Jultra Truth. Freedom. Oh and the end of New Labour and Tony Blair, Ian Blair, ID cards, terror laws and the NWO and their lies

Wednesday, July 05, 2006

Daily Mirror: calling for 7/7 investigation or UK 9/11 Commission whitewash ?

This Old Brit reminds us that yesterday, the Daily Mirror ran a large editorial calling for a public inquiry into the London bombings last year.

In this, the Mirror covered the story of Rachel North, well known for her campaigning for a full inquiry into the 7/7 tragedy of which she is survivor.

A full public inquiry is long overdue and indeed it is difficult not to be alarmed at the Blair goverment's ongoing efforts to avoid this, but there were a number of things in the Mirror coverage that people should be equally concerned about, and knowing that an inquiry will eventually be inevitable, the direction and template for such an inquiry may already be being shaped:

What follows are some modified and expanded comments I left over at Richard's (This Old Brit's) blog:

The Mirror's own commentary advocates a 9/11 Commission-style investigation, almost promoting it as a gold standard that should be replicated here for the 7/7 bombings:

"The model should be America's 9/11 Commission into the al-Qaeda assault on the Twin Towers" (Daily Mirror 4/7/2006)

The 9/11 Commission just assumed the validity of this assertion made early on, so we are already off to a shaky start.

But there are some better parallels: The 9/11 Commission was eventually put together after the families campaigned for it and against enormous resistance from the Bush administration, but as soon as it was agreed things started to take on a downward slant and it became clear where it was headed.

Henry Kissinger was intended to head the commission, which the New York Times noted as perhaps being a means to contain the investigation. When Kissinger didn't work out, they actually picked someone even worse in the form of Philip Zelikow.

To those who haven't had a chance yet, do read about Philip Zelikow, it will make you shudder with disbelief. The familes (sadly unsuccessfully) tried to get rid of Zelikow.

It was Zelikow's staff that did by far the majority of the work, not Kean, Hamilton etc (who are worthy of great criticism in their own right), while early on... 'commission member Max Cleland resigned, condemning the entire exercise as a "scam" and "whitewash"' 1

Now, there were some very interesting things that slipped out of the 9/11 Commission, but by and large, things were either lied about, grossly distorted or evidence outright ignored or denied to come up with a way of rubber stamping the official story already out there, not 'investigating it'. More worryingly the commission's report was used as a tool to manufacture a political mandate, to reinforce the direction of the administration of 'a world changed' scenario.

Some of the US families have noted it leaves them with more questions than answers and that is being very polite. For many others, the 9/11 Commission report is regarded as the sinister whitewash of our times surpassing the Warren Commission into JFK, indeed it is difficult to recognise this description from the Mirror,

"Even President Bush finally acknowledged, after taking a similar tack, that there needed to be a 9/11 Commission. The conclusions ended many of the myths around the September attacks. And the American people were reassured" 2

This statement is just false, a recent Zogby poll showed that less than half of Americans effectively accepted the 'findings' of the 9/11 Commission, who's conclusions were identical to those proposed in the hours and days after 9/11, a point of which the Daily Mirror are well aware as I (and many others) emailed the Zogby story to them at the time.

It troubles me that no distinction is being made between the families in the US who campaigned for an inquiry and the 9/11 Commission itself. There is no mention in the Mirror that the 9/11 Commission is a widely criticised affair, ranging from dangerous whitewash to malevolent story telling machine for US empire. So concerning were it's problems David Ray Griffin wrote a book about it, the 9/11 Commission report: Ommissions and Distortions.

My strong concern is that the UK is being led down an ally; in pointing to America as an example of where a commission was set up at public request, it is being nudged to effectively replicate the 9/11 Commission, where it is being wrongly held up by the press and some politicians as an example to follow, but if you follow that route then you'll just have something that will appease a lot of the tabloid press, will reinforce a lot of the worst political myths, but will horrify, and be denounced by, anyone who has actually looked at it.

The tragic and worrying real parallel which tends to get obscured by the media is both the US and UK goverments put blocks on investigations and that familes who rightly wouldn't take no for an answer pushed for it, but in the case of the US, the resulting 9/11 Commission was far from satisfactory to put it extremely mildly.

