Monday, January 15, 2007

We'll See if the Deniers Cover This

The trial of the four Muslims accused of attempting bombing of the London Subways on 7/21/05 (two weeks after the initial bombings of 7/7/05) is now beginning.

One of six Muslim men who went on trial in Britain Monday accused of planning to carry out 'murderous suicide bombings' on London's transport network on July 21, 2005, escaped from the capital disguised as a woman wearing a burka, the court was told.

Yassin Omar, who according to the prosecution had turned his London flat into a 'bomb factory' prior to the attempted attacks on tube trains and a bus, managed to get by coach to Birmingham, central England, where he was arrested by armed police on July 27, 2005.

He and the five co-accused, who are all from London and of Somali and Eritrean origin, were involved in planning an 'extremist Muslim plot,' prosecutor Nigel Sweeney told Woolwich Crown Court in south London.

The prosecution described Omar, Muktar Ibrahim, Manfo Asiedu, Hussein Osman and Ramzi Mohammed as having played the role of 'would- be suicide bombers.'


Since, as James mentioned a few posts below, Kevin Barrett thinks that Muslims never commit terrorist acts, perhaps he could take up the case of these young men, whom he no doubt feels are innocent of the crimes for which they are on trial? Will Alex Jones, who claimed in TerrorStorm that the 7/7 bombings were done by agents of the British Government, be calling attention to this case?

Let's put it this way, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for them to speak out on the topic.

33 Comments:

At 15 January, 2007 15:58, Anonymous Anonymous said...

In simple terms: 'Why did the Muslim try to escape?'

Was it because he knew he was guilty?

or is the NWO issue news?

 
At 15 January, 2007 16:47, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You SLC guys should love this:

(Fetzer talks about the "big thick thing") (and the two redwoods turning to sawdusk.)

Does this guy take speed?

 
At 15 January, 2007 16:59, Blogger Alex said...

You guys got it all wrong. They're not Muslims. There Joooooos!

 
At 15 January, 2007 17:08, Anonymous Anonymous said...

London 7/7 Terror Suspect Linked to British Intelligence?

 
At 15 January, 2007 17:16, Anonymous Anonymous said...

In any case, the article notes that the 7/7 and the 7/21 cells were likely using the same batch of explosives but that the former had higher quality of detonators.

 
At 15 January, 2007 19:06, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wonder what woowoo excuse they give for Motassadek being convicted as an accessory to murder?

 
At 15 January, 2007 19:34, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Fetzer is not an ally in the battle for the truth.

 
At 15 January, 2007 19:50, Blogger rocketdoodle said...

I am flipping you off so hard right now, bg.

 
At 15 January, 2007 21:37, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Becky Akers on Entrapped "Terrorist" Shahawar Matin Siraj

 
At 15 January, 2007 22:41, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Notice how bg can't think for himself and must post links to others sites to speak for him?

Classic example of the limited ability of the conspiracy theorist to develop original ideas.

 
At 16 January, 2007 00:07, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just last night we (I'm a Brit) had a fascinating programme on the TV including footage filmed undercover at mosques by a reporter, showing that the government's cozying up to Islam and telling us about all these nice moderates is so much rot. The 'moderates' weren't so moderate when they were speaking to the faithful.
And they were talking an awful lot about overthrowing democracy in the West and enforcing Islamic law.

 
At 16 January, 2007 02:24, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The July,21st bombers would of most likely killed themselves only and badly injure people beside them. Their bombs seemed to have the same explosive power as the bomb which Ramzi Yousef placed in Flight 434 in December 11th, 1994. That bomb (a Mark II Microbomb, definitely not homemade) ripped the body of the passenger who was sitting under it, and injured 10 people infront of him. You can say that those guys were a little less "professional" and sophisticated then the 7/7 bombers.


bg, the stories on how Mohammad Khan was being watched since 2003, a police tracking bug found in his car, and his connection to Haroon Rashid Aswat are all reasons of why there needs to be an independent inquiry.

 
At 16 January, 2007 05:46, Blogger The Masked Writer said...

I wonder if they will bring in MI 6 to testify in favor of their 'insider'?

Relevant interview from BG's link:

The Loftus interview suggests that the suspect was being used either as an informer or a "double agent":

MIKE JERRICK [FOX NEWS]: John Loftus is a terrorism expert and a former prosecutor for the Justice Department. John, good to see you again. So real quickly here, have you heard anything about this Osman Hussain who was just picked up in Rome? You know that name at all?

