corbyn’s got credibility problems but he’s winning the arguments for greater investment in the public services – NHS / Social Care and now Cops and I think I heard that the revised school funding formula is being overhauled. Not wanting to be focus on Manchester or be in any way mawkish but I think that terrorism, radicalism and cops’ powers to intervene (knife crime too) should be part of this election debate. Serious, sober, dam prescient and perhaps overdue – let’s not waste a perfectly good election, eh?
As mentioned, I hope you’re wrong – I hope it doesn’t change much 🙂
Most people aren’t bothered, but elections can be fought of a tiny and select group of people open to persuasion.
Another interesting connection is that David Shayler claimed in the 90s that MI6 funded an LIFG bomb attempt on Gaddafi in Sirte in 1996. LIFG is the Islamic group that the bomber’s father was a member of.
The room is rapidly filling up with elephants…..
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2017/05/murdoch-even-viler-knew/comment-page-8/#comment-680425
http://landdestroyer.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/uk-government-harbored-terrorists.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8919057/Leading-Libyan-Islamist-met-Free-Syrian-Army-opposition-group.html
@ Tom Fryer May 25, 2017 at 07:11
Right on! And though there have been debates about Gladio in various European Parliaments, and in the EU Parliament itself, Britain’s stance is that it does not discuss security issues.
The following was a ‘Terror Drill’ in Manchester in 2016 (it is NOT a video of the latest Manchester attack):
‘Crisis Actors Rehearse Terror Attack in Manchester, UK’:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbOnnVspx8g&feature=share
And like in so many cases, virtually no useful CCTV; surely a venue of that size has CCTV’s covering most of it, ESPECIALLY the front entrance! (I wonder what happened to the Nice CCTV, which Paris ordered destroyed?).
And in 7/7, in case anyone is unaware, there was not one CCTV picture shown of any of the so-called ‘suicide bombers’ on Underground stations or Underground trains shown to the public; the one CCTV picture of one of the alleged bombers in London was coming out of a Boots Chemist on Kings Cross mainline station. Yet anyone who travels on the Underground knows there are Tannoy announcements every few minutes saying how CCTV is all over the Underground system.
And of course, it’s not only Saudi Arabia that doesn’t want Corbyn to win; the whole PTB don’t want him to win.
And remember Kinkora – that was allowed to continue for three years, though known about (and used for blackmail) by the Police, Army and Security Services.
And in 7/7, in case anyone is unaware, there was not one CCTV picture shown of any of the so-called ‘suicide bombers’ on Underground stations or Underground trains shown to the public; the one CCTV picture of one of the alleged bombers in London was coming out of a Boots Chemist on Kings Cross mainline station. Yet anyone who travels on the Underground knows there are Tannoy announcements every few minutes saying how CCTV is all over the Underground system.
And of course, it’s not only Saudi Arabia that doesn’t want Corbyn to win; the whole PTB don’t want him to win.
And remember Kinkora – that was allowed to continue for three years, though known about (and used for blackmail) by the Police, Army and Security Services.
Thanks for a great piece, answered most of my questions. Troops on the ground is concerning for their political influence on the election, as is there probably being the rest of the series of bombs out there, but how long can the troops stay out when it was not a synchonised attack? As long as May wants them out there, showing how underfunded the police are?
I guess a month is a long time in politics:
‘Exclusive: Britain at risk of terror attack if Jeremy Corbyn becomes Prime Minister, Tory chairman warns’:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/22/exclusive-britain-risk-terr or-attack-jeremy-corbyn-becomes-prime/
(Note the date – 22 April 2017 – I wonder if the Tory Chairman has washed all the egg off his face yet?)
Can anyone identify the detonator found at the scene (or at least appeared in photos ostensibly from the device)?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4540408/Manchester-remote-controlled-professional.html
I have no doubt that it is an initiator from a type specific device (manufactured for a particular explosive device) ie. not a general use detonator.
If I am correct the provenance of the detonator may give a clue to who provided it.
