Saturday, October 30, 2010


The A Team was a cheezy TV series from the 1980's and made more recently into a film. They sorted problems out. The introduction always finished with,
If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire...The A-Team.

Obama had a problem. No one else could help. He knew where to find The A Team, at Langley. He hired The A Team.

The A Team is The Al-Qaeda Team, the Arab Bureau of the CIA and MI6.

And the plot today is more cheezy than any scriptwriter of The A Team could ever dream of.

That plot focuses on a broken President of the USA. He came into office promising the American people that he could fix it. Instead he bailed out the banks with trillions, and now the bloated banks are coming back for more. He is allowing Mexico to invade the Southern states, and allowing Wall Street to write up laws that fleece the American people further, and continuing wars in Afghanistan and now Pakistan. He is in real trouble with the American people. His CIA mask is slipping.

But then he remembered that a few people have published articles that suggested that a terror attack, and at least a threat, could persuade the American people to look up to him again, to see him as a protective father figure, as they had done in 2008.

So in the last month rumours were created that Europe was going to be blown up by a mysterious Abdul Jabbar.

And now, just in the nick of time, with just three days to go before the mid-term elections, the broken President is handed a golden opportunity to remind the American people that, despite his undying loyalty to Wall Street and his paymasters, he is actually a neat kind of guy. A printer with an assumed explosive device is sent nearly half way around the world, and is discovered after a tip-off with what was described by a BBC reporter today as "very specific intelligence" from Saudi Arabia (the Saudis of course having created The A Team for the CIA via Osama bin Laden). Immediately the Mockingbird Media goes into overdrive. Nobody had died. The threat of anybody dying from the device was minimal. But that didn't stop the Mockingbird Media. The discovery of this printer and other suspect devices has been headline news for hours. Planes bound for the USA were escorted by NORAD. Global panic is encouraged.

And then the broken President grabs the opportunity given to him by The Al-Qaeda Team with both hands and reads his script on TV. The world is once again safe, safe in the hands of the President.

Obama hired The A Team.

Wednesday, October 27, 2010


I heard on the radio yesterday that an agreement had been reached between Great Britain and Switzerland that would allow Great Britain to collect billions a year in tax from British holders of Swiss accounts. But today I read that this is not the case.

Apparently tax dodgers will keep the vast majority of their tens in billions in unpaid tax and handover just one billion per year!

So banks who caused the crisis will pay just 2 billion per year and British tax dodgers in Switzerland, many of whom I suspect are bankers who caused the crisis, will pay just one billion per year.

Contrast that with 18 billion per year from welfare, a half million public sector jobs to be go and the same in the private sector, and a drastic reduction in public services.

We must
1. place the banks in bankruptcy
2. create our own money, thankyou very much


Secrecy deal with Switzerland could let Britons avoid £40bn in taxes

• Agreement was hailed as giving exchequer £1bn
• Swiss can conceal names and block UK inquiries

Phillip Inman, Tuesday 26 October 2010 20.47 BST

Wealthy Britons could dodge £40bn in tax payments after the UK agreed ahead of negotiations on a tax deal with Switzerland that the country could maintain its traditional banking secrecy.

Thousands of higher rate taxpayers, who pay 50% tax on their income in the UK, will be allowed to keep their secret accounts in Zurich and Geneva and pay a low tax rate after the Treasury failed to secure agreement on sharing bank details.

Proposals to make the deal retrospective were also rejected by the Swiss authorities, saving further large sums for wealthy UK residents.

The Treasury said earlier this week that the agreement, due to be hammered out in the new year, would bring in extra revenues currently held in Swiss bank accounts beyond the reach of the UK exchequer. It is understood Treasury minister David Gauke, who will lead the negotiations, expects to raise more than £1bn.

But critics of the move said it amounted to a capitulation by the UK and showed the government was preparing to "let wealthy investors off the hook".

Richard Murphy, head of Tax Research, said: "No indication is given as to how these accounts are to be regularised. Indeed, there is no prospect they can be because the £40bn or so of evaded assets will not have to be declared by name by the Swiss. In that case there is no prospect of UK interest or penalties being charged.

"In other words David Gauke has just announced his intention to sign a total tax amnesty for UK tax evaders who have used Switzerland. Given that penalties and interest would have added well over 100% to the tax bills it is highly likely that all these evaded assets should have been due to HM Treasury. But Gauke looks like he will give away the whole lot."

