Police state ČR

Připravte se: Show v Gaze brzo začne
http://www.zvedavec.org/pohledy_1281.htm

Zkuste si představit, že by u nás probíhala permanentní sovětská okupace, při které by den co den zahynulo přibližně 100 Čechů, Moravanů, či Slováků. Zkuste si představit, že by Sověti postříleli mezi 20 až 100 tisíci civilních obyvatel, mezi nimi téměř třetinu žen a dětí. Možná by dříve či později (bez ohledu na českou umírněnost a mírumilovnost) začaly vznikat skupinky odporu, které by se se zbraní v ruce postavily proti okupantům. Tím jsem si jist. A buďte si jisti, že by v sovětském tisku byli nazýváni "teroristy", podobně jako dnes Čečenci. A že by se rudí politologové předháněli v propagandistických článcích o českých pohanských psech, kteří si neváží života. Buďte si také jisti, že by pravda byla úplně jiná.


V žádném případě nehájím metodu obrany se zbraní v ruce, na druhé straně se jí snažím pochopit. Izraelci berou Palestincům jejich území, kde dlouhá léta v pokoji žili. Američané okupují Irák a snaží se jim natlačit svou "hamburgrovou demokracii".

Zkuste se aspoň na chvíli vžít do kůže těch, kteří dnes a denně ztrácejí své známé, příbuzné, či děti.

Možná nakonec rozmotáte příčinu a následek. Možná nakonec dojdete k pochopení. Možná svůj strach poté transformujete v hněv a hněv v sílu. Sílu, která konečně a definitivně sesadí z trůnu ty naše "volené zástupce", kteří používají zbraně jako normální nástavbu politiky.

To, že až dvě třetiny muslimů uvažují o tom, že se ze strachu odstěhují z Británie, je pro mne naprosto šokující zpráva a cosi vypovídá o naší xenofobii a rasismu.

Jistě, Islám má některé zvláštnosti. Například ty ženy. To, co vidíme my, je jeden z úhlů pohledů. Na druhé straně: některé čtenářky jistě znají ten kolotoč práce, nákupy, děti, domácnost a manžel, který si chodí na sqash či s kamarády na pivo. O takovou rovnoprávnost na západě stojíme? Stojíte? Takhle to chcete? Abyste pak museli bojovat v řadách feministek o aspoň trochu normální život?

Zkuste se na dovolené u moře podívat na neurotickou rodinku západní a zkuste se podívat na rodinku islámskou. Zkuste např. pozorovat jejich děti. A možná uvidíte, co za celá léta ne...

Asi bych neměnil, přesto říkám: vše má své pro a proti. Ale nikdo nemá právo druhému vnucovat svůj systém, ani politický, ani rodinný. Už vůbec ne se zbraní v ruce, násilím. Až toto přestane Západ dělat, může se soustředit na to, co dělají ostatní. Do té doby já osobně považuji za pro světový mír daleko nebezpečnější militantní americké křesťany s Bushem v čele.

OPAKUJI pro ty, kteří to stále nechápou: ONI (kterých je několik set, maximálně několik tisíc) nás (kterých je několik miliard) chtějí poštvat PROTI sobě navzájem. Nevím jak vy, já jako kdybych to již někde zažil. Udělali nám to v posledním století minimálně dvakrát. Zatím znovu vyhrávají... Lidé se zdají být nepoučitelní.

Věřme, že pouze zatím a že se nakonec probudí. Následky by v tomto případě totiž byly zcela fatální.

Všichni lidé chtějí mít domov, chtějí mít co jíst a chtějí být zdraví. Bez rozdílu křesťan, Muslim, nebo Žid. A pak je tady několik takových, kteří k tomu všemu chtějí peníze jako prostředek moci a ovládání. A neštítí se při tom ničeho....

Takže, staví-li dnes někdo Muslimy an block ke zdi (přečtěte si české noviny a podívejte se na českou televizi) a vytváří atmosféru strachu a xenofobie, NEBUDU mlčet. Až totiž přijdou pro mne, nemusel by být už nikdo, kdo by se mne zastal...

Když přišli nacisté pro komunisty, mlčel jsem; nebyl jsem přece komunista.
Když zavírali sociální demokraty, mlčel jsem; nebyl jsem přece sociální demokrat.
Když přišli pro odboráře, mlčel jsem; nebyl jsem přece odborář.
Když přišli pro Židy, mlčel jsem, protože jsem nebyl Žid.
Když přišli pro mě, nebyl už nikdo, kdo by se mě mohl zastat.

Martin Niemöller (1892-1984)



http://www.osud.cz/cs/clanek.php?id=3793&PHPSESSID=e880eb0df81e87dcc6b73a78bd0e29a7

How Black Ops Staged the London Bombings

Evidence regarding the 4 alleged bombers comes from a single CCTV image of 4 similar-looking individuals.

by Fintan Dunne

July 25, 2005



Increasing doubt has been expressed concerning the official version of the London bomb attacks.

The evidence so far presented by the investigators is patchy and contradictory. We bring to the attention of our readers a text which questions the validity of the official story.






Staged terror events --like magic tricks-- rely on misdirection to throw people off the track. To uncover how the London bombings were carried out by a Western black operations team, we must see through the key misdirections they built into the operation.

The official spin goes like this:

Key evidence of the movements of the four alleged bombers comes from a single CCTV image of four similar-looking individuals entering Luton Station to catch a London-bound train. Three of them had driven to Luton to meet the fourth and carry on by train to King's Cross station in London.

