ThoughtCrime News - Cutting through the propaganda

"Apologies for a very late update. I worked a night-shift last night and I have another one tonight, so my hours are a little weird. It helps to pay the bills though. Tomorrow's update will therefore be late too.

Today I want to update my thoughts on Dr Queen's website and why I am defending him. My views on this apply to all the news right now.

Dr Queen is a lecturer at the University of Birmingham and he has come under fire from Jewish organisations for one link on his webpage. It started with the Union of Jewish Students (UJS) taking offence to the linked-to website and presumably deeming it anti-semitic and therefore also Dr Queen by association for having linked to it.

Lets put events into perspective here. The UJS want to have someone change their personal website because they are offended by one link. A personal website! There are no reports of Dr Queen going around and making accusations against Jews, or about the state of Israel. There aren't even any reports of him inciting violence or repression. And certainly he's not shooting protestors in the head or running them over with mechanical diggers.

What we have is a story making the news about one link on someone's website. Before the news coverage, what difference did it make to the world what Nat Queen had on his home page? Especially one link that a few might take offence to because of their close-mindedness? Very little. Before anyone gets irate about Dr Queen's apparent rabid anti-semitism, let's consider how events unfolded.

Take a look at Dr Queen's homepage. Under the heading of `Scientific', Dr Queen has the following links:

From his webpage it is apparent that Dr Queen has a background in physics and mathematics. He's a scientist. If you read a lot into those links, you might presume that he believes there is no God. He's not saying that though, I merely presumed it.

Under the heading of `Human Rights' is the offending link:

American State Terrorism. The most serious attacks on human rights are committed by undemocratic and imperialist governments. This site documents the prime example.

Since Dr Queen said he refuses to change his website just because the one he linked to has been updated, we must make the assumption that he put it up in the format you would now see. Since he added it, the `offending' material must have gone further in challenging peoples' preconceptions of America and perhaps now Israel. Did the website mention Israel before it was changed? I don't know. But the point is that Dr Queen linked to it to demonstrate AMERICAN state terrorism. He wasn't having a pop at Israel with that link.

The website has changed and until the the UJS started its campaign, it would seem that Dr Queen was not aware of this. Meanwhile the UJS was already helping to sway the thinking of students on campus into believing that Dr Queen was against Jews in some way. Absent an ongoing national advertising campaign by Dr Queen to plant in the public consciousness :

that he was an advocate of free speech
that he had certain views about the extreme practices of the USA and perhaps also Israel
that his work was about his work and his views weren't something he made a big deal about

what chance would he have?

Sure the links were on his website, but who would even know that unless they had been there? Who else would this have been except fellow academics, students, seekers of information on maths, physics or PGP. I missed one; maybe people with absolutely nothing better to do with their lives than hunt down people with links on their website that they, the viewer, may have a problem with ie the Thought Police.

I suppose what could have happened was that a Jewish student of Dr Queen's saw his website recently, clicked on the link in question and then disengaged their brain. Maybe the student was a member of the UJS. Once the campaigning starts however, it can only get fuel in the mainstream press and from interest groups who polarise the issue and push it further.

We need to ask what UJS campaign organiser, Danny Stone, hopes to achieve by pushing this issue?

I would bet that he would respond `to counter-anti-semitism'.

For those who are able to appreciate that this whole thing is being blown out of all proportion, they can see that Dr Queen is being unfairly targeted for condoning thoughtcrime.

For those who don't appreciate how this all unfolded, they will believe, absent stimuli for opening their minds, that Dr Queen is anti-semitic, racist and therefore an `undesirable'.

The result of this campaign is not a reduction in anti-semitism. Rather it will lead to an increase in anti-semitism because it will demonstrate to some how Jewish interest groups manage to get news coverage which colours the way people think. It also shows how they target people who attempt to stand up for the right to make criticism when it is Israel which is criticised. Jewish groups seldom seem able to distinguish between criticism of the State of Israel and criticism of Jews. I still don't understand why Jews aren't allowed to be criticised, but Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jehova's Witnesses and anyone else I've forgotten are all fair game. Anti-semitism has become an industry.

