Thursday, November 11, 2010

Shillebrity Death Match #23 - Max Keiser vs. Alex Jones

Mirror mirror on the wall, who's the Truthiest of them all?

It's a heavyweight bout between Max and Alex

Jones won his previous challenge with a knock-out assertion that 'the Arabs own Hollywood!!!' but Max has got some special moves of his own

Place your bets and scroll forward 4 minutes in to see which of the these two duelling Infowarriors is going to leave his opponent speechless...

That's a knock-out @4.24

Well done Max!

The cheque's in the post and the negatives aren't


Tuesday, November 09, 2010

I can't believe it's not a proper inquest pt6

The J7 7/7 Inquest blog has now been updated to include a post about 7/7 survivor Daniel Biddle's testimony:

The J7 post discusses the material covered in my previous post but with a lot more rigour and detail

There's also, and it's a rare day indeed when I link to this site, an interesting comment over at the UK 9/11 forum:

There's a little bit of Carol Vorderman style numerology before the meat of the comment, which after an analysis of Biddle's testimony and train timetables, concludes with...

"A question for Mr Keith QC and his team:

How is it that Danny Biddle, disembarked from a main line train that, in your own words, arrived at Liverpool Street at 8:40 am or as confirmed by Mr Biddle, "there or thereabouts", then made his way along the platform, across the concourse, down the steps to the underground ticket barriers, through the ticket barriers and eventually onto the the Circle Line platform, ignore an overcrowded train and wait for the next Circle Line train, and then travel eight stops including Edgware Road on a Circle Line train in under 10 minutes on 7th July 2005 ?


I presume that, Gareth A Davies at The Telegraph to pick a single example from the media are able to explain how they had Danny Biddle still tapping out (or editing his previous draft of) a text message to work to say he was on the way at 9.17am - the same time as the MPS originally claimed for the Edgware Road incident.

9:17am is now, according to Mr Keith QC, over 27 minutes after Mr Biddle saw MSK's arm move quickly, an action he elaborated upon in his "more detailed" version given in December, by adding that it looked like he [MSK] was pulling a white cord."

Here's a link to
another newspaper story that quotes Biddle being injured at 9.17am

So, to recap...

On the morning of 7/7, Mohammed Sidique Khan walked along a rush hour tube carriage, scattering bank cards and other documentation in front of his fellow passengers along the way, before standing up/ sitting down and putting his small/ large rucksack on the floor/ his lap and blowing himself up some distance from/ adjacent to the device, which was made from military grade/ home-made explosives, at 8.50am/ 9.17am

Clear as mud

Unless you're one of those people who goes for the '
Some Muslim nutters did it!!! What more do you need to know?!!' school of intellectual thought, the current state of the Official Narrative is, um, shambolic

As I and others have stated previously, the 7/7 inquest does not appear to be an objective information gathering exercise but, rather, an extended presentation of a pre-established, and seriously flawed, narrative.

The material starting to pile up at the J7 7/7 Inquests blog supports this conclusion very strongly

Taken from the forthcoming - Official 7/7 Narrative Logic Problems for Kids Vol.1
(originally intended to be a single volume, but that was before the Inquest started)

And now I'm going to ask for a favour

Without rehashing old debates, I personally have been somewhat scornful of certain other 7/7 researchers

From my high-tech secret command centre (a page of RSS feeds running on an abused netbook), I monitor postings on a large number of alternative news websites. What this sophisticated intelligence operation tells me is that those other 7/7 researchers have received, and continue to receive, considerably more promotion on-line than the work of J7 and producers of films that share the J7 ethic

That's the ethic which focuses on identifying the flaws in Official Narratives rather than promoting alternative narratives

Plugs for
7/7 (Raspberry) Ripple Effect and the musings of a certain Nazi apologist and BBC comedy act there are a plenty

Plugs for J7 and films like
Ludicrous Diversion and Seeds of Deconstruction ...biff all

I can't remember the last time sites like Alex Jones', David Ickes', What Really Happened and loads of other major conspiraloon portals pointed readers to J7, if ever

You could debate the reasons for this for ages but the fact is J7 is the source of much material that a lot of other researchers include in their own work. Yet credit, or valuable search-engine fodder in the way of links, is rarely given in return.