Also in the photographs there is what appears to be blood on the detonator. Doesn’t make sense!
The detonator had been moved between the first photo and the second ergo Not forensic shots, must be for show. But blood smear in both. Odd!
Why should there not be blood on the detonator?
Once the bomb exploded it would have become a projectile like every other part of it.
Anything that can deliver a charge could be used as a detonator. This article is nonsense.
“Also leaked was a diagram showing the location of the bodies of those killed. The fact that they were found in a circle around where the bomb is believed to have gone off suggests the bomb was evenly-packed, experts say.”
Evenly-packed?
Unless the troops are going to shoot everyone with a rucksack, bag or bulges under their cloths they are not going to be much use against a suicide bomber.
Maybe maniac at a wheel, knife or guns on display. Maybe that’s the message that’s the government is putting out. If you want to kill indiscriminately and succeed, blow yourself up .
Sorry to cut in on this discussion….But, you need to come forward again concerning the murder of Seth Rich now that special prosecutor as been set up. A reply would be appreciated. If you what you say is true, you are evidence to bring a murderer within the DNC down as back up testimony to Kimdotcom and Julian
How many people commenting here believe that the troops will be taken off of the streets in the foreseeable future? What is the recent record of ‘states of emergency’ being recinded?
Armed troops seem a permanent fixture in France, are they in place there to replace depleated police numbers?
I notice that many Left commenters are framing the discussion of this attack as being a consequence of austerity cuts hammering the effectiveness of the police. Many of them are implicitly or explicitly calling for more security from the state, despite the highly securitised and surveilled conditions under which we already live.
There are two fairly distinct frames mind in approaching this event, and they go a long way to determining what questions get asked and therefore what narrative gets developed. If I had read from Craig a genuine, detailed appraisal of the points of contention surrounding the 7/7 narrative (or more on 911 than a dismissal of the controlled demolition theory) then I would take his position on Manchester more seriously. However, the steady march toward totalitarianism is unstopable by the repeated acceptance that things co-incidentally keep fucking up, but always in favour of the people who have responsibility to stop them fucking up.
If false flags are left to fly, then more and more will be raised on the mast. The progressive Left have failed to call bullshit on this era of 21st century terror, and now the US and the UK are being led into the mire by the power of these lies.
“…the repeated acceptance that things co-incidentally keep fucking up, but always in favour of the people who have responsibility to stop them fucking up”
In the interests of critical thought, this can plausibly be attributed to an observer effect, the effect of mistaking opportunism after the fact for pre-planning before the fact. In this instance there are indications both ways.
this can plausibly be attributed to an observer effect, the effect of mistaking opportunism after the fact for pre-planning before the fact.
I get that.
But if the same patterns keep recurring again and again:
of ‘intelligence failures’ concerning the same kind of characters in the orbit of the intelligence services;
of the same obscuring of facts from the public’s view in investigations and inquiries;
of the same anomalous evidence ignored;
of the same sudden changes in official narrative without explanation;
of the same lack of accountability or consequence (in fact often the same ‘promotion for failure’);
and of the same benefit for the same groups, policy directions and interests (domestic and global);
then who is you or anyone to say what lies within the realm of ‘critical thought’ when asking if there is some agency behind the pattern rather than repeated co-incidence?
I can’t speak for others, but I’m not calling for calling for more security/funding etc. I think that’s part of the problem. like we can just throw money at these things and it will improve. So point taken i guess. It is a right wing position and not good.
What I have pointed out and iv seen very few others do is the failure to act on intel they had. And was glad to read this just now.
https://twitter.com/leninology/status/867415049362706432
Read this?
http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/sorted-mi5-how-uk-government-sent-british-libyans-fight-gaddafi-1219906488
Thanks, will do.
ps, And myself thought I don’t think cutting with no other plan is good aside from NHS schools etc, a lot of areas of cuts I’m ok with, id love to see less people prepped for violence on our steers, the police….. And the Army? basically US corporate mercenaries that helped create these conditions?
