This week: • London Bombs • Patriot Acts • Saddam •
• Bandar • Gitmo • Bodies • Paraguay • PRC • Stuff •

 

What a week it has been — the little red email has barely had time to catch its breath at all the bombs and subsequent civil liberty crushing moments that followed the explosions and we are not simply talking about mistaking a Brazilian for an Arab here and the five rounds of police lead that ended his life so abruptly.

The more we think about the first set of London bombs the more it looks like a set-up job. The official line has the four men heading into Luton rail station and then into London and onto suicide missions. The big problem with this account, as the excellent people at WagNews note, is that a terror group would most likely not deliberately waste valuable human resources in suicide attacks, if suicide tactics are not needed.

WagNews goes on to posit a theory that runs contrary to the mainstream media, who are now also pushing the line that the ‘bombers’ may have not known the bombs would explode with them too. And contrary to the alternative media who posit that the ‘bombers’ thought they were transporting drugs.

All of this presupposes they carried the bombs onto the London transport system — which, according to the WagNews theory, they did not.

Those four were patsies — the collective Lee Harvey Oswald of the piece. On the M1 from Leeds to Luton, a car with a flashing blue light came up, stopped them with the cars moved off the motorway. The fourth character was apprehended as he made his way from nearby Aylesbury to Luton. All four were then mutilated, not by bombs but by special forces, before their remains were slipped back into the bombed out sites with their identity papers being ‘found’ on the scene.

Speculation also surrounds the CCTV image of the four entering Luton station. Many feel it is a clear cut and paste job as evidenced here and here. Thus runs WagNews’ take on it.

Back to the deadly bombs themselves: there is evidence that they were planted under the floorboards rather than in the carriages — something that points to very high up assistance needed to carry out. The fact that the head of London Transport is ex-CIA should perhaps not be forgotten, then.

See what Aldgate East witness Bruce Lait told his local Cambridge newspaper for proof of the bomb plant. Lait and his dance partner Crystal Main were the only passengers in their carriage who survived without serious injury — despite being nearest to the bomb blast. 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.

And there was the bus bomb — a highly visible piece of carnage compared to the others underground — the top deck peeling off like a sardine can.

Bus blast survivor Richard Jones 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,’ as reported in the Sunday Mail — not exactly a carbon copy then of the CCTV images put out by the cops that showed the bus bomber, Hasib Hussain, as a blue-jeaned, unshaven, and poorly attired character.

So there you have it — conspiracies a plenty. Lest we forget, both Rudolf Giuliani and Benjamin Netanyahu were staying in the same hotel near one of London bombs on 7/7 and there is evidence the Israelis knew about the explosions prior to the fateful day as we reported here. Finally just how much did Federal reserve chairman Alan Greenspan know about the strikes in London?

No wonder Tony Blair has moved repeatedly to block calls for an official July 7 bombings inquiry.

In the coming days and weeks we suggest a plough through the WagNews website — are we being lied to about the London bombs on a massive scale? Perhaps time will tell.

 

 

The way Blair has decided to honour those who died in the London bombs is strip away centuries’ old freedoms. In the wake of the repeated attacks on the British capital Blair and his home secretary, Charles Clarke are pushing though the transatlantic equivalent of the PATRIOT Act while in Washington the bombs have been used to promulgate a tougher renewal of the PATRIOT Act with barely a peep of protest.

Now do you see who might be behind the bombs? Blair might not be lying when he continues to claim the bombs are nothing to do with Iraq — even though 70% of his citizens think it is related. They may well have come from members of the Allies — those ‘on the side of freedom’ — in order to rush in draconian regulations that in normal times would never have a chance of passing into law.

Now in Britain deportations a plenty are on the cards for anyone who so much as thinks evil things, let alone actually threatens to carry them out as The Register reports. And for evil, we mean anything Muslim.

We can’t help thinking back 86 years ago to the Treaty of Versailles where ridiculously harsh conditions were set for the Germans who had lost World War One. The severity of the treaty sowed the seeds for the rise of the Nazis and the Second World War. Thanks to these bombs Muslims are being singled out for harsh treatment — dialogue is needed, not ostracizing measures or we will face continued backlashes.

For instance, The Guardian reported last week that special intelligence units, called Muslim Contact Units, are being planned across Britain to monitor Muslims so the authorities can collect “community by community” knowledge of where extremism is building up. Big Brother just got secular.

Meanwhile, across the pond you can kiss goodbye to the American constitution with Patriot Act II coming into force.

A top government attorney declared last Tuesday that, in the spurious War on Terror™ (TWOT™), the United States is a battlefield, and therefore President Bush has the authority to detain enemy combatants indefinitely in US territory — a claim to send shudders down the shackled, sweaty, skinny backs of all Gitmo detainees.