JOHN LOFTUS: Yeah, all these guys should be going back to an organization called Al-Muhajiroun, which means The Emigrants. It was the recruiting arm of Al-Qaeda in London; they specialized in recruiting kids whose families had emigrated to Britain but who had British passports. And they would use them for terrorist work.

JERRICK: So a couple of them now have Somali connections?

LOFTUS: Yeah, it was not unusual. Somalia, Eritrea, the first group of course were primarily Pakistani. But what they had in common was they were all emigrant groups in Britain, recruited by this Al-Muhajiroun group. They were headed by the, Captain Hook, the imam in London the Finsbury Mosque, without the arm. He was the head of that organization. Now his assistant was a guy named Aswat, Haroon Rashid Aswat.

JERRICK: Aswat, who they picked up.

LOFTUS: Right, Aswat is believed to be the mastermind of all the bombings in London.

JERRICK: On 7/7 and 7/21, this is the guy we think.

LOFTUS: This is the guy, and what's really embarrassing is that the entire British police are out chasing him, and one wing of the British government, MI6 or the British Secret Service, has been hiding him. And this has been a real source of contention between the CIA, the Justice Department, and Britain.

JERRICK: MI6 has been hiding him. Are you saying that he has been working for them?

LOFTUS: Oh I'm not saying it. This is what the Muslim sheik said in an interview in a British newspaper back in 2001.

JERRICK: So he's a double agent, or was?

LOFTUS: He's a double agent.

JERRICK: So he's working for the Brits to try to give them information about Al-Qaeda, but in reality he's still an Al-Qaeda operative.

LOFTUS: Yeah. The CIA and the Israelis all accused MI 6 of letting all these terrorists live in London not because they're getting Al-Qaeda information, but for appeasement. It was one of those you leave us alone, we leave you alone kind of things.

JERRICK: Well we left him alone too long then.

LOFTUS: Absolutely. Now we knew about this guy Aswat. Back in 1999 he came to America. The Justice Department wanted to indict him in Seattle because him and his buddy were trying to set up a terrorist training school in Oregon.

JERRICK: So they indicted his buddy, right? But why didn't they indict him?

LOFTUS: Well it comes out, we've just learned that the headquarters of the US Justice Department ordered the Seattle prosecutors not to touch Aswat.

JERRICK: Hello? Now hold on, why?

LOFTUS: Well, apparently Aswat was working for British intelligence. Now Aswat's boss, the one-armed Captain Hook, he gets indicted two years later. So the guy above him and below him get indicted, but not Aswat. Now there's a split of opinion within US intelligence. Some people say that the British intelligence fibbed to us. They told us that Aswat was dead, and that's why the New York group dropped the case. That's not what most of the Justice Department thinks. They think that it was just again covering up for this very publicly affiliated guy with Al-Muhajiroun. He was a British intelligence plant. So all of a sudden he disappears. He's in South Africa. We think he's dead; we don't know he's down there. Last month the South African Secret Service come across the guy. He's alive.

JERRICK: Yeah, now the CIA says, oh he's alive. Our CIA says OK let's arrest him. But the Brits say no again?

LOTFUS: The Brits say no. Now at this point, two weeks ago, the Brits know that the CIA wants to get a hold of Haroon. So what happens? He takes off again, goes right to London. He isn't arrested when he lands, he isn't arrested when he leaves.

JERRICK: Even though he's on a watch list.

LOFTUS: He's on the watch list.The only reason he could get away with that was if he was working for British intelligence. He was a wanted man.

JERRICK: And then takes off the day before the bombings, I understand it--

LOFTUS: And goes to Pakistan.

JERRICK: And Pakistan, they jail him.

LOFTUS: The Pakistanis arrest him. They jail him. He's released within 24 hours. Back to Southern Africa, goes to Zimbabwe and is arrested in Zambia. Now the US--

JERRICK: Trying to get across the--

LOFTUS: --we're trying to get our hands on this guy.

JERRICK: John, hang around. I have so many questions now.

LOFTUS: Oh, this is a bad one....

(Fox News, 29 July 2005, emphasis added)

 
At 16 January, 2007 06:04, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Swing Dangler, Haroon Rashid Aswat connections with British intelligence go back to Bosnia-Serb war, where the CIA & MI6 collabrated with Jihadis (backed by Saudi funding) to create the KLA (Kosovo Liberation Army) and used them as a tool to destabilize and split it in different parts. After the war, MI6 most likely used Haroon as a double agent to infiltrate terror cells in the UK. Aswat made about 20 calls to Khan weeks before the bombings, I would say that he must have definitely known about the plot (since he was a known jihadi who other aspiring future jihadis looked up to), the thing is did he inform MI6, and if he did, then what went wrong in the process to stop Khan and his cell. Only an independent inquiry will find the truth.