The idea these people are keeping us safe and not setting an example of brutality as the highest order in society is very odd to me. So I really shouldn’t be the one saying do a better job to any of these institutions. They are well enough funded for defence and prevention. But used for attack and robbery.
If I had my way prisons would not exist in anything like there current form. locking people in cages? under who’s moral authority? lol, what a joke. It’s just a cycle of violence the state has “legitimate” monopoly over, and mopping up (most of what they actually do ) is really helping nothing. Police basically administer violent outcomes that’s set as an example at the highest levels of the state.
The nation state, an idea that’s really not my thing.
Rant over.
Sry that is wording is extra wrong. I’m not in favour of cutting caring & education.
*myself though I don’t think cutting with no other plan is good, aside from NHS schools etc a lot of areas of cuts I’m ok with*
comma in wrong place. sigh
well, Mog, with 69.000 armed soldiers, many of them on rotational duties abroad, how many could they possibly deploy on the same day?
LBC have been playing a recording of May speaking to the Police Federation conference in 2012, I think it was, when she spoke about the suggestion of paramilitary police on UK streets being a nonsense.
A policeman from Manchester in the audience stood up and spoke to her about policing there, addressing her as Ma’am. He said that the cuts had abolished all the community policing and therefore the local knowledge and info. He said that the response was thus totally ‘reactive’.
No link on their website yet.
http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien/
The Police Federation website.
http://www.polfed.org/newsroom/news2017.aspx
Strange how we are constantly informed by the media and the government, that Salman Abedi, went to Syria to fight with ISIS. Yet Abedi’s father told the BBC that his son’s passport showed that he hadn’t been there at all.
Abedi’s father also said that he did not recognise the description, of the nature of his son put out by the media, and indeed his father claims the his son’s nature and attitude to fanatical religion, terrorism, etc was completely contrary to the media reports.
As for the establishment hounds that loiter on this blog 24/7, most of the regular commentors are well aware as to the reason why they do so.
According to one report Ramadan Abedi was former Libyan intelligence. In addition he was involved in the assassination attempt which prompted David Shayler to resign and was part of the British/US operation to remove Qaddafi.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2017/05/murdoch-even-viler-knew/comment-page-8/#comment-680425
Then there’s this:
“The father of the Manchester Arena suicide bomber was a member of al-Qaeda linked militant group that attempted to assassinate Muammar Gaddafi in the 1990s, it was claimed on Wednesday. Ramadan Abedi, the father of bomber Salman Abedi, was a member of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, a militant group founded in 1995 to pursue the violent overthrow of Gaddafi’s military dictatorship, Abdel-Basit Haroun, a former Libyan security official claimed. Mr Abedi, who lived in Britain for over a decade in the 1990s and 2000s but now lives in Libya with other members of the family, denied the allegation. ”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/24/renegade-libyan-faction-accuses-britain-nurturing-manchester/
However, one line from that telegraph article leapt out:
“The LIFG maintained a branch among the Manchester community, a member of the Libyan diaspora who declined to be named said. There are no previously documented links between the LIFG, which formally disbanded in 2011, and the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (Isil).”
Which seems to be contradicted by this from the Washington Times:
“Major news out of Libya as Abdelhakim Belhadj, the former head of the al Qaeda-linked Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, and a major player in the U.S.-backed overthrow of Moammar Gadhafi, has reportedly joined the Islamic State and is leading its forces there. This according to The Blaze National Security journalist Sara Carter on Twitter, and Fox News’ Catherine Herridge in a Fox News report.
Belhadj’s ties to al Qaeda were controversial during the run up to U.S. airstrikes in support of the Libyan rebels, but this did not prevent him from maintaining a high profile at the time, including being made head of the Tripoli Military Council, a position he held until resigning to run for office in May 2012. Belhadj has a reputation for involvement in the international jihad has well, playing a role in the 2004 Madrid training bombings, and accused by investigators of being involved in the murder of two Tunisian politicians at behest of the Muslim Brotherhood.”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/3/frank-gaffney-jr-us-backed-rebel-reportedly-leads-/
Given that Abdelhakim Belhadj won a judgement at the UK Supreme Court this January I doubt that he joined Islamic State in 2015.