Now, remind us, what was it we were saying a year or so ago about Bush and fascism? Click here to remind yourself of the overtly dangerous times we are living in — all we need now is for Congress to catch fire like the Reichstag in 1934.

 

 

Over at the US’ plagued Middle Eastern colony, Iraq, reports are emerging that the Saddam Hussein trial is looking to do a speedy hatchet job to quickly and literally bury any embarrassing blasts from the pasts.

An Iraqi government newspaper has said that toppled President Saddam Hussein was expected to be sentenced and executed within weeks.

The government-financed al-Sabah daily quoted unidentified sources close to a special court hearing Saddam’s case that the verdict will be issued in the next three weeks against the former leader and his top former aides.

The sources said they expected the first death penalty against the former regime officials to be handed to Saddam after the special court convicts him on 12 charges of “crimes against humanity.”

The court last week completed its questioning of Saddam over his role in the alleged killing of 150 residents from al-Dujail by the security forces of his regime after a foiled assassination attempt against Saddam in the area in 1992.

A case from 1992 was a handy first choice, given that it came after the US had ended its close ties with the Hussein regime. A quick execution would lay to rest all those murky, embarrassing links between Reagan, Bush I, Rumsfeld and the Butcher of Baghdad. A speedy death would not give Saddam a chance to rekindle memories of the Reagan-Bush administration furnishing him with the weapons of mass destruction that he employed against the Iranian and Iraqi people, and that US and UN officials used as the excuse for imposing the brutal 12-year embargo against Iraq, whose resulting deaths of Iraqi children arguably were a principal motivating factor behind the September 11 attacks, and that President Bush ultimately relied upon as his principal justification for invading Iraq.

Saddam won’t get a chance to talk about later pacts. For instance, in his first year in office, Dubya’s dad signed a secret executive order, National Security Directive Number 26. It called for even closer ties between the United States and Iraq.

In a September 25, 2002, article entitled “Following Iraq’s Bioweapons Trail,” author Robert Novak wrote, “An eight-year-old Senate report confirms that disease-producing and poisonous materials were exported, under US government license, to Iraq from 1985 to 1988 during the Iran-Iraq war. Furthermore, the report adds, the American-exported materials were identical to micro-organisms destroyed by United Nations inspectors after the Gulf War. The shipments were approved despite allegations that Saddam used biological weapons against Kurdish rebels and (according to the current official US position) initiated war with Iran.”

All along, Reagan and Bush knew what an evil character Saddam was, but it wasn’t until he invaded Kuwait that they switched to paint him as a tyrant

According to the New York Times, the US gave Iraq vital battle-planning help during its war with Iran as part of a secret program under President Reagan — even though US intelligence agencies knew the Iraqis would unleash chemical weapons. The covert program involved more than 60 officers of the Defense Intelligence Agency who helped Iraq in its eight-year war with Iran by providing detailed information on Iranian military deployments, tactical planning for battles, plans for air strikes and bomb-damage assessments

When Saddam did try and tell the world about his close links with the Republican administrations of the 1980s, his efforts were censored. Saddam Hussein’s delivery of his weapons report to the United Nations shortly before President Bush invaded Iraq was hijacked by US officials before it could be released to the public and excised the parts in which Saddam detailed who exactly had furnished him with the WMD — the report dropped from 12,000 to 3,000 pages.

Now, justice has been perverted to mute any embarrassment. Out of sight, out of mind the White House has decided in its hushed, hurried disposal of a former asset.

 

 

Finally, a Bush has resigned. Sadly it’s only Bandar Bush, AKA Prince Bandar bin Sultan bin Abdulaziz Al-Saud, the Saudi Ambassador to the US. This comes a scant month after what was heralded as “A Fresh Start in Saudi-US Relationship”. And follows reports of 82 year old Fahd bin Abdelaziz Al Saud’s death in May (King Fahd official remains hospitalized).

So what is going on? Is Bandar fed up with the Bush administration? Does he have wind of a new terror attack and feel he can’t re-brand Saudi Arabia this time? Or is he off to home to start jostling to get his hands on the kingdom, now King Fahd is looking ready to shuffle off this mortal coil. So far the press seems to be fairly silent.

To read the extensive profile in the New Yorker, Bandar was having a whale of a time being ambassador to the US, enjoyed a lot of access and wielded a lot of influence, particularly in Republican administrations. He had a hand in scandals like Iran-Contra. He hunted with President Carter, fished with President Bush, and jawed with President Reagan.

But since 9/11 he has lost favour back in Riyadh, as his relationship with King Fahd’s half-brother Abdullah, heir-apparent, who is ruling in his stead is supposedly tense. Abdullah and Bandar are almost polar opposites: Abdullah is nationalistic, religious and not the greatest fan of the West — the pragmatic, worldly Bandar is not. Abdullah is also cracking down on corruption, and Bandar has lined his pockets more than a little.