The dominance of coverage in the news about people like Nat Queen doesn't prompt thought about the issues. It brainwashes people into believing that Queen and others are anti-semitic, that anti-semitism on campus is `a problem' and serves to stifle debate about what objectionable activities Israel or the USA may undertake. Rather than give the same degree of coverage to more important issues like the criminality of the US and Israeli governments they instead let people know about this apparent prejudice and racism. What they don't tell you in the news is often more important than what they do say.

I'm still waiting for the BBC, Sky News, The Times, The New York Times and other media institutions to tell us how the 9/11 attacks were an inside job. Of course they won't do. If they gave the same coverage to the problems with the official 9/11 story rather than parrot it, they would educate the public and help shape a more realistic paradigm rather than the fiction they convey on a daily basis. The same goes for these allegations of racism. It fuels racism rather than diminish it.

In some ways we really do live in the Matrix. People get most of their ideas of the wider world from the media - what they read, what they watch, what they hear. The voice of media institutions seems to carry more weight than those who are not in the business of selling advertising to promote press-releases to the public, such as human rights groups, internet-based journalism or so-called `conspiracy theorists' who in fact are often dedicated and detailed factual researchers. People are heavily influenced by the corporate media and we are constantly bombarded with it. To deny this is to put one's head in the sand.

The general public are so busy running around in their day-to-day lives that they don't have time to think about the news, never mind realise how it subconsciously shapes the world around them. Very few take the trouble to investigate whether governments or the media are telling the truth.

The death of Rachel Corrie as a result of being mowed down by a mechanical earth digger driven by an Israeli soldier received very little press attention. However when a lecturer has a link on his website that says things that threaten the squeaky clean image of Israel in the minds of of some Jews, they'll do all they can to make a big deal about it. What ever happened to "love they neighbour as thyself?" Can't they just open their eyes and their minds beyond their indoctrination?

Dr Queen is being used to promote an agenda of controlling our minds. For this reason I am defending his actions. If anyone has a problem with this, deal with it.

Update on physics911.org website

I received an email from Dr Dewdney:

"Dear Simon,

Thank you for getting in touch with me. The physics911.org site was put up by one Sid Walker, an Englishman-turned-Australian who recently had to return to England to attend his father's funeral and to assist with the ensuing estate and family matters that inevitably accompany such things.

Sid is better known for another site, which he had been operating for two years (or more) called feralnews.com, rather like your site, I imagine.

Thus, prior to the site going down, we were a bit like a turtle out of it's shell, so to speak - somewhat vulnerable. My last contact with Sid was about a week ago. Communications had been spotty, but more or less regular, as he gadded about the country, sending me a message via whatever equipment he
could get his hands on whenever he had the time.

He is supposed to be back in Australia sometime today, being somewhere in the middle of the air at this moment.

I am not too worried about Sid and I have every confidence that he will have the site back up within a few days of his return. Thus, in my opinion of the moment, we are down but not out.

We suffered a possible denial-of-service attack over a month ago, although it may also be that links to physics911.org had previously been posted (prematurely) on other sites that assumed we were live. We weren't.

Until we go public in a few days, the site will have been been private, used only by the fifteen-odd members of the Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-eleven, or SPINE for short. We are an all-professional panel consisting of two aeronautical engineers, a mathematician, a computer scientist, a physicist, a cellphone engineer, a physician, and sundry other relevant professions, not to mention an intelligence officer. We are getting new applicants all the time and the level of expertise (and, therefore, credibility) continues to climb. We have been cooperating over the web to develop as much new, reliable material as we can. I am nearly finished an analysis of the Pentagon crash that makes it physically clear, even to relatively unknowledgable people, that the absence of relatively intact wings, albeit somwhat crumpled, is conclusive. No 757.