There are definite links between LIFG and AQ however.
Reminds me of Unlce Ruslan, the close relative of the Tsarnaev brothers who was also entwined in the CIA covert operations on Chechnya.
http://www.madcowprod.com/2013/04/29/uncle-ruslan-aid-to-terrorists-from-cia-officials-home/
Nothing to see here, it’s all a co-incidence.
RoS
“Yet Abedi’s father told the BBC that his son’s passport showed that he hadn’t been there at all.”
___________________
That presumably means there was no Libyan entry and/or exit stamp in his passport. Does that prove he wasn’t there?
More generally : your implication is that he was not the terrorist bomber. Do you have any thoughts on why the authorities should have fingered an “innocent” man and on who the true culprit might have been?
Please share with us any information you may have (and of course inform the authorities).
“More generally : your implication is that he was not the terrorist bomber. Do you have any thoughts on why the authorities should have fingered an “innocent” man and on who the true culprit might have been?”
_______
On the contrary Habb, I’m not implying anything, just stating observations.
Nor have I claimed in any fashion that Salman Abedi was not the perpetrator. Of course if I had any info on the matter, I would, inform the proper authorities, but I do not.
Still asking pertinent questions, appears to have put you into a defensive mode. A strange line of approach for someone who’s anti-British.
Is this ‘real life’?
“Israel quite openly backing al-Qaeda in Syria. Interview with former Mossad chief Efraim Halevy. “
How would Abedi (in Libya) know what his son’s passport (in the UK) showed?
Still see no criticism of the GMP which has been documented as being good makers of domestic terrororists like some of the Crawley cafe internet users in Operation Crevice before 7/7.
Craig said:
“I have no doubt whatsoever the jihadists would try to influence the election, and try to influence it against Corbyn. As the great journalist John Pilger said yesterday of this possibility that ISIS are trying to influence the election against Corbyn and the SNP: ”
Sorry but this is as stupid and paranoid as the russian-influence claim.
The only BBC output I receive regularly is via the radio, partularly Radio 5. For the past couple of days it’s been like a rolling tabloid, wall to wall “human interest” stories from Manchester (I’m sure it wasn’t like that in the days of the IRA). If they’re broadcasting any useful information then I’ve missed it. Has it been explained for instance how the police were able to identify the alleged bomber so quickly? Much too quick for DNA.
Donchaknow? His bank card survived intact.
Course it did. I wonder how they knew it belonged to the bomber. The muslim-sounding name I expect.
Also on Salman Abedi, if as the mexia and the government claim that Abedi, was known to the security services. Why was he allowed to travel back and forth to Libya? A war torn nation.
Habb.
Re your first paragraph, with so many terrorist attacks occuring in Europe in recent times. One would think that those “known” to the security services, would be monitored more closely.
Re your second paragraph, I say in response to my first point, especially when those “known” to the security services fly out to Libya, (or any unstable regime) regardless of the final destination, which should be followed up on.
Wouldn’t you agree with that?
!/. Good to see we agree on the need for greater monitoring, RoS.
2/. “regardless of the final destination” – I suggest you read my original comment more carefully.
“In fact, nothing I wrote can in any way be construed as indicating I thought that the British state was implicated in the attack. For the record, I do not think it is remotely likely the British state was implicated in the attack. I knew a lot of senior people in the security services, and a few in special forces, and there is not a single one I suspect would do this kind of thing, or not actively seek to stop it if they came across it. I simply discount the idea.”
Did someone kidnap Craig Murray? Because this is the comment of an idiot.
From reading this blog for years, I know that Mr Murray is far from such. Makes this para deeply odd indeed.