Murphy is a former KPMG accountant who wrote a report for the TUC in 2008 detailing how wealthy individuals and corporations based in the UK were avoiding £25bn a year in taxes. He said losses to the taxpayer could balloon over the next few years as more people move their accounts to Switzerland's lower tax regime.

"This could have knock on effects for British banks which lose their competitive edge to Swiss banks offering the same savings rates, but much lower taxes," he said. Murphy said the agreement amounted to Gauke handing British tax sovereignty to Switzerland.

"Why should we enter a deal that denies the UK tax authority the right to make inquiries about the tax affairs of a British person? Under this agreement the Swiss are granted the right to decide how many inquiries may be made and whether they are appropriate or not."

A statement by the Swiss authorities said: "During the exploratory talks, Switzerland and the UK agreed on a lasting solution which respects the protection of bank client privacy. Consequently, the automatic exchange of information will no longer be an issue in relations between the two states.The solution will apply after the entry into force of the agreement to be negotiated (no retroactive effect)."

At the moment many UK taxpayers are faced with a choice of declaring income based offshore and paying full tax or keeping it hidden from the authorities. Under the new regime, which could levy a tax rate as low as 20%, it will become legitimate to maintain an offshore account and pay the lower Swiss tax rate.

HM Revenue & Customs has twice threatened savers with hidden offshore bank accounts with fines and penalties worth 100% of their tax bill. An amnesty in 2008 and 2009 persuaded just 10,000 of the 100,000 people with substantial offshore savings to come forward.

Approximately £100bn–£125bn of British investors' money is believed to be in Swiss banks.

MEP Sharon Bowles, who chairs the European parliament's influential economic and monetary affairs committee, welcomed the deal but said she was concerned it lacked a retrospective element. She warned that Europe faced a €250bn (£223bn) tax fraud bill every year that governments must tackle.

© Guardian News and Media Limited 2010

Monday, October 25, 2010


I listen to Alex Jones for positivity.

He constantly tells us about being stopped in the streets by cops who thank him for what he is doing.

A few weeks ago I listened to a phone in and one guy phoned in, he started talking about some stuff and Alex remembered his voice as someone he knew from Army Intel. Alex is always stating that the military and police are definitely alert and constantly waking up to new levels.

So what does Pastor Williams do? He scares the shit out of those kind of people and tells us all that this terminally-ill guy, who has apparently served the agenda for years and is on his death bed, has told him that everything that the NWO have done so far is on track!!!

What is that kind of info going to tell those who have power? Those people who, after listening to Jones and the very positive news from Infowars etc, who have power and were black hats but after listening to Alex have changed to grey or even white; what are they going to do?

Are they going to think, "shit, I'd better go black again", or what? Very probably.

I mean, what has Williams told us that we don't know already? To get gold and silver, to stock up on food etc. I've been doing that for years!

Did you notice that Williams did not state who to vote for in the mid-term elections next week in order to stop trillions going to the banks, but he did terrify us with demands for putting a roof over our heads and keeping cash in the house, while also plugging his latest DVD, stating "they" are going to pull the plug?

And why is he keeping such apparently devastating information from us out of respect for a dying man who apparently only has two weeks to live but who has served the agenda for years? His info about Iraq and Bush was yesteryears scandal.

The title Pastor should also tell you something. I mean, WHERE THE FUCK IS JESUS OR GOD OR FUCKING ANYONE FROM THE ALLEGED HEAVENS?!!

Where was Jesus when the white man was raping and stealing property from the native American Indian to build this so-called kind-spirited US of A, which came AFTER the War of Independence (Independence my arse!!)?

Where was Jesus while all the child abuse has been going on?

I'll tell you: laughing his head off at the banality of it all!

What a load of bullshit the whole Christian church is! All Churches are, including the The Church of Fucking Satan, bullshit.


And we are expected to get down on our knees and pray for salvation from this doom and gloom monger?


He won't tell hundreds of millions of people the information that he, a Pastor of the Christian Church, has been told by an alleged insider that could spur millions into action and self-protection! WHY? Out of respect for a man who has served the agenda so much that we are where we are, which is according to Williams, virtual Armageddon.

Williams has confirmed my deep mistrust in Christianity.



Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai has alleged that Iran is paying him money to keep his loyalty and the loyalty of Afghan lawyers, tribal elders and even the Taliban! Iran denies the allegations.

First of all, Karzai's loyalty is to our monarchy; he is a Knight of the Order of St Michael and St George.

Second, apparently the US has known about this money anyway.

Third, the US does the same!

Fourth, the US even protects the Taliban opium.