I hope I have addressed your concerns. Please feel free to post this message if you feel so inclined.

All the best,

Kee Dewdney

akdewdney@uwaterloo.ca

(519) 679-8105
http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~akd/"

Propaganda Matrix is having some difficulties with Yahoo right now. If anyone out there has any knowledge about Yahoo ID/profile systems, please get in touch with Paul"

-Editor

University lecturer branded `racist' for weblink

Dr Queen's homepage

The `offending' link

TotallyJewish.com's coverage (London Jewish News)

Tuesday update

"It looks like Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon knows he's going to be hung out to dry.

The Independent reports today:

"Geoff Hoon, the Defence Secretary, was given a rough ride in the Commons yesterday over Iraq and the death of David Kelly as he struggled to regain his authority.

Mr Hoon came under fire from Labour and Tory MPs and was ticked off by Michael Martin, the Speaker, for announcing a decision to send another 1,200 British troops to Iraq in a written Commons statement, which limited MPs' ability to question him on the deployment.

The Defence Secretary looked uncomfortable and hinted for the first time that he would resign if he is criticised in Lord Hutton's report next month. He told Sky News: " If he's critical of me, I will have to accept that. I'm content to await his results and to read what he has to say.""

They're also beginning to turn up the heat under Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, but my guess is that he will stay. When they hold inquiries like the one into the death of Dr Kelly, the last thing they want to do is actually find the people responsible for mis-deeds. It's an old technique - ignore the people with the most to say. A prime example of this is the more than 100 witnesses who saw the missile streak towards TWA Flight 800 over Long Island, NY, in 1996; the FBI just pretended these witnesses never existed, never cited their testimony and thus put forward the mechanical failure hypothesis, aided and abetted by the willing mainstream media.

This is not conspiracy theory folks, but an analysis of the facts. This is not being done with the death of Dr Kelly, and has been avoided like the plague with regard to the September 11th attacks on the USA. What the 911 Commission and the Senate investigation steadfastly refused to explore was what ACTUALLY happened that day. Apart from the FBI's say so, there is no proof that there were any hijackers on the planes at all.

`Well who flew them into the buildings?' if there were no hijackers, you may ask. We know that since the Second World War there has been technology available to remote control airplanes, and the technology was touted for use in the unbelievable `Operation Northwoods' which involved the Chairman and Joint Chiefs of Staff plotting terror attacks on the American people as a pretext to justify a war against Cuba. Change the name to Afghanistan, swap Bin Laden for Castro and you have the blueprint for the 9/11 attacks. This was 1962 folks, and they talk about remote controlled planes. They're using remote controlled drones in Iraq and Afghanistan today, so the technology is coming off the production line.

I've received a lot of emails about the new 9/11 pictures and the anomalies. Now that readers have had a chance to look at them and have a think, let me say that I do not necessarily believe that there was actually anything on the bottom of that second plane. I put the pictures up because that frame looked bizarre, and because I've wondered to myself if the depiction of the first plane was too small to be what they said it was.

This website is called `ThoughtCrimeNews.com' for a reason. I see the pace the world, media, politics, education and public consciousness moves and it all works against thinking for oneself. I wanted to prompt thought and debate about the suggestion that there WAS something there. When the `blackened area' was pointed out I stated straight away that I thought it was the building in front of the WTC tower, yet I have received emails from people who it seems cannot read English, or who cannot digest full sentences without asking for help.

I am prepared to agree with those who suggest that the blob/bulge/strange object `underneath' the second plane is perhaps nothing more than a digital artefact. The frame is after all taken from a blow-up of video-camera footage. But there is the possibility it was something else. The white flash is probably just the sun glaring off a water tower. I am not qualified in photo analysis, nor am I qualified in aviation technology. I am, however, superbly qualified in asking difficult questions and being a pain in the arse, as we say in England.