Victims and families, the UK and Rachel deserve better than a 9/11 Commission.

2. Greengrass in the Mirror.

And if people wanted a sign that they are being dangerously mislead into a corrupt UK 9/11 Commission which will do everything it can to avoid genuine investigation while fabricating a mythical politcal zeitgeist, then they can look no further than Flight 93 propagandist Paul Greengrass's comments in the Mirror:

"It was called the 9/11 Commission Report. Without it, we could never have reconstructed what happened aboard the hijacked passenger jets, nor even begun to understand the complex forces that led up to the attacks on September 11th 2001 [..]

It stands today as a powerful and impressive exercise in accountability from a society mature enough to know that when faced with a calamity on the scale of 9/11, government's first task is to find out what happened and why"

The fact they are rolling out Greengrass who is waving the 9/11 Commission report as if it were some authoritative, reliable account is extremely worrying. People are effectively being prepared for another war on terror/Clash of Civilizations mandate-making novel straight out of the CFR and piped through a collection of compromised cronies like Kean and Hamilton, or in this case their UK equivalents. And if previous regime investigations into itself are anything to go by like the Hutton report it doesn't bode well.

3. The Mirror talked about 'Al Qaeda (sympathisers) trying to infiltrate MI5'

I don't even know how the Mirror could print this garbage that's been handed to them. It's just nonsense. It may be code for MI5 trying to infiltrate itself.

Thanks to Rachel and Richard


Blogger Richard said...

Jultra, you've done it again. Produced another brilliant piece.

So I was not at all surprised to see that Rinf.com have picked it up and reproduced it at their place. You've deserved wider recognition for a long time, btw. Well done.

Also, I thank you for the Old Brit cites, and I'm sure Rachel does too.

Once again, good on you, Jultra.

8:03 PM  
Blogger J.UL1R4 said...

You're extremely kind Richard and thanks always for the incredible work you do.

Yes Rinf mirrors some of the stuff from here which is really appreciated and I'm very grateful for.

I just got a little alarmed at what was going on in the Mirror and I meant to write about it yesterday but this weather is frying my mind.

Also on the Zogby poll; this is a point the Mirror themselves are aware of, as I myself (and I'm sure many others) emailed the story to them at the time. I think I'll put that in actually.

Thanks again Richard,

10:53 PM  
Blogger John Doraemi said...

I would add, regarding the 7/7 bombings:

1. Simultaneous “terror exercise” running during the attacks.

2. Israeli security company which “guarded” the London underground (involved in the exercises) having NO VIDEO of the actual detonations.

3. Israeli/Mossad foreknowledge of attacks, warning to Netanyahu to avoid the area.

4. Detonations UNDERNEATH the carriages blowing the steel UP. Documented in article/TV interview on the dancer who survived.

5. Aswat, the “mastermind” kicked out of USA for plotting Terrorism YEARS before 7/7 attack, hidden and protected by MI6.

The London attacks were “Al Qaeda” all right. And Al Qaeda is a joke played upon the world by the colluding intelligence services to manufacture fear, war pretexts and “full spectrum dominance.” The real masterminds wear suits, not turbans. The low-level patsies have no clue what they’re involved in.


2:56 AM  
Blogger J.UL1R4 said...

Good points John, will a '9/11-style inquiry' look at those issues or just ignore them ?

9:22 PM  
Blogger The Antagonist said...

Any inquiry held under the current laws of the land will ignore all of the above, and more, by design, thanks to the All New Inquiries Act 2005.

In support of Geraldine Finucane, whose husband was brutally murdered in front of his family, Amnesty International last year called for judges to boycott any inquiries held under the terms of the act. To date, the UK government has not been able to identify any judge willing to take on the Finucane inquiry under the flawed terms of the Inquiries Act.

The Amnesty International Report 2006 carries just one paragraph about the Inquiries Act 2005:

"The Inquiries Act 2005 came into force in June. It undermined the rule of law, the independence of the judiciary and human rights protection. It therefore failed to provide for effective, independent, impartial or thorough public judicial inquiries into serious human rights violations. AI called for its repeal."