The police claim to have another CCTV video of them splitting up at Kings Cross and heading in different directions to carry out the attacks. Papers identifying them were found at the scenes --where their bodies have also been recovered. Police also found bomb materials in the car they left at a pay carpark in Luton.

That's the tale of the "suicide bombers." The big problem with this account is that a terror group would never deliberately waste valuable human resources in suicide attacks, when suicide tactics are not needed.

In answer, mainstream media are now also pushing the line that they may have been duped --and didn't know the bombs would explode immediately they were set. In alternative media some are also pushing the idea that they simply thought they transporting drugs.

Both explanations assume the four did actually carry the bombs onto London's Underground trains and a bus.

Which of course, they didn't. All this has been misdirection.

Here's how it really went down:



The three who were driving from Leeds to Luton never completed their journey. Somewhere along the M1 motorway, a car with a flashing blue light came up behind them and both cars pulled over to the side of the road. The seeming police officers demanded identification and then insisted that the car be moved off the motorway for safety reasons and for further questioning.

Meanwhile another team was intercepting the fourth person in as he made his way from nearby Aylesbury to Luton. None of them would be seen alive in public again. They did not participate in the bombings.

The CCTV image of them entering Luton Station is a cut and paste of prior surveilance photos taken of the four. This is the key misdirrection.

Intercepting the four would have been much to public once they entered Luton Station. They were taken out before that. Let's come back to what happened to them after we unveil the other key misdirection.

The bombs on the Underground were not in the tube carriages. They were under the floors of the carriages. The black-ops team would need access to rail or maintainance yards in order to plant these timed devices.

That's the reliable way. That's why this was inevitably how it would be done.

Confirmation of this comes from a number of reports, including this eyewitness account of the Aldgate East tube bomb by Cambridge dancer Bruce Lait. He and dance partner Crystal Main were the only passengers in their carriage who survived without serious injury - despite being nearest to the bomb blast.

Here's the Cambridge Evening News report [also]:



"When I woke up and looked around I saw darkness, smoke and wreckage. It took a while to realise where I was and what was going on... " He and Crystal were helped out of the carriage. As they made their way out, a policeman pointed out where the bomb had been.

"The policeman said 'mind that hole, that's where the bomb was'. The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train. They seem to think the bomb was left in a bag, but I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag," he said.

Moreover, Christophe Chaboud, head of the French Anti-Terrorism Co-ordination Unit, told Le Monde newspaper that the explosives used in the bombings were of military origin:

He added that the victims' wounds suggested that the explosives, which were " not heavy but powerful", had been placed on the ground, perhaps underneath seats. [Source also]


Or perhaps under the floor.

Causing injuries such as those suffered by Emily Benton, one of two Knoxville, TN sisters on vacation in London who were injured in one of the tube blasts. She had broken bones and skin missing on her feet:

"Her feet were badly injured (the hospital doesn't think she will lose her feet), and she has a bad cut on her arm." [Source]

With much of the carnage taking place underground, it was useful that the bus bomb could provide an above-ground spectacle -and the only sighting of a bomber in action:

BUS blast survivor Richard Jones yesterday revealed how he came face-to-face with one of the London bombers. The Scots IT expert got off the doomed double-decker just seconds before it was torn apart in an explosion that killed 13 passengers.

"This young guy kept diving into this bag or whatever he had in front of his feet," he told The Associated Press.



He said the bomber was around 6ft tall, in his mid-twenties, clean-shaven and smartly dressed. The man was wearing hipster-style fawn checked trousers, with exposed designer underwear, and a matching jersey-style top. 'The pants looked very expensive, they were white with a red band on top... He was standing with his back to me downstairs at the driver's side, which is exactly where the explosion was... The noise was unbelievable. I served an apprenticeship in an explosives factory in Ayrshire so I knew what it was.' [Source]

Which doesn't sound anything like the blue-jeaned, unshaven, rather drably-dressed Hasib Hussain. But the tale of a nervous bomber served to add color to a London landscape which badly needed at least one eyewitness account of the bombers in action.

The bus -like the trains, had a concealed bomb.

Meanwhile, the alleged bombers had been whisked to a remote location to be ruthlessly murdered in a way that would be consistent with their participation in a suicide bombing. They died in a callous blast arranged with military precision.

Four more murders came easily to those who were meanwhile killing scores in London with the same ruthless precision.

Their bodies and body parts would be infiltrated into the forensic investigation. Their identity papers would be "found" at the scenes of the bombings. Their injuries would seem consistent. Their names and their memory smeared forever.

It's war. This is what it's like. Stop it.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=DUN20050725&articleId=737

Police Debate if London Plotters Were Suicide Bombers, or Dupes

LONDON, July 26 - Within hours of the July 7 attacks here, many British police and intelligence officials assumed that the four bombers had intended to die with their bombs.

But in recent days, some police officials are increasingly considering the possibility that the men did not plan to commit suicide and were duped into dying.

Investigators raising doubts about the suicide assumption have cited evidence to support this theory. Each of the four men who died in the July 7 attacks purchased round-trip railway tickets from Luton to London. Germaine Lindsay's rented car left in Luton had a seven-day parking sticker on the dashboard.

A large quantity of explosives were stored in the trunk of that car, perhaps for another attack. Another bomber had just spent a large sum to repair his car. The men carried driver's licenses and other ID cards with them to their deaths, unusual for suicide bombers.