So I wanted to prompt questioning and debate about these pictures. If I hadn't spotted the blob and put out the pictures, someone else would have, and perhaps would have spun it as conclusive proof that those weren't the original planes that hit the WTC towers. I have one reader suggesting that the man responsible for the new footage, Mr Hlava, may be an intelligence asset. I'll bring you more about this, whether it is confirmed or conclusively denied. I will say that the timing of the release of the new tape is a little suspicious. I mean, he didn't know what he had? Give me a break!

Hey guys, don't shoot me down. I personally believe the attacks were an `inside job' and that elements of the US government, or shadow government, have a lot of questions to answer about the 9/11 attacks. Former environment minister Michael Meacher articulated just a few of these questions very succinctly in his article in the Guardian on Saturday. As I said would happen, rather than debate Meacher on the evidence and the questions raised, everyone the powers that be can dig up has been used to rubbish his argument.

David Aaronovitch (absolutely no relation whatsoever) has sunk his teeth into Meacher in the Guardian today, but he has fallen for the trap that Meacher managed to avoid:

"This is conspiracy 101. Say something is a fact which isn't. Then ask questions, rising up through incompetence, gradually to mal-intention, and then - abruptly - demand who might be behind it all. Cui Bono, my dear friends?"

Aaronovitch has unfortunately believed the accounts given of the fighter jet responses. Rather than look at the accounts of what jets scrambled from where and at what times and more importantly how these changed over time, he has instead just swallowed up everything that General Myers, Robert Mueller et al can feed him on a spoon. Wake up David, they're lying to you.

Despite these strenuous smear efforts, Meacher is not alone. There are many people who agree with his line of questioning and actually go much further, as does former German minister Andreas von Buelow who accuses the US of piloting the planes into the towers by remote control in his book about 9/11.

I have read a suggestion that by putting out the pictures on Sunday and presenting them the way I did, I must be some kind of intelligence asset put out on the web to steer people away from discussing the justifiably pertinent issues surrounding the 9/11 attacks. Let me assure you that I am no such thing, for those who would take my word as sufficient. For those of you who don't, well what can I say? Very little. Except look at the stuff I've been carrying on this site, and ask yourself how many intelligence assets would actually give credence to any of this in the first place? Again, there is a reason for calling this website `ThoughtCrimeNews.com'.

If I was MI6, would I phone into the Alex Jones show and agree with him? Doubtful. For those of you who listen to Alex Jones, I was calling in using the name `John' until I decided to go public to contribute to the daily spin cycle of the news. Read into this what you will, but I did it to protect myself, until I realised it was safer out in the open.

Enough of that. I've said my piece.

How can Israel sort itself out and find a peaceful settlement with the Palestinian people? Not very easily according to Barry Chamish who contends that they are setting the stage for foreign troops to intervene in the Holy Land. Tom Clancy conveniently conditioned us to accept this notion in his 1992 book `The Sum Of All Fears". Gee, thanks Tom. It would come as no surprise to some when they send the troops in, thanks to his novel written with very close access to Pentagon sources and information. What does Clancy know that us mere mortals don't?

If any readers think that I am a self-hating Jew or a something to that effect, well sorry to disappoint but you'd be wrong. I support the right of the State of Israel to exist, but I think that they're doing some pretty dreadful stuff, and I don't think that it is the policy of all Jews worldwide to support such activities. If we want to blame someone, I think Chamish is on the money when he pins it on the machinations of Shimon Peres and the like. To some, the suggestion that Peres is working for the Vatican is just too fantastic to be true and they would rather blame either the Palestinians entirely, or the so-called `Zionazis' (their word, not mine) who run Israel. Isn't this just a little too simplistic? Ask yourselves why the London Jewish Chronicle absolutely refuse to cover any of Chamish's work, not least his analysis of the Yitzhak Rabin assassination and his conclusion that the man convicted of Rabin's murder, Yigal Amir, didn't do it.