 
At 16 January, 2007 06:07, Anonymous Anonymous said...

*and used them as a tool to fight, destabilize, and split Yugoslavia (and it's forces) in different parts (which was the result of the war).

 
At 16 January, 2007 07:08, Blogger James B. said...

Swing Dangler, Haroon Rashid Aswat connections with British intelligence go back to Bosnia-Serb war, where the CIA & MI6 collabrated with Jihadis (backed by Saudi funding) to create the KLA (Kosovo Liberation Army) and used them as a tool to destabilize and split it in different parts.

Hey genius, the KLA was not involved in the Bosnia - Serb war. To point out the obvious, the Bosnians and the Serbs were.

 
At 16 January, 2007 07:11, Blogger Pepik said...

"where the CIA & MI6 collabrated with Jihadis to create the KLA and used them as a tool to destabilize and split it in different parts."

So federal Yugoslav forces and local Serb militias attacking, murdering, and ethnic cleansing Bosnians and Croats had nothing to do with it? Once again, its a world where all them foreigners just sit around with nothing to do until the NWO drops in to make history's wheels turn.

And how did the KLA "fight, destabilize, and split Yugoslavia (and it's forces) in different parts (which was the result of the war)" when Yugoslavia and its forces had already been split into different parts long before the war in Kosovo had really kicked off?

What I really find interesting is that the probability of conspiracy theories springing up is directly correlated with US media coverage. So the 7/7 bombings got some media coverage, a tiny fraction of 9/11 though, but the second wave got almost no coverage.

Similarly, there are ten billion 9/11 conspiracy websites, not much on 7/7, and nobody can even be bothered to come up with conspiracy theories for the second wave of bombers. That's because 9/11 conspiracies are mostly about money and forming cults. For people that can't be bothered to find out that no hijackers are still alive, who is going to make the effort required to dream up a conspiracy theory about an event like this that hardly anyone even remembers?

 
At 16 January, 2007 07:13, Blogger Alex said...

Girl in Gray:

I read about that program ahead of time, and I REALLY wanted to see it, but ofcourse it didn't air here in Canada. Do you happen to know the name of the program? I didn't realize it had come out already, but perhaps I can look for it on one of the torrent sites. I don't normally like to "pirate" stuff, but when it's a show that's not airing here, well, I think I can make an exception :)

 
At 16 January, 2007 07:55, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It was called 'Dispatches: Undercover Mosque'. It was pretty scary stuff! Muslim preachers speaking to 'their' people, and saying things like all women are defficient, and a woman's evidence in court is worth half a man's evidence. Plus lots of anti-semitism. Hey! They're holocaust deniers too. Do you think there really might be a conspiracy, and the 'Truthers' are actually pawns of Islamofascism based in Saudi?

Note: that last bit was a JOKE.

 
At 16 January, 2007 08:20, Blogger Alex said...

Hah. Naw, they're just "useful infidels".

Turns out a blogger from Toronto found the show on youtube. I'm still trying to get a torrent link, but in the meantime if anyone wants to see the show, try Here (it's split into 3 parts). I'd love to see BG and Swinger try to deny the reality of Muslim extremism after watching that.

 
At 16 January, 2007 08:37, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Patty Casazza and PBS are full of pull hooey!


Patty Casazza on Implementing 9/11 Commission Recommendations


At least she mentions Bldg 7.

At least she mentions the failure in Afghanistan.

At least she mentions Kissinger.

At least she mention the OBL failure.

 
At 16 January, 2007 08:38, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Alex said...

Hah. Naw, they're just "useful infidels".

Turns out a blogger from Toronto found the show on youtube. I'm still trying to get a torrent link, but in the meantime if anyone wants to see the show, try Here (it's split into 3 parts). I'd love to see BG and Swinger try to deny the reality of Muslim extremism after watching that.


Alex, you twat.

I don't deny Muslim extremism.

 
At 16 January, 2007 09:06, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Speaking of twats,

Video: Dems, Don't be Pussies

 
At 16 January, 2007 09:31, Blogger Alex said...

Sorry, but it's rather difficult to remember which one of you lunatics believes in which insane theory. No need to get your panties in a bunch. What I did was the equivalent of accusing someone of believing in UFO's when in fact he believes that the aliens teleported themselves to the earth. It's not even a difference in degrees, it's just a small mistake.