In addition, none left behind a note, videotape or Internet trail as suicide bombers have done in the past. And the bombers' families were baffled by what seemed to be their decisions to kill themselves.

While some of these clues could be seen as the work of men intent on covering their trail, some investigators increasingly believe that the men may have been conned into carrying the bombs onto the trains and leaving them, thinking they were going to explode minutes later.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/27/international/europe/27suicide.html?ex=1280116800&en=fdf59c7e0c9dbe5a&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

must read

About Those Nuclear Attack Speculations

http://tvnewslies.org/blog/?p=69

IF WORLD WAR III IS INEVITABLE WHO DO WE BLOW UP?

Jim Moore | July 28 2005

Two questions just rose up out of the political ashes, making it imperative that I run to my “think” room and consult my crystal ball. Question One, are we, or are we not, going to experience the horrors of another World War, this time nuclear?

Question Two, if a nuclear war is inevitable, how do we know who our enemy is?

The answer to the first question has presumably already been answered by a recent Associated Press-Kyodo poll---how more accurate can you get than an AP-Kyodo poll?---which clearly shows that six out of 10 Americans believe that a nuclear war is likely. Not all countries believe this, of course, but they don’t know what we know about wars.

With Question One settled, let us now zero in on Question Two. In the event that WWIII should break out---and since we can’t help being in it--- maybe even starting it---who will our enemy be?

Every one of our wars has had a target-participant. One we could finger and fix our sights on. If we bother to declare war at all, we should have somebody in mind to declare it on.

In 1776 it was England; in 1812 it was also England; in 1865 it was the Confederacy; in 1898 it was Spain; in 1917 it was Germany; in 1942 it was Germany, Italy and Japan (the Axis Powers): in the 1960’s it was Korea; in the 1970’s it was Vietnam; in 2005 it is Iraq and Afghanistan.

We have always had a designated enemy. So it is quite natural to ask, in a nuclear war, who will we blast into oblivion?

Not Terrorists---they don’t have a country to blow up; they’re all over the world; besides, every time we find one, he blows himself up before we can get to him.

Not Arabs---killing another hundred thousand or so innocent men, women, and children doesn’t contribute much to any viable war effort.

Not Osama bin Laden---after three years we haven’t found him, so how are we going to nuke him? Besides, Bush fudged again and said this guy is no longer a priority target.

Not Japan---the U.S. and Japan have never had a closer relationship. Or so it would seem from our automobile sales.

Not China---that wouldn’t be very smart since we gave them all our nuclear secrets. Also, there are so many Chinese they would stomp hell out of us.

Not Mexico---thanks to Presidents Bush and Fox, if we started “eliminating” Mexicans, California would lose half its population. Not France---bomb the nation that gave us our Statue of Liberty? Are you nuts?



Not Russia---it wouldn’t make sense to start a “hot” war with the country we defeated in a “cold war.” A luke-warm war? Maybe.

Not Africa--- the instant we blow up any African nation the ACLU would come down on us like a swarm of tse tse flies.

Not England--- we’ve already kicked their butts twice. Furthermore, Tony Blair’s personal secretary is a distant cousin of my boss's wife's uncle.

Not Israel--- with so many international bankers being Jewish, we would be out of cash two days into a war.

Not Cuba--- Castro has outlasted us for 40 years. No reason to believe that starting World War III would shake him up.

Not the Arctic regions---nuclear explosions would melt the ice caps, causing massive flooding, and we would quick have to build another Ark. Moreover, who really wants to kill Eskimos?

No, my belief is that if we insist on starting another war, our designated target should be Ourselves. It would be The Quiet War, with no explosions of any kind whatsoever, including nuclear.

In conducting The Quiet War we would take stock of what we have done, and are doing, to this planet and the people on it. We would take seriously all dissents, all injustices, all tyrannical acts, and put them into a Court of Complaints for immediate review and remedial action.

We would kick the conniving, war-making neo-conservatives out of the Administration and the Pentagon, revamp our foreign policy, rethink our domestic agenda, restructure our whole approach to other nations in the world, and begin running America the way our founding fathers envisioned it should be run. Which, by the way, they put on paper in a document called the U.S. Constitution.

We would start minding our own business, respect other countries and cultures, and adhere to our own unique values, principles, and heritage. “Live and let live” would be our motto.

This way there would be no need to declare war on anybody, nor them on us, and the miseries of World War III might never come to pass. Is this an idea whose time has come? Apparently not yet.

http://www.etherzone.com/2005/moor072705.shtml

Abbas: Nejsou důkazy, že atentátníci byli muslimové

28. července 2005 20:18

Pozornost světa se nedávných útocích upřela k vyznavačům islámu. "Dodnes nejsou důkazy, že ti lidé, kteří to dělali, byli muslimové. Musíme čekat až bude dokázána vina," odpověděl v on-line rozhovoru předseda Muslimské unie ČR Mohamad Abbas. Objevilo se i téma války v Iráku.

"Co je jisté z více arabských zdrojů, že do amerických médií se dostane jenom zlomek toho, co se děje v Iráku. Okupační armády dělají všechno, aby schovaly ztráty, a proto nám to vadí. Vraždy a sebevraždy jsou spojeny s okupací a jejich přítomností," uvedl Abbas v rozhovoru.

Abbas žije v Česku od roku 1988. Vystudoval architekturu.

Podle časopisu Reflex je synem někdejšího súdánského velvyslance v Československu.