For the record, I do not think it is remotely likely the British state was implicated in the attack.
Not even ‘remotely likely’ ?
Anthrax attacks?
Gladio?
Northern Ireland?
Yeah yeah the UK security services couldn’t POSSIBLY have had a hand in this attack because Craig Murray knows them and vouches that they are good eggs.
Laughable.
And don’t forget folks – 9/11 could not possibly have involved a controlled demolition – also brought to you by Craig Murray – gatekeeper extraordinaire.
Craig says he doesn’t think so. People are quite free to disagree with him and argue their case on here, and are doing so right now. There is also an entire thread devoted to 9/11 on which people are free to argue as much as they like in favour of controlled demolition.
The framing of the 911 debate purely around the demolition question is ludicrous and it is a failing of Craig who made that post all those years back (and also that of so many of the commenters there who have focused on that line of inquiry to the exclusion of almost all others).
The same questions about Manchester are there in the 911 debacle. Who knew what, and when? Why wasn’t anything done about it? Will anyone be held accountable or repremanded? Will systems change? Who benefited? Where do the leads of the money trails and intelligence connections lead us?
All these are so often written off as conspiracy theorising, or crowded out by other (unending) disputes.
Thank you. This is a helpful article. You are much better placed to judge whether this was a lonewolf or part of a cell. However, it does seem to me that these events (as with the Westminster attack) which may be carried out by one deranged individual, whether genuinely radicalised or just a perverted imagination (and it seems relevant in the Manchester case that the IS claim of responsibility is distinctly half-hearted), there is only one primary aim and that is to stir up division between the Muslim communities and others, leading to the breakdown of relationships and ultimately to inter-communal violence. It hen becomes the battle they want between ‘Islam’ and the rest of the world. That is what, at all costs, we must resist.
Andrew go to The Intercept and read the analysis.
I don’t knwo if anyone has linked to this article by Middle East Eye but it deserves wider audience.
‘Sorted’ by MI5: How UK government sent British-Libyans to fight Gaddafi
The British government operated an “open door” policy that allowed Libyan exiles and British-Libyan citizens to join the 2011 uprising that toppled Muammar Gaddafi even though some had been subject to counter-terrorism control orders, Middle East Eye can reveal.
Several former rebel fighters now back in the UK told MEE that they had been able to travel to Libya with “no questions asked” as authorities continued to investigate the background of a British-Libyan suicide bomber who killed 22 people in Monday’s attack in Manchester.
….
‘No questions asked’
One British citizen with a Libyan background who was placed on a control order – effectively house arrest – because of fears that he would join militant groups in Iraq said he was “shocked” that he was able to travel to Libya to fight in 2011 shortly after his control order was lifted.
“I was allowed to go, no questions asked,” said the source, who wished to remain anonymous.
He said he had met several other British-Libyans from east London who also had control orders lifted in 2011 as the war against Gaddafi intensified, with the UK, France and the US carrying out air strikes and deploying special forces soldiers in support of the rebels.
“They didn’t have passports, they were looking for fakes or a way to smuggle themselves across,” said the source.
But within days of their control orders being lifted, British authorities returned their passports, he said.
so the British Government, May, Dave, Hague and the security services thought this was a good idea.
http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/sorted-mi5-how-uk-government-sent-british-libyans-fight-gaddafi-1219906488
The soldiers patrolling the streets during the Crimea referendum were in order to ensure that the Kiev fascists did not try to sabotage it. The population of Crimea is ethnically 90 per cent Russian, they didn’t need to be bullied into voting to rejoin (note- rejoin) Russia after they saw what was happening to their fellow-Russians in Donetsk and other parts of Eastern Ukraine.
Given that the population of Crimea was only 65% ethnic Russian back in 2014 perhaps you might wish to acknowledge how well the ethnic cleansing programme is going – and I don’t think that is the work of the Kyiv fascists but perhaps some other bunch.