I can't help noticing that J7 has started to heavily watermark some of the excellent material the group is generating for the 7/7 Inquest blog. I suspect that this has little to do with vanity and quite a lot to do with people ripping off and repackaging J7's work, without offering readers the chance to view the material in the context intended by the people who created it

Jaguar at Luton station car park from J7 Truth Campaign on Vimeo.

J7 is a small group of ordinary folk running themselves ragged filling in FOIs, attending hearings, sifting through transcripts and presenting their findings in as clear and as well-documented way as they can. I think they could do with a hand during a period in which they must be absolutely shagged out

So, here's the favour I'm asking for

Over the course of the 7/7 Inquest (and it's set to run for months), and assuming J7 is able to maintain its prodigious effort, please think about posting the occasional link to J7, especially the J7 7/7 Inquest blog, during your travels around the Internet.

I have no doubt that the kind of intelligent, sophisticated, empathic and physically attractive people who pass through here don't need me to elaborate on this request by suggesting that any links posted should be as intelligent, sophisticated, empathic and physically attractive as they are. So I won't

Except that bit where I just did




I can't believe it's not a proper inquest pt5

There's a new post up at the J7 Inquests blog:

It is a thorough deconstruction of the anomalies which J7 has identified in the alleged evidence that places alleged bomber Shehzad Tanweer at the scene of the Aldgate explosion on 7/7

As well as being significant in itself, the comments underneath that post are also worth reading. There are a couple of thought-provoking observations about the nature of the damage caused on the 7/7 train carriages, and also a series of contributions from what appears to be the same anonymous commentator...

"How about he bent or crouched over the rucksack, which was on the floor, to detonate it? Or held it in his arms and triggered it?"

"You'll get your answer today when a survivor will testify that he saw Mohammed Sidique Khan detonate a bomb in his rucksack which was on the floor of the carriage. QED and time for you to put an end to your speculations"

"Are you accusing Mr Biddle of lying? What possible motive would a man who's had both legs blown off have in protecting the conspiracy that ruined his life? Don't tell me he's been 'got at'"

"The piece of shinbone was removed in hospital and passed to the scientists for DNA testing. It belonged to Tanweer. PS I was working at the forensic lab at the time."

"Are you accusing forensic scientists of fitting up Tanweer? "

"The answer to your question is no. I've only been in forensics for a mere 15 years. Can you give us a quick rundown of your forensic experience please?"

It turns out that, Daniel Biddle, the survivor who was going to 'testify that he saw Mohammed Sidique Khan detonate a bomb in his rucksack which was on the floor of the carriage' did not say that and actually referred to a small rucksack on someone's lap

This is a big difference, as the nature of the damage and injuries reported from the carriage is consistent with a large device at floor level, not a small device at waist level

Apparently, 15 years of relevant forensic experience does not equip the commentator to distinguish between statements which refer to...

Small rucksack on lap


(Large) rucksack on floor

This is no Gil Grissom we're dealing with here

The style of the commentator's attack is an illustrative example of some of the strategies that apologists for Offical Narratives employ...
  • They insult and patronise in an attempt to provoke an emotional response

  • They ignore effective responses to their insinuations and simply move on to a new line of attack
and above all
  • They relentlessly attempt to force those who have identified flaws in an Official Narrative to generate speculations of their own
This is not the behaviour of someone who holds a point of view that they know to be well-supported. This the behaviour of someone who is either unconciously dissonant or consciously deceptive. This is what you do when you know you are defending a flawed position

And it doesn't help when, as illustrated by the following misguided comment I just saw under an Aangirfan post,
truthers play right into the hands of those who would distract you from the weaknesses in their fairy story...

"Maybe they just paid the guy off and he figures he's lost his legs in a bombing so why not profit from it. Even bomb victims can be ready to serve tyranny, either that or brainwashed at some point. These people did 911, so magicking up this "witness" is hardly beyond them."