Abbas vede i server Muslimské listy. "V této době, kdy můžete v češtině číst všechny názory proti islámu nebo 'nechápající' islám a islámský svět, cítili jsme velkou potřebu nabídnout široké odborné veřejnosti jiný pohled na dění v islámském světě," vysvětluje Abbas vznik serveru.

"Věříme, že chybné nebo zkreslené informace jsou jako potraviny s prošlou lhůtou - můžou škodit víc, než si dokážeme představit," doplňuje.

Čtenářům slibuje, že zdrojem zpráv bude tisk, internet, tiskové agentury z islámského světa, často i západní média, která jsou jen zřídka reprezentovaná v českých médiích.

http://zpravy.idnes.cz/domaci.asp?r=domaci&c=A050727_170950_domaci_jpl

Washington recasts terror war as 'struggle'

By Eric Schmitt and Thom Shanker The New York Times

WEDNESDAY, JULY 27, 2005

WASHINGTON The Bush administration is retooling its slogan for the fight against Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups, pushing the idea that the long-term struggle is as much an ideological battle as a military mission, according to senior administration and military officials.

In recent speeches and news conferences, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and the country's top military officer have spoken of "a global struggle against violent extremism" rather than "the global war on terror," which had been the catchphrase of choice.


Administration officials say the earlier phrase may have outlived its usefulness, because it focused attention solely, and incorrectly, on the military campaign.


General Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the National Press Club on Monday that he had "objected to the use of the term 'war on terrorism' before, because if you call it a war, then you think of people in uniform as being the solution."

He said the threat instead should be defined as violent extremism, with the recognition that "terror is the method they use."


Rumsfeld spoke in the new terms on Friday when he addressed an audience in Annapolis, Maryland, for the retirement ceremony of Admiral Vern Clark as chief of naval operations. Rumsfeld described America's efforts as it "wages the global struggle against the enemies of freedom, the enemies of civilization."

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/07/26/news/terror.php

A new world order?

Chico Enterprise-Record

Most Americans have not heard of the FTAA (Free Trade Area of the Americas). Most have heard of NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) and GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade). NAFTA and GATT were stepping stones to the FTAA. The day after GATT was passed, Henry Kissinger was quoted in the L.A. Times that "he was grateful that GATT had passed because it was a giant step toward a new world order."

CAFTA (Central America Free Trade Agreement), currently before Congress, wraps up all the Americas. If passed, it will eliminate our borders, the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the American middle class, merging all the governments into a regional government, and a little later into a one-world government.

...

http://www.chicoer.com/letters/ci_2869398

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Indo-US nuke pact, cornerstone for a new world order: NY Post

...

For the Bush Administration, the July 18 is a major diplomatic accomplishment, but the New York Post adds that the American president still needs to do much more if wants to be seen as a country applying its nuclear and climate strategies peacfully.

The paper believes that during his second stint as President, Bush has "put into place the cornerstone for a new world order".

...

http://news.webindia123.com/news/showdetails.asp?id=100324&cat=World

Police State New York





A policeman talks to concerned workers who were evacuated after a suspicious package was found in front of Commerce Bank at 205 Montague Street in Brooklyn on Monday, July 25, 2005. According to an officer at the scene, the package was found chained to a fire hydrant in front of the bank at 8:50am. The bank as well as the buildings within a block radius were evacuated at 9:15am. The package was detonated but was found to contain personal belongings.

--------------------------------------



On Sunday, July 24, 2005, a police officer checks the (Polaroid-type) photo he just took of the Amtrak Ticket window 13 area behind him where a man earlier caused a disturbance that led to the evacuation of Penn Station in Manhattan.

-----------------------------





A sightseeing double decker bus stands empty on Broadway and the packages of the sightseerers are arranged on the street after the bus was evacuated, Sunday, July 24, 2005 in New York's Times Square. Five men were briefly detained and questioned by the NYPD. Police said the driver stopped the bus and called the police.
(AP)





New York City police officers stand over five unidentified men who were evacuated from a double decker sightseeing bus, Sunday, July 24, 2005 in New York. The men were briefly detained and questioned by the NYPD. Five men were briefly detained and questioned by the NYPD. Police said the driver stopped the bus and called the police.

http://www.nynewsday.com/news/nyc-pennscare-pg0724,0,1420998.photogallery?coll=nyc-homepage-mezzbox&index=8

Oxford Law Prof alarmed at "police’s Mossad-style execution" of innocent ’suspect’

Bellacio | July 27 2005

John Gardner is the Professor of Jurisprudence at the University of Oxford, and occasional Visiting Professor at Yale Law School.

Police state: Like many of my fellow-Londoners I am less alarmed by suicide bombers than I am by the police’s Mossad-style execution of a ’suspect’ (who turned out to be a completely innocent passer-by) on Friday 22 July. This is not because we are at greater risk of death at the hands of the police than at the hands of the bombers. (Both risks are pretty tiny, but of the two the risk posed by the police is clearly smaller). Rather, it is because, all else being equal, it is worse to be killed by one’s friends than by one’s enemies, and worse to be killed by people in authority than by people not in authority.

Here are some other important things to remember in thinking about the police actions of 22 July:

(1) There is no general legal duty to assist the police or to obey police instructions. Rice v Connolly [1966] 2 QB 414.

(2) There are special police powers to arrest and search. But there is no special police licence to injure or kill. If they injure or kill, the police need to rely on the same law as the rest of us.