The July 7th Truth Campaign has also called on judges to boycott inquiries held under the act and supports Amnesty International's call for the repeal of the act.

So far, none of the prominent organisations calling for an inquiry into 7/7 have addressed the issue of the Inquiries Act 2005, or whether they would accept an inquiry under the act that renders all inquiries subject to State approval.

Should the government ever announce a public inquiry into 7/7, they are highly likely to be unable to find judges who will taken on the inquiry, owing to the Inquiries Act 2005.

So, the point of anyone calling for a Public Inquiry into 7/7 under the Inquiries Act 2005, is precisely what?

9:51 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So, the point of anyone calling for a Public Inquiry into 7/7 under the Inquiries Act 2005, is precisely what?

There is no point in it at all. This is the theme that I explored in this thread that went missing.

The British use these white papers, inquiries etc as a way of placating the public, as a way of drawing an artificial line under an incedent, wihtout making a single change to any fundamental problem or cause.

I will repeat what I said before. It does not matter who did the mythical '7/7' where a small number of people were killed. They were killed in the same way that people in Iraq are killed every week, and yet, there are no two minutes of silence for them - indeed, if we were to hold two minutes of silence for all the people killed by Murder Inc USUK in the middle east, there would not one of us be able to speak for weeks at a time.

All human life is of equal value. It is dishonourable, despicable, nauseating and shameful the way that the people sacrificed in London are being made into some mock '911' centerpiece for radical re-engineering of society. I dont like it when anyone is killed, no matter where they live, and I dont like it when peoples lives are used to manipulate the sheep in the population.

This is why all of us who have a single working braincell must unanimously reject all of the sentimental, sickening and maudlin anniversary marking and silences for something that is in actuality inconcequential in the grand scheme of things.

We must all agree not to react in any way to any bombing, outrage or absurd act of nonsense that they try and use to to direct us like herds of sheep into a totalitarian slaughterhouse. We must, all of us, maintain perspective. We keep a hold of our ability to grasp scale. Millions of men died so that we would not have to live in tryanny, and we spit on their very real sacrifices when we shed crocodile tears and words of stupid grief over a mere 50 people who were in the wrong place at the wrong time, killed by maniacs whoever they were.

We must remember the people who DELIBERATELY went to battle for us, who DELIBERATELY went to be killed in two world wars, who put themselvs in the line of fire so that we would not have to carry ID cards like the Germans, or have no property rights etc etc.

Calling for inquiries is a part of the '7/7' '9/11' lie. We categorically reject the 'terrorist threat' / 'war on terror' mindset. We actively defend our freedom and rights no matter what outrages are thrown at us, and no matter who they come from. This is the only defence possible agains this, the only real threat to our lives.

MI5 is putting together an american style threat level system to keep everyone's fear levels heightened. We must reject this nonsense without hesititaion; it is part of the psychological warfare that is being waged against us.

This is the REAL threat; our unguarded, unmeasured reaction to False Evidence Appearing Real - FEAR. If you are thrown off of a horse, you get right back on it. You don't cut one of the horses legs off to make it 'more secure' The same should be said and done with our lives and society here in the west. No matter what they do, no matter how far they take this, we must never EVER give up even a fraction of an inch to them.

5:55 PM  
Blogger J.UL1R4 said...

Antagonist thanks for the excellent info. Good Lord, very interesting and very frightening, this legislation seems to effectively cripple any inquiry as you point out.

Of course, from the point of view of the Daily Mirror, the Inquiries Act would make it fit in very well with a '9/11 style inquiry' wouldn't it?

Interesting it came into law a month before 7/7 as well.

And I saw the coverage you got in the Guardian, congratulations on that!

Anon : look I couldn't agree more with what you are saying.

"If you are thrown off of a horse, you get right back on it. You don't cut one of the horses legs off to make it 'more secure"

Yes absolutely, and this is the crux of the point that many turn away from. We are dealing with choices, people are making these choices because they want the world to be that way.

This truth is just too challenging for a lot of people to deal with though. They can't deal with it at all and think they are still participating in it, of course they are not, anymore than than someone who is being bullied is laughing with the bully.

9:41 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home