It was the Neo-cons Bush and Blair era, following the illegal wars of aggression against Afghanistan and Iraq. I had been an activist against the 2003 Iraq war and later against Blair. Before the 2005 G7 conference at Gleneagles, Scotland the Privy council passed a motion prohibiting criminal prosecution of G7 atendees. I was at the demonstrations against the G7 in Scotland. I believe that there were failed attempts to apprehend me by UK authorities on 6 July 2005. Then boss of the Metropolitan Police [17/2/22 ed: Ian Blair] was unashamedly extremely supportive of Tony Blair. Tony Bliar was extremely unpopular at the time. On the morning of July 7 2005, at the end of the G7 summit, there were explosions on the London underground and the made for television bus event. My analysis suggests that the tube explosions were dust explosions and that there were many previous but less serious dust explosions on the London underground. This leaves the bus explosion as fake manufactured terrorism. One country is particularly experienced at fake terrorism bus explosions. Then London mayor [ed: Ken Livingstone] sacked Robert 'Bob' Kiley following the publication of my the danger of dust explosions on the London underground article. London's Metropolitan Police followed the script provided by Efraim Halevi (sometimes spelled differently because it's a translation from Hebrew) in the Jerusalem Post on 7 July 2005. The explosion times were presented as simultaneous when they weren't. If the London explosions were dust explosions and the bus event was fake manufactured terrorism then there were no bombings or suicide bombers. 21 July 2005 there were copy-cat unsuccessful bombings on the London underground. 22 July 2005 Jean Charles de Menezes was murdered at Stockwell tube station. Ian Blair almost immediately stated that the Met Police assumed full responsibility for the death suggesting that it was not the Met that killed him. Official teams of foreign killers were operating in London following the London non-bombings. Many lies were promulgated by Met Police immediately after Jean Charles de Menezes murder. Untrue comments such as wearing a coat too warm for the weather, jumping barriers and the later "Houston, we have a problem" were crafted to relate to myself personally, to harass me, to make clear that I had been watched by UK authorities in depth for an extended period. One reason for murdering Jean Charles de Menezes was to support the suicide bombers narrative of & [ed: 7] July i.e. there are suicide bombers because, we're looking for them and killed someone by accident. I published an article demonstrating why Jean Charles de Menezes was selected to be killed on Bristol Indymedia on 27 June 2005 [ed: 28 Aug 2014] a few hours before the server was seized by British Transport Police. [ed: that doesn't seem correct][ed: Don't think that date is correct. Was the server seized 3 times - 2005, second time, 2014? The 2005 date is too early.] Current Met Police boss Cressida Dick was apparently in charge when Jean Charles de Menezes was murdered. My alternative narrative suggests instead that it was foreign agents that murdered de Menezes and that the official narrative was a fabrication. 13.03 This post republished at the original uri / url because it was getting cut & paste messed up [17/2/22 7 July 2005, 2 + 5 = 7 ]
A decade on I’m starting to feel very much like I did a decade ago – that the state is out to get me personally. Actually, it’s more than just a feeling. It’s the language used about Fascists (individual Fascists?) and Big Cons.
It all seems totally out of proportion as it was a decade ago. Hardly necessary or proportionate for name-calling a couple of Bully-boys and making a probably unfulfilled commitment to get up to speed. I said that I was trying to move on. The trouble is that it should by now be well appreciated that I do defend myself.
I can’t help thinking that perhaps this post would be better made tomorrow.
11.30 edit: I’m going to let this go for a short time to see if there’s confirmation or not.
20.35 edit: Having reviewed things I think that I was prob mistaken and that it’s not directed at myself. It’s taken me a long time to get a handle on Cameron and I think that it’s simply that he’s a big fan of Tonee’s for unknown reasons and – despite achieving good grades – he’s not that bright. For example the (Eton) mess that he made about censoring search engines and now he wants to ban alternative narratives (conspiracy theories) and start a Cameron Youth.
7 July 2005, the day of the London murders.
Central to understanding the London bombings is the bus at Tavistoc Sq. Why is there a Kingstar van in front of the bvs? What does that mean?
Blind old cnut Blunkett all of a sudden says “Human nature is you get carried away, so we have to protect ourselves from ourselves,” he said. “In government you are pressed by the security agencies. They come to you with very good information and they say ‘you need to do something’. So you do need the breath of scepticism, not cynicism, breathing on them. You need to be able to take a step back. If you don’t have this, you can find yourself being propelled in a particular direction.”
I suspect that this is about spying on mobile phone users: In fact I suspect that it’s about governments demanding the ability to spy on mobile phone users is designed into the systems. This was on big C cnut Blunkett’s watch after all …
[These demands from ‘law enforcement agencies’ are for every signal including location. Mobile phones signal their location continuously. Isn’t that a bug? … Blunkett, what do you have to say? You were home secretary after all … ]
[Later edit: Blunkett became Home Secretary in 2001. It should be recognised that mobile phones announce their location and much more.
[Later: It appears that there was no opposition by Blunkett to these demands from ‘law enforcement agencies’. Wasn’t there a scandal about this time about New Labour databases? – Escalibur was associated with Mandy and Labour coming into power but it was more than that – have to research this.]
Don’t look at this Mobile phones are designed to be mobile bugs
R.I.P. Jean Charles de Menezes murdered at Stockwell Tube Station 22 July 2005.
Jean Charles de Menezes was killed to send a message . The message was that another totally innocent person was to blame – somebody absolutely, completely not responsible – for the bombings. Ian Blair made many statements about how the murder of the innocent Brizzlian was so directly related to the ongoing terrorist investigation.
It is clear from the murder of Brizzlian Jean Charles de Menezes that there was absolutely no intention in pursuing those really responsible for the London bombings of 7 July, 2005.
I suggest that you look at all the shit Ian Blair did from the very start -libertines, cocaine. he was never a copper, always pursuing a different agenda
Frank ly it’s Jean Charles de Menezes
Later edit: The point about the murder of JCd was that it was a message of who should be targeted for responsibility for the July 7 explosions. Get it?
directly related to the ongoing terrorist investigation – all that shit …
7 October 2013
To clarify: Jean Charles de Menezes was killed 911 days after the introduction of the shoot-to-kill policy known as Operation Kratos. To clarify – I am saying 911 days after the introduction of Operation Kratos. If you do the math there is a difference of 912 days but it is still 911 days after. There is a similarity here that the event known as the Madrid Bombings or 3/11 occurred 911 days after the event known as 9/11 in New York. 911 is not a coincidence. It is the beginning of killing people under Operation Kratos.
I have shown that Jean Charles de Menezes’ name can be interpreted using Agrippa’s code. It produces a description that can be taken to indicate me and my location.
Jean Charles de Menezes was Brizzle-ian.
Ian Blair on the day described the police murder of Jean Charles de Menezes as directly linked to the ongoing terrorist investigation. JCd was deliberately murdered to send a message.