(3) The law allows those who use force in prevention of crime to use only necessary and proportionate force. Jack Straw and Sir Ian Blair say that officers are under great pressure. But this is no excuse. In law, as in morality, being under extra pressure gives us no extra latitude for error in judging how much force is proportionate or necessary. R v Clegg [1995] 1 A.C. 482.

(4) Arguably, the police should be held to higher standards of calm under pressure than the rest of us. Certainly not lower!

(5) The necessity and proportionality of the police use of force is to be judged on the facts as they believed them to be: R v Williams 78 Cr. App R 276. This does create latitude for factual error. In my view it creates too much latitude. The test should be reasonable belief. The police may be prejudiced like the rest of us, and may treat the fact that someone is dark-skinned as one reason to believe that he is a suicide bomber. But in court this reason should not count.

(6) It is no defence in law that the killing was authorised by a superior officer. A superior officer who authorises an unlawful killing is an accomplice. R v Clegg [1995] 1 A.C. 482.

(7) The fact that those involved were police officers is irrelevant to the question of whether to prosecute them. It is a basic requirement of the Rule of Law that, when suspected of crimes, officials are subject to the same policies and procedures as the rest of us.

(8) Some people say: Blame the terrorists, not the police. But blame is not a zero-sum game. The fact that one is responding to faulty actions doesn’t mean one is incapable of being at fault oneself. We may blame Tony Blair for helping to create the conditions in which bombing appeals to people, without subtracting any blame from the bombers. We may also blame the bombers for creating the conditions in which the police act under pressure, without subtracting blame from the police if they overreact. Everyone is responsible for their own faulty actions, never mind the contribution of others. This is the moral position as well as the position in criminal law.

Proposed new anti-terrorist offences: The one that has been variously labelled as ’condoning’ or ’glorifying’ or ’indirectly inciting’ terrorism gives cause for concern. It is already an offence to incite another person to commit an act of terrorism (Terrorism Act 2000 s59). In which respects, we may wonder, is the scope of this offence to be extended? The word ’indirect’ suggests that they mean to catch those who incite the s59 inciter. But under general doctrines of English criminal law it is already an offence to incite the s59 inciter. So one suspects some other extension of the existing offence is being cooked up. Is the plan to criminalise the mere defence or endorsement of a terrorist act? If so we are in for trouble. Terrorism in English law is defined to cover all modes of political violence, however trifling. Are academics and commentators no longer to be permitted to defend any political violence? Is Ted Honderich’s Violence for Equality, or Peter Singer’s Democracy and Disobedience, to be put on the banned books list? The only thing protecting these books at the moment is that, in the eyes of the law, an argued endorsement is not an incitement. The thought that the government may be thinking of changing this should send a shiver down the spine of anyone who still has a spine (damn few).

Lord Hoffman in A v Home Secretary [2005] 2 WLR 87: ’The real threat to the life of the nation ... comes not from terrorism but from laws like these.’ Quite right. Some extra risk of being blown up by fanatics on the way to work is one of the prices we pay for living in a free society. Let’s make sure we keep it that way.

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/july2005/270705profalarmed.htm

FTP:
/Hijacking.Catastrophe.2004.DVDRip.XviD
http://www.hijackingcatastrophe.org/

NFO:
For those of you who had the misfortune of watching Fahrenheit 9/11 or the even more horrendous Fahrenhype 9/11, here is a film to hopefully restore your faith in high quality documentary filmmaking. No shenanigans or Jerry Springerish bullshit here!

Perhaps I am being a bit hard on Michael Moore, but I have to say I was thoroughly unimpressed with F911. Too much of the time while watching F911, I was either cringing or thinking "so what?". There are, for instance, perfectly good reasons why rich Saudis would fly out of the country in the wake of the disaster, and why President Bush wouldn't want to rush out of the classroom as soon as he learned that the second tower had been hit. Moreover, these two incidents, which Moore makes a big deal of in his film, don't really lead anywhere...Moore makes no conclusions. Really, what is the point of following this kind of conspiracy theorist approach?

I could go on and on pointing out flaws and holes in F911, but I won't. On the other hand, I really haven't been able find any weaknesses in "Hijacking Catastrophe"...it is quite matter-of-fact, and sticks to the more enlightening and important issues. It does this without any cheesy stunts, and yet the pacing is so fast that it keeps the viewer enthralled.

Even though many people, myself included, like to compare this film to F911, there really is not that much overlap in content between the two, since they take such different approaches and directions.

My encode is from the original DVD, and it will play on the Philips 642, which means it will play on just about anything. It looks pretty good, and is much better than the VCD version, which, as far as I can tell, is the only other version floating around in Fileshare Land.

Resolution: 576x336
Bitrate: 880
Framerate: 29.97
Audio: 192 Kbps MP3
Size: 541 MB

Finally, you don't have to take just my word...
Here are the reviews from others, taken from www.imdb.com.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

For those of us who agree with many of Michael Moore's views but despise his irresponsible tactics, "Fahrenheit 9/11" was a horrifying movie for all the wrong reasons. Happily, Moore's brand of intellectual con artistry is entirely absent from Earp and Jhally's "Hijacking Catastrophe," which is quietly matter-of-fact and all the more compelling as a result. No fraudulent newspaper clippings, deceptive editing, histrionic bombast, or grossly misleading innuendos are to be found here; just a bunch of intelligent, articulate people making some devastating points. The film is tightly edited and fascinating throughout.