Just when ‘Strong and Stable’ had been confined to the recycle bin of hilariously awful political slogans, it begins to take on an unsettling new meaning as we watch soldiers walking though our streets.
I’ll take a stab.
Brainwashed gangs wandering the streets with guns.
Lets face it, if intelligence doesn’t already know they couldn’t stop anything.
And what it tells me is they don’t have a clue. Are they even looking clues nowadays?
What do they expect exactly?
Your thoughtful article again leaves us with a burning question of who we attach ourselves to as ‘friends’ and what the relationship truly is founded upon.
Saudi Arabia is a state run by vile people as is Zionist Israel and others like Syria.
But money somehow reduces soundly based and principled behaviour to a sidelined wish list for an ideal other world.
Its all about power and money, energy (oil & gas) and increasingly potable water which are the assets to acquire control of and profit from.
No change from this is a vote for Hell on Earth.
It is also rather strange that Salman Abedi was known to British security services, yet according to some reports if correct? That is, that a unknown US official could put a name to the Manchester bomber roughly five hours after the attack took place, a quite remarkable feat of deduction if true.
Of course none of this, allys the grief, and sorrow of terrible tragedy, relatives and loved ones of the attack must be feeling right now.
So….MI5 facilitated the travel plans of known extremists to Libya to help topple Gaddafi:
http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/sorted-mi5-how-uk-government-sent-british-libyans-fight-gaddafi-1219906488
Unrelated to the above, John Sweeney’s report on Newsnight last night was a disgrace. A filigree of speculation, rounded off by harassing mosque goers in Didsbury. He kept barking the same question at them: Did Salman Abedi pray here?
They wouldn’t answer him, so he turned to the camera and said: “For many people, that might not be good enough.”
Well done, John. Slow hand clap for you. What a brave soul, speaking truth to power. A whisker away from incitement, I shouldn’t wonder.
The chances of a random mosque-goer knowing whether or not Abedi prayed there, among 1000 other worshippers, will probably be quite slim. But that didn’t stop the brave John from fearlessly confronting those who, by implication, are somehow complicit because they refused to talk on camera.
And finally….one political face is prominent on the BBC home page today, among the dead and the tributes – UKIP leader Paul Nuttall.
I suppose it’s possible to read something into this juxtaposition, but I can’t for the life of me think what that might be…
I’ve made this into a hand Facebook user-friendly story.
Once upon a time, there was an evil country who weren’t happy with the world the way it was and sought to change it through violence and politics. This country bought thousands of bombs from far away lands and used them to blast their neighbours into submission.
The country was also very rich, and with its money and influence it funded a number of evil, secretive terrorist organisations. These organisations would stealthily attack countries near and far to further enact the evil country’s political desires.
One day, a hero came along in the faraway land from which the evil country bought their bombs. This hero wanted peace and love and with great determination he rose to the top to try to take control of the nation. He condemned the evil country and said that if he did manage to take control, he would no longer sell them bombs to be used on their neighbours.
The evil country was furious, and sent one of their secretive terrorist organisations to try to stop the hero. Right when the hero, with love in his heart, was about to win control of the nation, the secretive terrorist organisation attacked the children of the faraway land with a disastrous bomb, killing tens of innocent adults and children. The people of the faraway land were so shocked and distraught, they turned away from the hero and his messages of love and peace. ‘It is your fault!’ They cried. ‘Your talk of peace and love has made us look weak!’ They didn’t realise that love and peace were the only thing that could ever defeat the evil country in the end.
But now they had a choice to make. It was the most important choice they would ever make. That choice was between hate and love. Between selling bombs and refusing. Between death and life. What choice did they make?
The decision is ours.
Handy*
Thanks. It’s very easy to take a short and narrow view.
I think that terrorist lost in Manchester because of the people & strength of love. That’s why i don’t feel unsettled, not because of the army. If we did not have solidarty we’d be lost even with all the might in the world.
That’s our real strength. What makes a real difference, not soldiers wandering around aimlessly.
Nice story.