Tony Blair

R.I.P. Jean Charles de Menezes

Spread the love

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

https://bristol.indymedia.org/article/691701

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 …

Get it?

Later: http://bristol.indymedia.org/article/691701

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.

 

Continue ReadingR.I.P. Jean Charles de Menezes

I’ve been wondering … and the problem is that

Spread the love

I’ve been wondering what it takes to start an investigation by the police into a crime. I would expect that it would just be reasonableness that a crime has been committed. I wouldn’t expect much interest in trivial crimes like shoplifting or minor criminal damage but I would expect more interest in more serious issues like murder, incitement to murder, terrorism, etc.

and the problem is that it’s not normal criminals that are doing this. Instead it’s governments, police chiefs and international criminals protected by privy council above-governmental dictat according to some above-law divine protocol.

Don’t look at this the protocol says … this is above justice …

Instead the privy council dictat says everyone invited to G8 2005 are above UK laws. They can’t even be arrested or questioned. They are above the law. These Neo-Con cnuts can do what they like without any legal recourse …

They can’t even be arrested or questioned

They can commit murder or mass-murder without even being arrested or questioned

If these b’stards did the 7 July 2005 bombings they could not be arrested or even questioned because of a privy council dictat made by Tony Blair

next post

Later edit: I’m very pleased that at least some journalists are better informed now. I’m not really sure that that makes any difference since I’ve been warned of journalists being carp.

I wonder if journalists were so carp that they weren’t even aware of this coded bs

Isn’t it there every day on the sun?

Continue ReadingI’ve been wondering … and the problem is that

About Tor, allsorts and my story

Spread the love

I was thinking of deciphering this article on Tor for my readers. While it’s an interesting article it’s quite difficult to follow even if  you’re familiar with Tor.

There are a few interesting points like it’s never been possible to identify a tor user from a specific request and the way to go is to compromise (hack into) the user’s computer e.g. by luring them to a dodgy website. What the not possible to identify a user means is that it’s not been possible to go in reverse through tor from the e.g. website viewed. I was aware of government-funded sites that host malware – my previous blog was blacklisted with search engines because of comments with links (probably) to them.

Infection through a browser is a standard practice not necessarily involving the use of Tor. A possible attack vector would be to compromise (hack into) a cheap webhost and wait until the target webhost client connects to make a post. Cheap webhosts are not going to have good security: they’re cheap through cutting corners on everything. They’re certainly not going to be any match to government agencies.

Chances are that the software will not work straight away and the victim could notice some strange effects e.g. the keyboard not working properly until the spy software was tinkered with and tweaked. Somebody could very easily notice that their keyboard was playing up, especially when it returned to normal because that’s strange and unusual.

Anyway, in the prism and related documents that the article refers to there are many references to terrorists. It’s much easier to spy on perfectly law-abiding and respectable people if you first assign them to that category called suspected terrorist. I don’t like that label and I don’t like being spied on.

It seems to me that I may have to help to get rid of this label, so I’ll start by saying that it should be quite obvious that I have had an issue with alcohol. That’s a start. I’m likely to say far more which involves telling my story and also – by extension – involves identifying the real terrorists. They are former Home Secretaries, Prime Ministers and police chiefs. I am firmly of the opinion that there are very few real terrorists outside of government agencies because that is what my research and experience is telling me. Interested?

Edit: Can we have some relevant leaks please?

 

Continue ReadingAbout Tor, allsorts and my story

Daily Mail

Spread the love

The Daily Mail has been almost universally condemned for attacking Ed Miliband through attacking his long-dead father. Ralph Miliband was a Marxist academic and activist, a Jewish immigrant to evade the Nazis and served in the British Royal Navy during the Second World War. He was accused by the Daily Mail of hating Britain when he actually hated many aspects of bigoted right-wing ideology in Britain.

There are similarities between the Daily Mail and this blog. We both have a huge online readership and influence and we both attack politicians. The Daily Mail is traditionally more open to conspiracy theories which I find refreshing.

The differences are ideological and that I often attack people who have already attacked me e.g. Tony Blair, David Blunkett and all the has-been old New Labour Home Secretaries and of course Ian Blair. My attacks on family members have probably only extended to Cherry and she was very closely associated with Tonee. I could very easily hint at obvious, acknowledged issues about the Blair ‘family’ as I’m doing right now. I very occasionally get the wrong target but I do apologise for it.

A comment made it through the spam filter today. It was spam. Please feel free to comment – it’s likely to be published so long as it’s not spam.

Continue ReadingDaily Mail

Privatisation will threaten Royal Mail’s six-day service, warns campaign group

Spread the love

[Well of course the service will suffer, postage charges will rise, postmen and women will be sacked – that’s what businesses do to make money. Many Tory and Liberal-Democrat-Tory MPs reassure their constituencies that the opposite is true. They’re lying.

Tony Blair’s NEW Labour tried to privatise Royal Mail. Their argument was that there was a deficit in the pension fund. I never really grasped that very poor argument. Any deficit would have be due To Royal Mail or the government dipping into it as promoted by Gordon Brown. The current government argues that Royal Mail needs investment despite it apparently turning a profit. Why not invest some of that profit? ]

Competition will make it impossible for a privatised service not to cut deliveries in rural areas, says Save Our Royal Mail

…

Richard Graham, the MP for Gloucester, argued that privatisation would provide the investment needed to compete against the private sector. “I don’t want to save Royal Mail because I don’t think it’s a panda or a tiger,” he said. “I want to grow Royal Mail. I want to see it become a world- beating company. It’s got 150,000 employees. Wouldn’t it be fantastic if it had 200,000 and was running postal services under that great brand all around the Commonwealth?

“It needs to be able to compete against private-sector competitors, and it can only do that effectively if it has the investment it needs to get the technology that the competitors have,” he said.

The panel clashed over how privatisation would affect value for money for consumers. Dunn said Royal Mail had historically kept prices low across the market, but expected a sharp increase after privatisation that would allow its competitors to increase their prices, too. Graham, however, predicted that the new ownership would freeze prices after last year’s rises.

Ben Harris-Quinney, chair of the right-wing thinktank Bow Group, accused the government of “rushing out” the privatisation. “Research in July showed that almost half of the country were not aware of the privatisation of Royal Mail and 65% of those surveyed were against any notion of privatisation,” he said. “There has been no campaign. This has been a Westminster-bubble discussion that hasn’t engaged with the public at all.”

…

 

Continue ReadingPrivatisation will threaten Royal Mail’s six-day service, warns campaign group