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

"Hijacking Catastrophe: 9/11, Fear & the Selling of American Empire" is a riveting documentary that should not be missed. It sheds much needed light on shocking use of the tragedies of September 11th 2001 by Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and others in the George W. Bush administration as a tool to implement their terrifying neo-conservative agenda. Unlike the excellent but obviously biased "Fahrenheit 9/11," this film avoids cheap shots at the subjects and focuses on the facts. The information unearthed in this documentary is so damning that spit-laden combs and eerie off camera presidential preening would be a waste of valuable seconds. This film is unfortunately short at 60 minutes in length but with commentary from such titans of intellectual thought as Norman Mailer and Noam Chomsky, the film uses each of these minutes to gripping avail.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Wow! Just watched this movie last night, and I didn't sleep well at all. I saw Fahrenheit 9-11 and found it to be entertaining, but too biased to be taken seriously. This movie, however, gave me chills and I am already quite familiar with the material discussed. It is an hour well spent and goes a long way toward educating the average American about NeoConservative views and how they have now become the dominant force in American politics. This movie is a MUST SEE if you ever care to truly understand why we are in Iraq and Afghanistan and why we're not leaving (so long as Bush and the NeoCons are in power anyway)!

The main difference between this movie and the others which have tried to target the Bush Administration so fiercely is that this one actually shows the extreme economic costs of waging continuous wars with those we don't agree with, and leaves it mostly to the viewer to decide whether never-ending war and American Imperialism is the correct course to take with so many other pervasive domestic problems of our own to deal with (not to mention the myriad of social and political costs).

Invite your friends, family and neighbors to watch this movie with you because this is the true debate Americans should be having and not whether some rich kid did his duty in 'Nam thirty years ago. Enjoy!

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Granted, this film is not as "glitzy" as Michael Moore's, and it isn't as in-your-face. However, that doesn't not take away from it's message, and some may argue it enhances it.

While Fahrenheit dealt more with Bush's hypocrisy and both his dealings and benefits financially with the Arab world, Hijacking Catastrophe widens the camera, focusing on "Neo-Conservative" chickenhawks of the Republican party (Rumsfeld, Bush, Cheyney, etc.) and illustrates how their right-wing foreign policies, schemed since the post cold-war early 80's, have been systematically put into place since 9/11.

A brilliant film. Impressive list of world-renowned thinkers, ex-military, and political activists weigh-in on the topic. The film ends leaving the viewer with some scary conclusions on how the Bush Government and the Republican Party view it's place in the world, and furthermore, how they see the world as something to be conquered.

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!!!

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I just saw Hijacking Catastrophe: 9/11, Fear & the Selling of American Empire today and was most impressed with the objectivity, the detail and complete examination of the facts. Obviously in the title you understand it has an opinion and it finds and examines evidence to make its point. It does so, however, leaving the viewer with enough information to form their own opinion: Masterful documentary film making at its finest. It is shame that most Americans won't see this film before your Presidential election. If so I doubt you would re-elect your current President and might in fact have him, and Rumsfeld et al, charged with high treason, which would be justified IMHO.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

This movie is more dispassionate than F9/11. With interviews by the usual suspects of "Left" oriented politics (to those who have watched a lot of documentaries), with a spattering of retired military members, it paints a picture of the present President as starting us from hegemony to Empire.

Overall, it uses more conventional documentary techniques and less personal invective to make it's claims. The conclusion is that when no one is left standing, who will pay for the current debts?

On the lighter side, I could not keep my eyes off the screen when Norman Mailer was interviewed. It was not watching him, rather in the background was a huge a Lego project that was either a castle, or futuristic spaceport.

PETVAL: na FTP
/911.The.Great.Illusion.by.George.Humphrey/

9/11 The Great Illusion by George Humphrey
This documentary is the film version of the book "9/11: The Great illusion", also by George Humphrey
60 objective facts, worthy questions and valuable insights that will make even the skeptics realize that 9/11 was orchestrated and carried out by the Power Elite within our own Government.

London 7/7 Attack: Creating the Enemy

by Ghali Hassan

July 14, 2005
GlobalResearch.ca

Instead of saying; it is too early to say who is responsible for the 7/7 London bombing, Tony Blair immediately accused Muslims and Islam of the crimes. No evidence, no names and no documentation were provided to support his accusations. This happened despite the fact that all Muslim nations have strongly condemned the attacks on innocent people. They do so, Blair said, because they "hate our way of life" and "our values". Why these ‘Muslim terrorists’ chose Britain of Blair not Switzerland or Sweden? The word why has simply disappeared from the language of both politicians and the media.

Western media, pundits and commentators were quick to jump on the Blair-Bush bandwagon and continue to amplify and encourage this anti-Muslim prejudice. To blindly accuse Muslims and Islam of violence is to ignore the real purveyors of today’s violence and terrorism in the world. Do few individuals represent the whole faith of Islam or Christianity?

Those responsible ‘have no respect for human life’, Blair said. Do those who participated in the barbaric "Shock and Awe" bombings of Baghdad and in the destruction of Iraqi towns and cities have respect for human life? What kind of terrorists has the capacity to perpetuate the criminal atrocity inflicted on the Iraqi people? Baghdad was the heart of the Muslim world and cultural capital of Islam for more than seven centuries.

Since March 2003, there has been a London bombing in Baghdad every day. The holly cities of Najef and Fallujah have been destroyed. Hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi men, women and children have been murdered. Tens of thousands of Iraqis are imprisoned, and tortured every day. The whole fabric of the Iraqi society has been deliberately decimated. Why?