One of my biggest gripes is the way consciousness is effectively controlled by the mainstream media, education, the government and therefore by peer-pressure, our own family, friends and the general public. People read Orwell's `Nineteen Eighty Four' and say "oh well, that's just fiction. It'll never happen." Oh yeah? Take a look around. The media have done such a good job on the public about subjects like Israel, 9/11, conspiracies, politics, high-level satanic ritual abuse, foreign `enemies' - you name it - that it is difficult if not impossible to raise challenging issues without being shouted down, smeared, discredited or called a liar. Again, think about the name of this website. The operative word is think or thought.

When looking at today's headlines, or any news story, ask yourself if this is the way you would have wanted it 10 years ago, or even now. Don't give yourself the get-out clause of "well we have to because...". Just ask yourself if you want it that way. Do I want an ID card? No. Do I want a chip in my arm? No. Will I be forced into having one by the collective idiocy of the general public who are persuaded by the agenda of the power-elite? Not if I can help it. As Dave VonKleist says on The Power Hour, "where is YOUR line in the sand?""

- Editor

Monday 8th - Pictures cause a stir

"I have received several emails from readers about the pictures posted yesterday.

Here are some extracts:

"When looking at the pictures Mr Spencer's argument sounds convincing,however what concerns me is this. If Mr Spencer is correct then what happened to the boeing 767's and their passengers. Unles I went dyslexic and missed a part of the article Mr Spencer did not offer any plausible theories as to where these planes and their passengeers went to.

LC"

"I processed the image of the plane that looks like it has an anomolous attachment to the fuselage. The first image is an enlargement and uses sharpening filters. The second rendition is stripped of color with enhanced sharpness and contrast/brightness.

Something is definitely there that was not built by the manufacturer.

"I agree with your assessment of the new film. But...

Where did the real planes go? And the people on them? What about the cell phone calls from the passengers?

Thanks. Great job.

CA"

One reader offered the following analysis of the new pictures:

"i dont know if you guys created these fakes or you are getting duped by someone.

contrast one of the new pix with one of my original screen captures from 'the day'

two things jump right out at me.

1) building is already blackened in the new one and pristine in original

2) flying angle of the aircraft is altogether different, more steep turn and more pointed downward in the new

My response:

"Thanks for your email.

No, I didn't do anything to these pictures. They are from the NY Times, as the story on my site clearly indicates. If you check out the link to the NY Times you will see that they are from the new footage that has been `discovered'.

All I did was take screen grabs from the Shockwave presentation and post them, adding the big black arrow. That's it.

If you think it's fake, address your anger to the New York Times.

What I will say is that the shot of the second plane appears to be taken from a different angle to the picture you sent me.

As for the building being blackened, I can't see it. It looks like the shot has been blown up from VHS camera footage whereas the coverage on the day would have been broadcast quality.

If you think I've still missed something, please let me know."

W replied:

"here is the pic i am referring to with the "blackened area" circled and a big arrow pointint to it. this is quick ugly work. heh
for the record, there is no anger directed at you.
i have my opinions on who did what to who that day and i dont think it was 19 arabs.
i also dont think anyone in the "arab terrorist" world was capable of grounding our air force for nearly 60 minutes that day and the lack of response by them is the worst part of it all.
as for their claims that no-body knew what was going on....
on "der tag" (the day) i lived just south of the entrance to Cheyenne Mountain (NORAD) and passed by on my way to work just as the radio news was reporting the second aircraft attack.
i have no photos and no way to prove it to anyone but the entrance was already "sealed" with hum-vees and at least a squad of light infantry.
somebody knew SOMETHING was going on pretty damn early in the game.

No way to prove it one way or another though.
I didnt even really THINK about it for several weeks.
Like everyone else, I was in shock and buying everything we were being told for quite a long time.
sigh....

Personally I think that the blackened area is simply an old building in front of the WTC, and I seem to recall having some photos of the damage done to it, taken while I was in Manhattan last year.