And fifth, Karzai's brother is CIA and deeply involved in the opium trade.

Do the drug trade maths.



Karzai's bags of cash a conundrum for the U.S.

Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai shrugged off accusations on Monday that his chief of staff, Umar Daudzai, received "bags of money" from Iran.

"Let's not make this an issue," he said at a news conference, using a Robert Frost-like analogy to explain the money transactions: Good bags of cash make good neighbors.

The New York Times reported that Daudzai received $1 million to $2 million every other month from the neighboring country of Iran and that the money was distributed to Afghan lawmakers, tribal elders and even Taliban commanders to secure their loyalty.

Bags of money seem to be floating around quite often in Afghanistan these days.They have been a huge thorn in the efforts to curb corruption in Kabul. The Post's Greg Miller wrote in September:

After nearly nine years of nation-building in Afghanistan, experts said, the U.S. government faces mounting evidence that it has helped to assemble one of the most corrupt governments in the world.

One of the biggest problems concerns the bags of cash. An estimated $1 billion a year leaves the country in bags carried out of the Kabul airport. Miller also wrote in August:

In April, officials encountered a courier for a financial transfer firm who reported that he was carrying $700,000 on a flight to Dubai, but when customs officials inspected the courier's luggage, they found an additional $600,000.

However, in his dismissal of the news, Karzai said cash transactions are quite normal and then-President George W. Bush was aware of the Iranian donations. The United States supposedly gives him bags of cash as well.

To complicate the story, the Iranian embassy in Kabul denies any cash payments, saying the allegations are "ridiculous and insulting."

By Melissa Bell | October 25, 2010; 9:47 AM ET

© 1996-2010 The Washington Post Company

Saturday, October 23, 2010


Who will buy Russia?

As stated in the following article, the proceeds from the sale of Russian oil and gas since 2008 have gone to rescuing banks. But even though Russia is now the largest exporter of oil, it is selling off large chunks of its economic infrastructure.

But who will buy it?

Who has the money?

Who could have engineered such a crisis?



London-steered Pirates of the Caribbean Detail New Sales of Russian Public-Sector Firms
October 22, 2010 • 10:04AM

Reflecting the ongoing poisoning of Russian policy by British free-trade doctrines and the people who implement them — the "Pirates of the Caribbean" clique of financial interests operating in Russia, while registered in British-run offshore zones — the Russian government has released more details of the mega-privatization binge, announced by Sub-prime Minister Alexei Kudrin in August. Following a closed-doors meeting with Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, First Deputy Prime Minister Igor Shuvalov yesterday revealed more on the planned biggest privatization since the 1990s, intended to raise up to 1.8 trillion rubles ($60 billion) by 2015. Total or partial stakes in up to 900 companies are to be sold, including 15% of the state-owned oil company Rosneft and, in 2013-2015, up to 25% of the assets of Russian Railways (earlier said by the Economics Ministry to have been off the list).

President Dmitri Medvedev cleared the way for the expanded privatization last June, removing protection from hundreds of stated-owned companies and facilities like ports, previously shielded against privatization on national security grounds. Kudrin has said that up to $30 billion raised in 2011-2012 would go chiefly for budget-balancing purposes — because, since 2008, Russia has already spent nearly all of its previous oil and gas export-derived Stabilization Fund earnings on the rescue of teetering banks and large companies — and to fill budget holes. As of yesterday's meeting, the time frame has been extended by two years and the money-raising target doubled.

"They'll have trouble selling it," Lyndon LaRouche said at the time of Kudrin's announcement in August, adding that the whole approach of trying to attract foreign streams of money stemmed from the "British Intelligence penetration of Russia." Since then, Kudrin has been named Finance Minister of the Year by Euromoney magazine.

Among the details given, Shuvalov said the government may sell part of its 51.2% stake in Aeroflot-Russian Airline. He said Russia was prepared to privatize Moscow's Sheremetyevo airport, but needed time to integrate all three Moscow airports into one hub, which he admitted could not be achieved through privatization. A 100-percent stake in the United Grain Company and 50 percent minus one share in the state-owned shipping company Sovkomflot, will be offered during the next three years.

"We're sending investors a clear signal for the next three years, and we're prepared to discuss the sale of even larger stakes," Shuvalov was quoted in Russian media. Smaller pieces of the Federal Grid Company (electricity), RusHydro, Rostelecom, and Rosagrolizing (agricultural leasing operations) are on the list.