The British public were told that the London bombing bears "all the hallmarks of al-Qaeda attacks". Even if the ‘terrorists’ are ‘white’, the British daily, The Independent, insured its readers, the ‘terrorists’ have to be "’mercenary terrorists’ hired by al-Qaeda to carry out these attacks". Al-Qaeda is now the West’s label for everything Muslim.

What is al-Qaeda? Al-Qaida (the ‘Base’ in Arabic) was the CIA sponsored training camp for the Afghan Mujahideen, including Osama bin Laden and his fighters. The group was created and financed by the US administration against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. They were called "freedom fighters" by former US president Reagan. In fact after meeting a group of bearded Mujahideen in the White House, the former president said: "These are the moral equivalent of America’s founding fathers". So, not long ago Mr Bin Laden and his men were the equivalent of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Abraham Lincoln.

Al-Qaeda has become a convenient phantom to justify an ongoing war. The continuing existence of al-Qaeda is a very useful pretext for the Blair-Bush axis and allies. It provides the necessary tool to create fear and manipulate public opinion.

The 7/7 London bombing was next to impossible to conduct in the middle of high security without the intelligence and coordination of important people in Britain. Like the 9/11 attacks, the 7/7 London bombing remains a mystery, and the crimes against innocent people will provide Blair’s government with enough pretexts to:

(1) justify the introduction of unpopular new British identity card;
(2) implement intrusive surveillance and policing of Muslims and the Muslim community;
(3) introduce new draconian legislations that will curtail freedom, civil liberties, and limits dissent, such as protest;
(4) continue to support Bush’s war of terror against defenceless nations; and
(5) divert public attention from the "pre-emptive" terrorism and the war crimes committed against the Iraqi people.

Throughout the Cold War, which was a pretext for state of fear, Western secret agents and NATO collaborated in attacks against civilian targets, which they then blamed on left-wing groups in order to create panic and force the public to turn to governments for more security and protection. One of these right-wing groups, implicated in attacks on civilians, was code-name Gladio. The existence of this group only became known in Italy in the 1990s and the Italian Senate, amid public protests, had to close it down, because it 'was beyond democratic control'. In other words, the lies became too big to hide from the public. (Cited in 'Secret Warfare: Gladio', by Daniele Ganser). Criminals are not difficult to find to instil fear and panic in the population. (See Fear: A political tool)

vice:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=HAS20050714&articleId=696

No Video of the 3 Bombers Inside the London Subway Cars before they blew up?

by Dick Fojut

July 25, 2005
GlobalResearch.ca

At present, the London underground has an analogue video network and video transmission at 180 stations. Confirmed by new reports, there are close to two thousand video cameras which monitor London's Underground and mainline rail stations.

It is estimated that "the average Briton is caught on various cameras up to 300 times on a normal day." (The Age, 8 July 2005).

The key issue raised in this commentary refers to videocameras inside the underground carriages. In most European metro systems, the trains are equipped with a videowatch installation, with video cameras inside each carriage. The driver of the train is able to see inside each of the carriages, and the digital video files would be available to police investigators.


EVERY London bus and Underground train car has multiple Video Cameras!

The Police claim the bus videos malfunctioned, but made no similar claim about the video cameras in the Underground train cars. The Muslim men are claimed to have ridden from Luton to King's Cross where they split up to take separate trains. I've also read it takes about 25 minutes to ride from Luton station to where the bombs were detonated.

Therefore, there MUST be some 25 minutes continuous video of first four men, riding from Luton, then video of each (supposed) "Muslim" Bomber, seated with his rucksack on each of the 3 separate Underground cars, riding from King's Cross - to where the 3 bombs exploded SIMULTANEOUSLY!

If the London Police CANNOT produce those videos they SHOULD possess, the accused 4 men, 3 supposedly with rucksack bombs, were NOT on the Underground train cars, did NOT detonate bombs! And the Police are LYING.

The 3 young men from Leeds apparently were innocent "patsies" used in a "False Flag" phoney Blair Government instigated "terrorist" attack! They weren't suicide bombers, or deceived dupes. They WEREN'T on the trains!

Instead of 3 falsely accused Muslim "patsies," either unidentified "others" must have carried on and detonated the bombs - OR the bombs were ALREADY concealed under seats, or UNDER the subway cars - and detonated by REMOTE CONTROL!

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=FOJ20050725&articleId=734

Svědectví očitého svědka londýnského atentátu:"..jako kdyby ta nálož byla ukryta pod vagónem!"

Tanečník z Cambridge Bruce Lait může mluvit o zázračném úniku, když bomba explodovala pouhých několik yardů od něj v soupravě podzemky.

32letý muž byl poražen výbuchem a vzbudil se do šílené scény ničení v podzemním tunelu nedaleko londýnské stanice Aldgate East station.

Pan Lait, který vyučuje tanec v Cambridgi, se domnívá, že on a jeho taneční partnerka Crystal Main byli jedinými pasažéry, kteří přežili výbuch bez vážných zranění - i když seděli nejblíže místa, kde vybuchla nálož.


Když přišel k sobě, leželo na něm tělo a byl obklopen mrtvými a raněnými. Ale je neuvěřitelné, že jedinými zraněními, které taneční mistr utrpěl, bylo pořezání obličeje a perforovaný ušní bubínek.

"Cítím se extrémně, extrémně šťastný," řekl.