One reader offered the following explanation for the white flash:

"I have a few thoughts about that photo. 1. The bright spot you see inthe photo is a reflection of a (infrared targeting laser). The camera
that was used to take that photo is most likely sensitive to infrared radiation. Judging by the size of the beams (spot) I would quess the
laser was stationed about 5 or 7 miles away from the WTC.
The object on the underside of the plane maybe a combination missile pod/ guidance system.
I've worked with lasers for over 25 years. The word LASER is and acronymfor L.ight, A.mplification, by S.timulated, E.mission of R.adiation.
That picture is even more damming to the elite then you can now imagine.
But not for long.... just watch!

For reference, here is a picture of a normal Boeing 767, with thanks to UnderReported.com.

Picture from FlightPix.com

In response to the common theme of what happened to the planes, readers may want to digest Professor Kee Dewdney's hypothesis `Operation Pearl'. [ Click here for locally cached copy if physics911.org is down]

Without full disclosure of the full facts of what actually took place on 9/11, we can only speculate based on the evidence available and by applying logic to the whole thing. Sadly the mainstream media don't want you to think about any of this and are training us to respond illogically by denouncing any speculation as `conspiracy theory'. As former minister Michael Meacher demonstrated over the weekend, presenting the facts when this has not previously been done is not the work of a conspiracy theorist but the legitimate questioning which we should all subject our governments to.

The FBI has a track record of lying about terrorist incidents in the USA. with the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center being a set-up, covering up the other players and other explosive devices in the 1995 Oklahoma City Bombing, the missile hit on TWA Flight 800 over Long Island in 1996 plus a host of other things that the federal government can't tell the truth about.

So why should we believe the garbage they've put out about 9/11?

The official explanation for 9/11 is full of holes, most especially the notion that they had no prior knowledge or that they didn't envisage planes being used as colossal missiles. Two articles of interest in this regard. A Time Magazine report `Bin Laden Rides Again: Myth vs. Reality' and a BBC news report about the G8 summit in Genoa, Italy in the summer of 2001. Because of apparent airborne terrorist threats, surface-to-air missile (SAM) batteries were deployed in the area around the summit. News reports also informed the public that the whole area was a no-fly zone.

I could take a lot of web-space and time shredding the official account of events on 11th September 2001, but I won't do that. There are plenty of websites which set out the case; try Google, Infowars or PropagandaMatrix.

Some may argue that there couldn't possibly be a cover-up because there would be too many people involved and the media would have told us about it. Really? Who is responsible for perpetuating the myths about the Gulf War, the '93 WTC bombing, OK City, TWA flight 800? The media. By unquestioningly repeating the lies of government and failing to examine the obvious evidence contradicting the official line, the media are either wittingly or unwittingly helping to brainwash the public. This is amply demonstrated by the fact that many Americans believe Saddam had a hand in 9/11 and this is purely due to ridiculous news coverage by the monopoly US press.

For an example of journalists not asking tough questions, how about CBS News anchor Dan (JFK) Rather in his own words on the difficulties he faces in the US since 9/11.

This week sees the second anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. Of course there will be a lot of patriotic activity in the US as well as the broadcast of the truly Stalinist propaganda movie DC 9/11: Time of Crisis which by all accounts has re-written history and sewn a few subliminal seeds with nuggets here and there. Meanwhile a conference will be held in Germany for those who doubt the official story, attended by Michael Ruppert of From the Wilderness and former congresswoman Cynthia McKinney.

The Times today offers a new revelation about the death of Dr David Kelly. Sgt Pederson, a US military linguist who worked with Kelly told a friend "Don’t believe what you read in the newspapers". What would that be then? A bogus story about suicide?

Bush appeared on TV yesterday to rally the American public into continuing their support for the bloodshed in Iraq and Afghanistan and asked for billions more dollars to fund it. Will this go down well considering the huge deficit?