This has lead to a problem for Bandar: the PR-glossed image of the house of Saud as friend to the West has been showing cracks since 9/11. The Kingdom is rather bitterly divided between the Saudi royal family of between 5,000 and 10,000 princes and the rest of the country who are becoming increasingly fed up with the Saud family’s dominance. Wahibism has become a stronghold of anti-Western feelings, and most Saudis support the Palestinians and many are pro al Qaeda, it’s no coincidence that 15 out of the 19 terrorists of 9/11 were Saudis. It has become clear to Washington that Bandar’s version of Saudi Arabia is not what is really going on in the Kingdom. And it seems to have become clear to Bandar that the only way is down if he stays.

Not that 9/11 left him without influence in DC — within two days he was smoking cigars with W in the Whitehouse, and had organised the evacuation of key Saudis from the US: Sauds, bin Ladens, and curiously even his successor, Prince Turki (although that story was later silenced), in the only civilian flights allowed in the three days after 9/11.

Prince Turki bin Faisal ibn Abdul Aziz Al Saud, former head of Saudi intelligence and currently ambassador to Britain, will replace Bandar. As head of Saudi intelligence he no doubt has some serious blood on his hands, but he also has some very interesting links. Turki left Saudi intelligence only 11 days before 9/11 and only four months after a Royal Decree reconfirmed his post for another four years. Some have speculated that he was fired for a meeting in Afghanistan with Osama bin Laden just prior to his move. Another alledged meeting was in July 2001 in the American Hospital in Dubai, according to Le Figaro and the Guardian. He was also alledgedly in the US on 9/11, and was evacuated by plane. Saudi intelligence appears to have some rather close links with al Qaeda. Turki also has very close links with the CIA and the Pakistani ISI (seen by some as a CIA franchise). He also had a large part to play in the BCCI scandal.

Perhaps this truly does signal “a fresh start in the Saudi-US relationship” — but will it a fresh start that the US will like? The jury is still out at the moment, although with so much Saudi money in the US, the US may be forced to like it.

 

 

Just two issues ago we brought you news of the wonderful food on offer at the Gulag-by-the-sea, Guantanamo.

No sooner had we detailed details of the fantastic cuisine cooked in the US’ Cuban enclave, which includes baked Tandoori chicken breast, mustard-dill baked fish, Lyonnaise rice, and fish amandine according to the soon to be released Gitmo Cookbook, than we hear those ungrateful so and sos are turning their noses up at this gourmet fare, and there was no pork anywhere to be seen on the menu.

The Centre for Constitutional Rights, a US human rights group based in New York, issued a statement last week that said 52 detainees had decided to enter hunger strikes which have been going on since late last month.

The news coincides with the release, last week, of eight detainees from the base on Wednesday.

The Associated Press in the US has quoted two of the released as saying that some 180 men are on hunger strike at the camp.

According to the human rights organisation, prisoners had said that as well as a hunger strike, they were planning to boycott showers and recreation time. There’s no pleasing some people — not only does the US provide delicious food, bathrooms, nifty orange jumpsuits and shackled shuffles around the facility and still inmates are dissatisfied.

They had listed nine demands which they said they were planning to put before the Guantanamo command.

The demands called for respect for their religion, including an end to what they described as desecration of the Koran and religious discrimination, contact with relatives and fair trials with proper legal representation.

They also said they needed adequate supplies of food and clean water, and needed direct sunlight and not to be forced to go for months without seeing daylight.

The International Committee of the Red Cross is scheduled to send a delegation to the camp this week.

510 men are being held in Guantanamo Bay. Some have been held for over three years without trial. More than 200 have been released without charges.

Check out the Center for Constitutional Rights’ website for full details of the ongoing shocking abuse perpetrated in the law-free zone of Gitmo.

 

 

For all the rolling news’ continued reporting of suicide bombers wreaking destruction across Iraq it is still the US and its allies who are butchering by far the most in its two year old colony — a fact the mainstream does well to obfuscate amid the car bombs.

Nearly 25,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed in the two years since the invasion, and four times as many died at the hands of US-led forces as from suicide bombers and other insurgents, according to a detailed study of the human cost of the conflict by Iraq Body Count and the Oxford Research Group No wonder the US continues to refuse to keep a body count.

The report concludes that:

• At least 24,865 civilians were killed up to March 19 2005;

• 9,270 or 37% died at the hands of the Americans or other coalition forces (86 were killed by British troops, 23 by Italians, and 13 by Ukrainians) Most of these deaths are thought to have occurred during the conflict and its aftermath.

• The second largest cause of death (36%) was criminal violence.

• Anti-occupation forces have been responsible for 2,353 deaths (less than a tenth, though column inches and minutes on TV news give this figure huge misleading coverage).

• At least 50 babies up to the age of two have been killed;

• 1,281 children aged between three and 17 have also died.