K explozi došlo hned poté, co pan Lait a paní Mainová, 23, nastoupili do soupravy na Liverpool Street a zamířili na South Bank na zkoušku.

Vybavuje si, že vagón měl uvnitř tak 20-25 lidí nejrůznějších lidí nejrůznějšího věku od teenagerů až do 60.

"Pamatuji si Asiata, byl tam bílý muž v teplákové soupravě a baseballkou a naproti nám seděly dvě starší ženy," řekl.

"Byli jsme tam taky asi něco kolem minuty a najednou k tomu došlo. Byl to jak obrovský elektrický výboj, který nás srazil a prorazil bubínky. Stále ten zvuk slyším," řekl.

....

Policajt říkal "pozor na tu díru, tady byla ta bomba". Plech byl vyhnutý nahoru, jako kdyby ta bomba byla pod vagónem. Zřejmě si mysleli, že bomba byla v zavazadle, ale nepamatuji si, že by někdo stál v místě, kde to bouchlo, ani jakékoli zavazadlo," řekl.

Byli vedeni tunelem na nástupiště v Aldgate, které bylo několik set yardů daleko a vyvedeni ven ze stanice, aby počkali na záchranku.

Pan Lait byl odvezen do Královské Londýnské Nemocnice do Whitechapelu, kde se v pátek setkal s Královnou.
http://www.osud.cz/cs/clanek.php?id=3795&PHPSESSID=d57684a077ea509a72879839faa3c26c

Georgia Claims Russia Behind February Bombing

Created: 26.07.2005 11:00 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 11:00 MSK

MosNews

Georgian Interior Minister Vano Merabishvili accused the Russian military Monday of being behind a series of attacks, including a powerful car bomb attack that killed three policemen in the eastern Georgian city of Gori in February.

The enquiry into the Gori attack “revealed that Russian colonel Anatoly Sysoyev organized a group of saboteurs who were trained on Russian territory. The group was responsible for several terrorist attacks and organized the attack in Gori,” Merabishvili said in televised remarks that were immediately denied by Russia’s embassy in Tbilisi and officials in Moscow.

“No Russian state institutions could have had any relation to this,” Yevgeny Ivanov, spokesman for the Russian embassy in Tbilisi, told AFP by telephone.

“The claims made by Georgia’s interior minister... do not have any bearing on reality. This is clearly a provocation, reflecting the unfriendly official line of official Tbilisi towards Moscow,” the Itar-Tass news agency quoted a senior official from the Russian army’s general staff as saying.

Three people have so far been arrested in the investigation and six more are wanted, Merabishvili said, adding that the results of the enquiry had been passed to the Russian embassy in Tbilisi, which Ivanov said would be studied. “I hope the Russian side will hand over all the suspects that organised and carried out these terrorist attacks on Georgian territory,” Merabishvili said.

The interior minister said he believed the group was responsible for attacks against power lines and an oil pipeline.

Sysoyev belonged to the Russian army’s main intelligence directorate and was frequently in touch with officials in Moscow, according to the filmed confession of one of the men arrested, Giya Valiyev, who has been charged with carrying out the bomb attack.

...

http://www.mosnews.com/news/2005/07/26/georgiaallegations.shtml

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Hegelian Dialectic in History: Russian FSB caught blowing up buildings

http://www.prisonplanet.com/911.html#fsb

We now know that a blueprint for the creation of a global Pax Americana was drawn up for Dick Cheney (now vice-president), Donald Rumsfeld (defence secretary), Paul Wolfowitz (Rumsfeld's deputy), Jeb Bush (George Bush's younger brother) and Lewis Libby (Cheney's chief of staff). The document, entitled Rebuilding America's Defences, was written in September 2000 by the neoconservative think tank, Project for the New American Century (PNAC).
The plan shows Bush's cabinet intended to take military control of the Gulf region whether or not Saddam Hussein was in power. It says "while the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein."

The PNAC blueprint supports an earlier document attributed to Wolfowitz and Libby which said the US must "discourage advanced industrial nations from challenging our leadership or even aspiring to a larger regional or global role". It refers to key allies such as the UK as "the most effective and efficient means of exercising American global leadership". It describes peacekeeping missions as "demanding American political leadership rather than that of the UN". It says "even should Saddam pass from the scene", US bases in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait will remain permanently... as "Iran may well prove as large a threat to US interests as Iraq has". It spotlights China for "regime change", saying "it is time to increase the presence of American forces in SE Asia".

The document also calls for the creation of "US space forces" to dominate space, and the total control of cyberspace to prevent "enemies" using the internet against the US. It also hints that the US may consider developing biological weapons "that can target specific genotypes [and] may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool".


Finally - written a year before 9/11 - it pinpoints North Korea, Syria and Iran as dangerous regimes, and says their existence justifies the creation of a "worldwide command and control system". This is a blueprint for US world domination. But before it is dismissed as an agenda for rightwing fantasists, it is clear it provides a much better explanation of what actually happened before, during and after 9/11 than the global war on terrorism thesis. This can be seen in several ways.

First, it is clear the US authorities did little or nothing to pre-empt the events of 9/11. It is known that at least 11 countries provided advance warning to the US of the 9/11 attacks. Two senior Mossad experts were sent to Washington in August 2001 to alert the CIA and FBI to a cell of 200 terrorists said to be preparing a big operation (Daily Telegraph, September 16 2001). The list they provided included the names of four of the 9/11 hijackers, none of whom was arrested.

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/comment/0,12956,1036687,00.html