Parroting Bush's line, the BBC has the cheek to ask `Should Muslim countries embrace Western style democracy?' The political set-up in some of these countries is far from perfect, but look where so-called democracy has got the UK or the USA. It's not just the concept of voting that they're talking about; they want to export our `free-trade' practices. In other words the multi-nationals want to run protection rackets in the middle-east as well as in the west.

More cage rattling from the CIA's one-time (current?) assets, Al Qaeda. We are all supposed to worry now about another terrorist outrage and demand that governments impose a police state to protect our freedoms (spot the double-think).

Apparently powerless to act against al-Muhajiroun, the powers that be are instead giving them airtime which makes everybody understandably upset when they hear them hailing the 19 hijackers as the `Magnificent 19'. Are these guys being run by our beloved government?

Big Brother is on the march. Police in the UK want every Briton to hand over a sample of DNA for a national database. The Telegraph reports that the British public are in favour of identity cards (nonsense) but balk at the £40 cost; what else would you expect from a newspaper allegedly run by our own intelligence services a la Conrad Black. Why don't they just ask everyone to sign a blank sheet of paper to be used for a `confession' at some point in the future? It won't be long before Labour decides to relocate to a big pyramid.

More updates later perhaps."

- Editor

Sunday 7th September - Developments

"Michael Meacher must have hit a nerve because the Telegraph has tried to discredit his well-founded research. Instead of debating the former environment Minister on the evidence he presents they try to rubbish him and make him look silly:

"One wonders whether he has confused his summertime reading with parliamentary briefing papers," said one diplomat."

Sky News did feature Meacher yesterday in its reports but confined itself to saying that he was accusing the US of going after the oil in the Middle East. Murdoch doesn't seem to think it necessary to give the facts to the public about the standing down of fighter jets on 9/11.

Clare Short has come out fighting today. An article also in the Telegraph today begins:

"Blair's 'abuse of power' led to Kelly death, says Short

Clare Short has launched a ferocious attack on Tony Blair, accusing him of an "abuse of power" that drove David Kelly to take his own life.

In the strongest condemnation yet by a senior politician of Mr Blair's role in the events leading to the apparent suicide of the Government weapons expert, Ms Short says that the Prime Minister helped make his life "hell".

The former International Development Secretary, who resigned in May, also accuses Mr Blair of flouting "proper procedure" and "a willingness to be economical with the actuality" in a full-blooded assault on her former colleague."

Short makes a reference to Blair's `abuse of power' and in light of PropagandaMatrix's report that Short "was threatened with death unless she stuck by Blair until the combat in Iraq was declared to be over" her comment has a greater meaning.

To have us believe in Gordon Brown's independence, Brown and Prescott apparently oppose `Blair's ID card plan'. Don't worry though, it will be back on schedule once Brown makes himself comfortable at Number 10.

New footage of the WTC planes has been released. Apparently the man who made the video didn't realise what he had. The New York Times has released a redacted version of the footage, but one of the frames is very intriguing.

I don't even know what to make of the white flash in the middle, but can you see something on the bottom of the plane body that shouldn't be there? I have added an arrow pointing to the object in question.

The NY Times is touting this footage as the only other film in existence which has the first plane, besides the work of the Naudet brothers who were making a film about New York's firefighters.

Here are the shots NYT provided of the first plane. The arrow in the second shot is the work of the NY Times:

Maybe it's just me, but looking at these pictures and the shots from the Naudet footage, the first plane looks too small to be a Boeing 767:

Naudet footage

There is a hypothesis about these two airborne weapons of destruction. Check out `The Incredible 9-11 Evidence We've All Been Overlooking'.

Blair and Hoon should quit, according to a new poll run by YouGov on behalf of the Mail on Sunday. Speaks for itself.

Following Abu Mazen's resignation and the Israeli targetting of Sheikh Yassin who vows revenge, the news is declaring that the Roadmap peace process is finished. If you've been following Barry Chamish's work, you'll be aware of his analysis that the Roadmap was destined not to work and that the Oslo accord was flawed from the start, to say the least. As if Israel couldn't do enough to make problems worse, now they're calling for Arafat to be expelled.