Shuvalov confirmed that stakes in the state-owned banks Sberbank, VTB, and Rosselkhozbank (the agriculture bank) will be for sale, including up to 50% minus one share of Sberbank, the state savings bank, which has the country's largest deposit and loan base. He said the government might yield control of VTB.

While Shuvalov made these announcements in Moscow, 1990s privatization orchestrator Anatoli Chubais, the former "young reformer" deputy premier who now heads the Rosnano nanotechnologies venture, arrived in San Francisco to entice U.S. "venture capital" into an increasingly privatized Russia.

In fact, the crucial elements of the policy package currently pursued by Kudrin, Shuvalov, and Kremlin staff figures like Arkadi Dvorkovich, were outlined 20 year ago by Chubais and others at seminars with top London operatives, held at the International Institute of Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), on how to take over the Soviet Union: 1) massive privatization, 2) creation of a layer of super-wealthy private entrepreneurs as the missing element for running the Russian economy (a notion based on pro-Nazi "creative destruction" ideologue Joseph Schumpeter's "Unternehmergeist," or "Entrepreneur-spirit," these later appeared in the person of the offshore-registered new Russian "oligarchs"), 3) and modernization through "post-industrial" technologies.

LPAC organizers had a vocal and visible presence outside the Russian-American Business Council meeting addressed by Chubais and fellow oligarch Victor Vekselberg (head of the Bahamas-registered Renova Group, as well as Medvedev's Skolkovo "modernization" project), with a large banner saying "Free Russia from the Pirates of the Caribbean" in Russian.


I don't know why but I always feel doom and gloom and despair and possible fear whenever Pastor Lindsey Williams talks about his source. It's like we build a head of steam, feel like we're getting somewhere and winning, the Infowars moneybomb raised a lot of money, and then WHAM! Along comes Williams with info from his source and I feel deflated, like the game's over already, that there's nothing we can do and nothing left to fight for.

I personally do not give the source much credibility. He tried to feed Williams that the Deepwater Horizon incident was an accident when several pieces of evidence indicate foreknowledge.

I am not stating that Williams is a minion, just questioning the credibility, the nature and the timing of the info.


In response to the latest Wikileaks Iraq war logs, of which there are many, Toby Harnden, US editor of The Daily Telegraph, i.e. MI6 agent, has singled out how Iran was allegedly involved in Iraq against US troops. He spends about 90% of his article attacking reports of killings by US troops as unreliable, but then decides that what the New York Times says, not himself, about Iran's involvement in Iraq must be true.

So in the world according to Toby Harnden, reports of US troops killing, raping and torturing Iraqis are false, but reports of Iran possibly involved in killing US troops are true. Therefore the USA must attack Iran now.

This shows the increasing desperation of the people pushing the A Clean Break/Rebuilding America's Defenses agenda of the NWO.



Will Barack Obama admit extent of Iran's role in Iraq, laid bare by WikiLeaks?

By Toby Harnden World Last updated: October 23rd, 2010

Much of the attention surrounding the WikiLeaks document dump will, predictably enough, focus on a single incident of two insurgents being killed after they tried to surrender to an Apache helicopter and, more disturbingly, the widespread abuse of detainees by Iraq forces, apparently with a blind eye being turned by the US military.

Some of the reporting of the documents is distinctly tendentious. Take for instance this from the Guardian. The headline states as fact that “Apache helicopters kill 14 civilians”. The source for this? A single Iraq informant, speaking to an interpreter for the US military. In addition, an Iraqi colonel said the number was 12.

Any journalist who has worked in Iraq (and I spent much of 2004 and 2005 there) knows that casualty figures from Iraqis were extremely unreliable and often based on rumour, exaggeration or personal/political agendas and prejudices. In the US report, the figures are rightly described as “unconfirmed”.

I’m not saying it’s not true that 14 were killed. Civilians die in wars, often in very large numbers, and they certainly did so in Iraq. There might well have been that number or more killed by US forces that. But we just don’t know and things that we can’t be sure about should not be reported as fact just because we might like them to be true.

Interesting to note also to that the Guardian has seen fit to name the interpreter in the incident report, which I won’t link to for that reason.

A couple of things to say about the detainee abuse. Clearly, a legacy of Saddam Hussein’s regime was a culture of astonishing brutality in Iraq. To expect that indigenous forces would somehow adhere to Western standards of due process is unrealistic. Also, the effort entailed, in the middle of a war, to investigate every allegation and suspicion of abuse by Iraqis would have been a mammoth, and probably impossible, task.

The files show there were occasions recorded when morally courageous US troops did intervene and the blind-eye policy was eventually and rightly changed.