To put it another way
  • Imagine you arranged to meet someone at a certain time and place
  • They don't turn up
  • The next day you phone that person and ask them why they didn't show
  • The person says 'But I was there!'
  • You say 'No you weren't'
  • The person then says 'If I wasn't there where do you think I was? And why? And with who?'
Would you be so daft as to even start to answer those questions?

(It's worth noting that after nine years of bullshit about holographic aircraft, space beams,
MI6 vs CIA vs Mossad, LIHOP/ MIHOP/ BUNNYHOP, etc etc, 9/11 Truthers are finally realising that it might just be better to stick with fundamental facts that as wide a number of them as possible can agree to be 'True'... DECLARATION: NO MUSLIMS PROVEN INVOLVED IN 9/11)


Sunday, November 07, 2010

FF15MP Spot the Difference Contest #51

A. Sir William Cubitt

B. Ian Duncan Smith

And if your answer was 'I can't see much difference but IDS does look like he's having sex with a goat' you can write your name on a scrap of paper and stick it in the raffle box


Compelling people to work for less than two quid an hour might, just possibly, bump into one or two small snags. The work has to be exceptionally unskilled, can't compete with work currently being done by people actually earning enough to exist, and it can't matter if The Compelled do, as is likely, a really shit job of it

Cubitt-style treadmills offer a tried and tested solution to these problems, especially when connected to a big windmill, or some rocks

This is an all-weather solution and doesn't involve much additional expense on stripey outfits, chains, shotguns, dogs, riding crops, mirrored shades or any of the other paraphenalia associated with managing reluctant groups of labourers in open spaces

And if any whinging do-gooders start complaining that this kind of enforced physical drudgery does nothing for upper body strength, you could always compel the feckless to alternate between treadmills and operating some of these wall-mounted bad boys... once used in Dartmoor Prison, that's the one still privately owned by the Royal Family

Of course, if IDS were brave enough to be a true neo-radical he could use cranks and treadmills to interface* all of the unemployed with electrical generators, commoditise their output US prison style, draw up a few bonds and turn them over to our fabulous banking industry to make a market with.

* = something like a person-sized Skinner Box, but with an axle


Saturday, November 06, 2010

Mainstream Conspiraloons #17 - Noam Chomsky, well sort of...

"The explicit and declared motive of the [Afghanistan] war was to compel the Taliban to turn over to the United States, the people who they accused of having been involved in World Trade Center and Pentagon terrorist acts. The Taliban…they requested evidence…and the Bush administration refused to provide any"

"We later discovered one of the reasons why they did not bring evidence: they did not have any."


Hope and Democracy? I s**t on Hope and Democracy (redux)

All things considered, nowhere near as formidable as some principles backed by a dash of bloody-mindedness

There's a post over at Craig Murray's blog which has a stab at a reasonable summary of the current plight of the UK and which ends with the line 'I see no hope'

A moderately interesting discussion ensued in the comments underneath, on the subject of the impending national implosion and the nature of hope and democracy.

That was until Craig's devoted trolls got stuck in and people started calling each other c*nts

Personally, I've maintained for a long time now that, just on a mathematical basis alone, the UK is economically and therefore probably socially fucked for a fair while into the future.

Whilst, on the face of it, that's a pretty pessimistic point of view, I'd argue that living through some kind of unpleasantness is the only way the majority of people will realise that they've allowed the significance of their own lives to be devalued in exchange for some cheap junk, both physical or psycological

So, I believe that there's a good chance that 'things' will eventually get better but only after some serious interim grief

But this 'hope' thing?

People who need hope to get by run the very considerable risk of losing it

Should someone only do what they believe to be the Right Thing if they expect success at the end of it?

Or should they do it because they believe it is the Right Thing to do?