London today experienced a mock chemical attack on the London Underground to train the emergency services and acclimatize all of us to the idea that we are vulnerable to such happenings. If/when there is a chemical or biological attack, we won't find it such a surprise, thanks to today's activities. Preparation. Gotta love it.

According to Skolnick, the US Military want to take Bush out of the game. Bush is due to make a statement tonight on American television, where he is expected to announce that other countries will help with body-count in Iraq. Will this be enough to placate the irate US armed forces?"

- Editor

Saturday 6th September - Meacher drops the bombshell

"I saw the front page of the Guardian today, and I could not believe my eyes. At the bottom of the front page screamed the headline

Meacher sparks fury over claims on September 11 and Iraq war

The front page story discusses Meacher's accusations in an almost full-page comment article within the newspaper where he says that 9/11 should have been prevented and that the war on terrorism and in Iraq is a smokescreen for the seizure of worldwide hydrocarbons by the west.

To Mr Meacher, I say well done and kudos for having the guts to go against so-called received wisdom about such issues.

Given that this was a front-page story in today's Guardian, I think this will have legs. I don't think it will be a hit-and-run effort, but rather this could actually be the beginning of the downfall of the nutcases driving western policy. It is the first serious break into front-page headlines of the notion that we are being seriously mislead about 9/11 as well as Gulf War II.

Until June of this year, Meacher was a Minister for the Environment and thus was closer to Blair than rank and file Labour MP's. He was reshuffled out of government (sacked) for his opposition to Blair's enthusiasm for GM crops.

It seems that Mr Meacher has again expressed his conscience publicly and in doing so has served the public more than his colleagues or the media would care to admit.

The last paragraph of his comment piece reads:

"The conclusion of all this analysis must surely be that the "global war on terrorism" has all the hallmarks of a political myth propagated to pave the way for a wholly different agenda - the US goal of world command over the oil supplies required to drive the whole project. Is collusion in this myth and junior participation in this project really a proper aspiration for British foreign policy? If there was ever need to justify a more objective British stance, driven by our own independent goals, this whole depressing saga surely provides all the evidence needed for a radical change of course."

Today is a wonderful day for information warriors. A former minister coming out and saying what a lot of us have known for a while gives us credibility and fuel to further our argument.

Those of you who wish to drop Mr Meacher a note of support can contact him at

meacherm@parliament.uk

Expect him to get hate mail over this, so words of encouragement I'm sure would be appreciated.

Meacher was interviewed on the BBC's Today Programme this morning. The only way James Naughtie tries to get the Bush administration off the hook is by claiming that neither Colin Powell nor Dick Cheney are backers of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC). You can hear the interview by clicking on the link below. As you listen, you might want to have a look at the names at the bottom of PNAC's statement of principles. The whole statement is quite chilling to read in light of Mr Meacher's analysis.

The BBC seem to be entertaining Mr Meacher's views this weekend. Appearing on BBC News 24 at around 5:30 this afternoon. Mr Meacher was effectively given as long as he wanted to put forward his viewpoint, without interruption. Whilst Peter Sissons trotted out the `conspiracy theory' label, Mr Meacher dodged this beautifully and stated the case for US prior knowledge and possible military stand-down on 9/11, drawing PNAC in at the same time."

- Editor

PNAC's statement of principles

Meacher on the BBC Today Programme 6/8/03
RealAudio 5 min 58 sec

Meacher sparks fury over claims on
September 11 and Iraq war

Meacher: This war on terrorism is bogus

Featured Articles

Reflections: University lecturer branded `racist for weblink

Israel:
Here Come The Troops
by Barry Chamish

Anomalies in new
9/11 video - updated

University lecturer branded `racist' for weblink

Exclusive:
The UN, Globalisation and the Battle for the Airwaves
Why is the UN shutting down Radio For Peace International?

RFID and the
end of civilisation