 
At 16 January, 2007 10:04, Anonymous Anonymous said...

BG wrote: "I don't deny Muslim extremism."

"I just think the Jews are behind it," he added under his breath.

 
At 16 January, 2007 10:34, Anonymous Anonymous said...

full of pull hooey

I reread my comment with the above words, and imagine I meant

full of hooey...

 
At 16 January, 2007 10:49, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cl1mh4224rd said...

BG wrote: "I don't deny Muslim extremism."

"I just think the Jews are behind it," he added under his breath.


I honestly don't harbor any kind of beleif like that.

I respect that Jewish people have been oppressed in many ways, in many locations, in human history.

I respect that the rounding up, imprisoning, and mass murder, which can rightly be called genocide, during WWII, was and is a historical fact.

I understand today that there is discrimination and defamation against Jews.

I understand that Iran and other Arab nations, and factions without portfolio, have made it, and continue to make it their policy to destroy the Nation of Israel as it currently wields power.

In light of the above, it is imperative that a true accounting of 9/11, and all other myths, false-flag operations, and propaganda campaigns should be exposed. Honest Jews around the world are against the Likudnic or other factions that seem to put us all in danger.

 
At 16 January, 2007 12:20, Anonymous Anonymous said...

muckers,

Have you watched Terror Storm?

Have your watched The Power of Nightmares?

 
At 16 January, 2007 12:44, Blogger Alex said...

You're missing the point muckers. Many of these speakers don't actually condone terrorist attacks. They don't specifically oppose them either, but they don't condone them, and they definitely don't call for them. That's because Islam has always had most success at infiltrating from within.

If you listen to what they're actually calling for - they're telling people to pretend to conform and not stick out unnecessarily, and meantime convert as many Kafir's as you can to Islam. Bring more of your family over. Have many, many children. Terrorism NOW is actually counterproductive to their long-term goal, because it brings negative attention to them. It makes much more sense to wait another 40 or 50 years, until 70% or more of the UK is Muslim, and then simply vote themselves into power. Vote Sharia law into effect. Or, if thwarted, start the terrorism THEN.

I'm not so much worried about terrorism as I am about attempts to undermine western society from within. France will be the test-subject for these attempts - so far it's the one western nations where Islamic extremism has made the most inroads. Keep an eye on France if you want a prediction of what the UK will be going through in a couple decades.

 
At 16 January, 2007 18:38, Anonymous Anonymous said...

And I don't exactly rate Jones that highly. At all.

I'll grant, for what it's worth, that Alex Jones is not a strong source for a number of reasons.

I would like to know what you make of the USS Liberty incident, and what Alex got wrong on his coverage of this in Terror Storm.

As an example, here's mine:

In discussion the USS Liberty, Alex Jones explains the major decision- making as resting with LBJ, as an "Imperial President" (my quotes and characterization). My read of Alex's tone is that he holds LBJ ultimately responsible for the decision to not rescue the ship, and leaves open the insinuation that LBJ had foreknowledge. The details of who planned, and why, and what pressures they were to cover up what players participated are almost certainly forever hidden.

Alex was trying to give a short treatment to the USS Libery incident as a way to buttress his overall theme. However, in working to push toward a common theme of false flag operations as being "all the rage" in human history, he weakens his credibility by trying to deal with a complex topic in a broad brush that leaves questions open to reasonable debate without even a footnote to allow for alternative interpretations.

 
At 17 January, 2007 01:32, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Muckers, it's a Channel 4 documentary, not BBC.

Of course I don't think all 9/11 deniers are anti-semitic, just some of them. There must be half a dozen different schools of denial already, some anathematising others.

By the way, if you listen to some of the reporting on the July 21st bombers, they were kind of obvious. All caught on CCTV (all London public transport is now fitted with it), so denial is NOT an option.

They wanted to be seen as martyrs. When their bombs misfired they ensured they would be seen as idiots.

And some of the bombs, being set off in underground (subway for you Americans) trains, would have caused serious injury, not to mention transport chaos.

 
At 17 January, 2007 15:58, Blogger Alex said...

They wanted to be seen as martyrs. When their bombs misfired they ensured they would be seen as idiots.

They should be sentenced to spend the next 20 years incarcerated in a small holding-cage in the middle of the UK's largest roundabout, riding backwards on donkeys and wearing dunce hats. Or maybe pigs instead of donkeys. Either way, I bet ya it'd put an end to "martyrdom" pretty fast :)

 
At 19 January, 2007 04:47, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sorry, my mistake. I plead my hair colouring.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home