I'm all for picking my battles and only getting into fights that I expect to win, at an acceptable cost. That's on one level. On a higher level, if you think in terms of a war that you believe to be worth fighting, rather than the individual battles which make up a war, the fight justifies itself, regardless of the expected outcome. As long as you've been true to yourself and done the best that you can, hope doesn't come into it

If the analogy with warfare seems too melodramatic, think about commercial pilots flying stricken aircraft. If you've ever heard a crash tape there is something uniquely spooky about doomed aircrew working through their recovery routines right up to the moment their plane hits the ground. But however unnatural that behaviour might seem to be, would you rather, as a passenger, have people who behave like that up front or the kind of people who'd take time out on the way down to say, or think, 'gosh, I hope we don't crash'

Bollocks to hope

Spivs like this are in the hope-peddling business...

They are also in the democracy-peddling business

There's a lot of discussion in the Conspirasphere about the nature of, and possible replacements for, the existing money system

There's a lot less discussion about political systems

Which is understandable, given the way that such crucial subjects as economics and civics are misrepresented in our schools

We've all got a lot of catching up to do, and the money thing has been uppermost in most people's minds, but the political system is actually more important as it dictates who controls the money supply

The prevailing narrative goes that democracy is the least worst system available to us and, with the fall of communism, there are no viable alternatives on the table


A little while back, I was supervising a group of young kids; four girls and three boys. They were working on a project that required a series of decisions to be made. And it didn't take too long for the girls to decide that the best way to reach those decisions was on the basis of a majority vote, which they called for regularly. I enjoyed the comedy frustration of the boys for a little while before imposing a somewhat less democratic system of government

Without some constitutional basis which lays down invariable principles, democracy is open to becoming the tyranny of the majority over the minority. Or in the case of most British parliaments in recent years, the minority over the majority

And the mob is very easily bought off with some bread, a few circuses and a dash of cynical fear-mongering

Democracy, fuck yeah!

Plutocrats absolutely love unconstrained democracy. That's why they've got soldiers forcing it on people at gunpoint around the world

It's worth remembering, as many Conspiraloons already appreciate, that the founding fathers of the USA set it up as a Constitutional Republic, not a Democracy, and they thought things through long and hard before doing so.

Admittedly, many of the founding fathers were genocidal slave owners but, perversely, they do appear to have created a system which had the potential to work against their own class interest.

This is not normal, was probably not wholly intentional, and is unlikely to be repeated on a regular basis

Now, here's the tricky question

How do you impose a set of fundamental principles on a society which establish the rights of the individual and minority groups in such a way that they cannot subsequently be removed by the 'democratic' majority?

How do you do that in a democratic way?

And what's to stop the plutocrats imposing their own, deliberately flawed, set of allegedly fundamental principles?

I only mention this because I suspect it might become an issue at some point in the not too super distant future


Friday, November 05, 2010

FF15MP Spot the Difference Contest #23



Now, as it happens, I've attended a few of the demos where these kind of offending placards have been displayed and, yes, it's always limited to a handful of demonstrators who operate outside of the mass of far more pleasant protestors (who occasionally offer to share their packed lunches with white infidels such as myself - I recommend the samosas) and, yes, the press photographers do spurn taking representative images and prefer to cluster around the half a dozen rent-a-fanatics like flies around shit

And if your answer to the Spot the Difference Challenge was something like 'at least the BNP would pull the UK out of Iraq and Afghanistan', help yourself to a sweetie from the jar at the front of the room


Wednesday, November 03, 2010

Mainstream Conspiraloons #207 - Lord James of Blackheath


Now here's
something you don't read every day...

"For the past 20 weeks I have been engaged in a very strange dialogue with the two noble Lords, in the course of which I have been trying to bring to their attention the willing availability of a strange organisation which wishes to make a great deal of money available to assist the recovery of the economy in this country. For want of a better name, I shall call it foundation X. That is not its real name, but it will do for the moment. Foundation X was introduced to me 20 weeks ago last week by an eminent City firm, which is FSA controlled. Its chairman came to me and said, "We have this extraordinary request to assist in a major financial reconstruction. It is megabucks, but we need your help to assist us in understanding whether this business is legitimate". I had the biggest put down of my life from my noble friend Lord Strathclyde when I told him this story. He said, "Why you? You're not important enough to have the answer to a question like that". He is quite right, I am not important enough, but the answer to the next question was, "You haven't got the experience for it". Yes I do. I have had one of the biggest experiences in the laundering of terrorist money and funny money that anyone has had in the City. I have handled billions of pounds of terrorist money."