Every death was verified by at least two sources before being included in the research, based on figures from Iraqi mortuaries, the Iraqi ministry of health, and media reports.

One of the many surprises in the survey is the huge surge in crime since the invasion. The survey points to the criminal murder rate soaring 20 fold since the invasion.

“This is the big untold story”, said John Sloboda of the Oxford Research Group. “There has been a massive breakdown in law and order and almost total impunity for criminals.” It is unclear whether Mr Sloboda is referring to the invading US forces or the local population here.

The study shows that more than 45,000 Iraqis have been wounded since March 2003, two-thirds of them by coalition forces.

Almost twice as many civilians (11,351) died in the second year after the invasion as the first, and somehow the politicians continue to claim things are improving.

To see the report in full, click here.

 

 

Rather quietly the US has secured a major coup down south which could initiate many others in the coming months across a region full of left leaning governments. Washington has signed an agreement with Paraguay that allows the US to station troops in the South American state for 18 months — a long-sought hemispheric outpost for the US to try and reassert some control over a region that is increasingly shunning the world’s most powerful nation.

According to the Council on Hemispheric Affairs the agreement grants the US troops, who are there ostensibly to *ahem* train officials in counter-terrorism and anti-narcotrafficking measures, legal immunity from possible offences committed during their stay.

Jose Ruiz, Public Affairs officer for the US Armed Forces Southern Command office, told COHA that “some military training will be operational in nature.”

A contingent of 500 US troops headed by seven officials arrived in Paraguay on July 1 with planes, weapons, equipment and ammunition. This group is the first of at least 13 US units set to enter Paraguay until the agreement expires December 31, 2006.

According to Servicio Paz y Justicia (SERPAJ) Paraguay, the Paraguayan National Congress passed this resolution allowing for the entry of US forces with no debate, behind closed doors and with the public largely unaware of the entire transaction. Joining with SERPAJ, other human rights groups also have voiced their concern, with US military instructors being criticized by human rights activists for having a history of teaching torture tactics to thousands of Latin American mid-level military officers at the infamous School of the Americas in Fort Benning, Georgia since shortly after World War II.

A sense of outrage and concern has flared up from neighbouring countries. The US forces are using the Mariscal Estigarribia airport base, which underwent construction by the US in 2000 to allow for the reception of large numbers of troops and weapons and to also facilitate the landing of B-52 and Galaxy planes. With the facility having a capacity to hold 16,000 troops and its proximity to the borders of Argentina, Brazil and Bolivia, Paraguay’s South American neighbours are questioning Washington’s intentions at Mariscal Estigarribia, fearing that they may include more than just drugs and terrorism. Asunción’s initiative with the US is cloudy enough to put the reputation of President Nicanor Duarte at serious risk.

According to the Buenos Aires daily, El Clarín, the inability of Paraguay to hold US forces accountable for their actions while in the region greatly undermines the power of the International Criminal Court and the Paraguayan judicial system. Particularly unnerving is the proximity of the Paraguayan base to the highly controversial Triple Border Area, where the three countries meet.

US military presence in Latin America has been a given since the early twentieth century. It has come in many forms: covert and overt military aid, installation and support of a number of military dictatorships, training of military leaders who later were infamous for their cruelty, economic bribes and a number of other atrocities not to mention coups by the bucket load. US influence throughout Latin America over the past century has led to the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent civilians and the violent militarization of many towns, cities and countries. Latin Americans are now extremely wary of Paraguay’s unprecedented agreement to provide the US with legitimate, almost unquestioned authority so close to their own countries. Bolivians are especially worried as the US coverts their extensive gas reserves.

As well as the obvious Guantanamo Bay site, the US already boasts permanent military bases in two other Latin American countries — Ecuador and El Salvador — many suspect that the Paraguayan agreement will be made permanent.

 

 

The words “pot”, “kettle” and “black” sprang to mind with the Pentagon’s latest global military report issued last week and its specifics on the growing threat of China. The US Department of Defense was alarmed that the world’s most populous nation was spending a whacking $29 billion on its military in the latest 12 month period surveyed.

“Current trends in China’s military modernization could provide China with a force capable of prosecuting a range of military operations in Asia — well beyond Taiwan — potentially posing a credible threat to modern militaries operating in the region,” the report warned. “Some of China’s military planners are surveying the strategic landscape beyond Taiwan.”

$29 billion. Hmmmm. No comparison was made with what the US budgeted for last year — $250 billion, more than eight times what the PRC spent, and that does not include the “special emergency extras” for Iraq of $81 billion.

China’s last foreign military action was the abortive invasion of Vietnam in 1980 (hardly a country that the US can pull out a holier-than-thou attitude on). We simply do not have enough fingers to count the amount of countries the US has launched military actions against since 1980. Would the real militaristic society please stand up?