Lord James is 72


Mainstream Conspiraloons #136 - Randy Quaid

I originally posted this link on the Conspiraloon Alliance blog because I thought it was too batshit for this blog, but WTF...


Time to go away now pt2

Cheers to Anon for the link to this series of presentations by Damon Vrabel entitled 'Debunking Money'

So far, I've watched the first in the series...

...and whilst it doesn't offer much in the way of new material for veteran Loons, Vrabel's delivery is 'concise and easy to understand'

Which might be handy, as we're now getting to the stage where those of us who have been grazing the Net for some time have a pretty good idea of what's going on with the Money thing and, rather than preaching to the choir and discussing this material amongst ourselves, we probably should be thinking about reaching out to the majority of people who are waking up to the fact that they are being rogered senseless but don't quite understand how*

Naturally, I reserve the right to pull the link to Vrabel's videos if and when I discover that he starts talking about Space Newts, dons white robes or instructs viewers to send otherwise worthless money to some bearded Loon and his followers in a compound in the Mojave Desert. That is, after all, a vaguely suspicious haircut he's sporting there

* = Something must be in the air/ water. Otherwise, how else could you account for a once unthinkable headline such as this...

NB Don't be holding your breath now


Time to go away now

Once upon a time if you wanted to bomb the crap out of someone you used to have to use something like this...

The Avro Lancaster. An iconic aircraft viewed with respect and affection by the British people who lived through World War 2. Which, given the huge number of people who died in them and were killed by them, is a pretty strong endorsement for the effectiveness of wartime propaganada

Britain built 7,500 Lancasters at a cost of something like £50,000 each (£1,600,000
in today's money).

About 3,300 of these planes and their crews of seven highly trained men were shot down during the war. Total RAF Bomber Command losses of all types of aircraft was 8,500 planes and 57,000 crew

Which was fab news for the industrialists who sold the aircraft and the bankers who created the money to
buy them but, still, not as profitable as it could have been.

Back in those days, building and
operating fleets of bombers required masses of skilled labour that needed training and paying

All of which reduced the bottom line severely

Nowadays, thanks to improved technology, if you want to bomb the crap out of someone you can use
something like this...

and one of these...

...coming in at a higher unit cost than an Avro Lancaster, a much lower labour component and the operators pay to train themselves whilst they're still children

It would be lovely to think that all those labour savings mean that people who would otherwise be fabricating and operating machinery of mass death would consequently be employed fabricating and operating other, less unpleasant things

Unfortunately, our current System does not require their skills anywhere else either

For something like 100-150 years that System required an educated, skilled workforce to tend
machinery and manage empire. Thanks to advances in technology, most of that educated, skilled workforce is now surplus to requirements and the System would like Us to, thanks for everything, go away now

And before We go away, that System would like to hoover up whatever crumbs of capital We managed to
collectively accumulate over those last 100-150 years

All of which should be bleeding obvious but a lot of people just don't seem to get it and insist on
believing that news like this... somehow an unfortunate consequence of the harsh economic times we live in and not part of
a Systematic eradication of a class of people that is now surplus to requirements

It would seem that, by some completely unguided, stochastic process, our colleges and universities are being transformed
from institutions which produce educated people capable of productive work and critical thinking into factories which produce dumbed-down debt bitches primed for a lifetime of shitty, service sector jobs and neo-serfdom

Which is just what our establishment needs and wants

What a marvelous coincidence

At which point one could argue till the cows come home whether this marvelous coincidence is...

a) the result of deliberate planning by a shadowy cabal of finance capitalists conspiring away on a
little island somewhere


b) the natural consequence of finance capitalists acting in their class interest without much in the way of deliberate collusion

But to be honest, as with most of these debates about whether or not a conspiracy is at work, when
you are on the receiving end the motivations of the people fucking you are largely academic

Your first priority should be to relieve your tormentors of the means by which they are fucking you