Before I continue, a pet peeve. Can we stop calling them WikiLeaks “the whistle-blowing website”? A whistle-blower is “an informant who exposes wrongdoing within an organisation in the hope of stopping it”. First, WikiLeaks does not operate within an organisation. Second, to presuppose they are exposing wrongdoing by leaking classified documents is buying their propaganda. But I digress.

It seems to me that the most significant revelations from the massive WikiLeaks document dump is the apparent extent of Iran’s nefarious role in Iraq. Remember how we were always being told that the Bush administration was exaggerating the extent of Iranian influence with the Shia militia groups in order to push along a neocon plot to attack Iran? Well, an initial reading of the documents conducted by the New York Times indicates there wasn’t much exaggeration at all.

Come to think of it, None other than Vice President Joe Biden said as recently as August:

Iranian influence in Iraq is minimal. It’s been greatly exaggerated.

So exactly how does that statement square with this from the NYT?

The reports make it clear that the lethal contest between Iranian-backed militias and American forces continued after President Obama sought to open a diplomatic dialogue with Iran’s leaders and reaffirmed the agreement between the United States and Iraq to withdraw American troops from Iraq by the end of 2011.

© Copyright of Telegraph Media Group Limited 2010


With just one week to go before the US mid-term elections and many disillusioned voters turning away from Obama and the Democrats, the ordinary undecided US voter has been given a stark reminder of what the Republicans did in Iraq.

As yet I have found no mention of bin Laden, but Iran is again named as a terrorist nation.

And again "they" are claiming risks to national security.

These 'leaks' appear at first to be less explosive than the Afghan logs, but the timing and nature of the release is interesting.

Friday, October 22, 2010


To hit that $500,000.

And/or maybe the gold and silver markets can be played, if we are all so confident of those markets?


For whatever reason Bilderberger and JP Morgan consultant Tony Blair gave Lord Hutton, not a qualified coroner but former Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland, the power to rule on the cause of death of Dr David Kelly without a full coroners inquest.

Kelly did not have a full coroner's inquest.

Witnesses were not questioned or cross-examined under oath.

His death was addressed as part of larger whitewash inquiry.

The right to justice was denied to Kelly because for whatever reason Bilderberger and JP Morgan consultant Tony Blair gave Lord Hutton, not a qualified coroner but former Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland, the power to rule on the cause of death of Dr David Kelly without a full coroners inquest.

You do the whitewash maths.

ps the police operation called Operation Mason that focused on Kelly's disappearance began NINE repeat NINE hours before Kelly was reported missing and even before he left his house!!

pps Bilderberger and JP Morgan consultant Tony Blair told us Iraq had WMD. Kelly told us they didn't. Bilderberger and JP Morgan consultant Tony Blair invaded Iraq as part of the A Clean Break/Rebuilding America's Defenses agenda. Iraq had no WMD. Kelly was dead.


David Kelly death: postmortem examination report

Report by Home Office pathologist Nicholas Hunt into death of government weapons inspector in 2003, published today


Wikileaks has announced that at 10am London Time tomorrow it will make a major announcement, and it is expected to leak hundreds of thousands of documents related to the war in Iraq. And it is expected that the same three establishment Mockingbird Media who helped to leak the Afghan war logs, The Guardian, The New York Times and Der Spiegel, will again help to distribute the 'leaks' along with MI6's very own Al Jazeera.

You may recall the fallout from the previous 'leaks'. The Pentagon got tens of billions to continue the war in Afghanistan, but the NWO also got to accuse Iran of meddling in Afghanistan and accuse Wikileaks of risking national security at a time when they are foaming at the mouth to restrict access to the internet. The 'leaks' themselves were from years ago and from untrustworthy sources.

But look at this report from Reuters 18/10/2010 in which The Pentagon calls for news organisations not to report on the proposed leaks.
The Pentagon urged news organizations on Monday not to publish classified U.S. documents due to be released by WikiLeaks as U.S. officials brace for a mass disclosure of leaked Iraq war files by the whistle-blower website.

[source :]


You can just see the Pentagoons put their heads in their hands in apparent dismay with Wikileaks, but behind their hands they are laughing their heads off with joy.


Wikileaks documents expected to be released as Nato warns of 'unfortunate situation'
The Pentagon is bracing for an imminent release by Wikileaks, the whistle-blower website, of more than 400,000 secret documents about the Iraq war in a move that Nato denounced as potentially endangering lives.

By Toby Harnden, Washington
Published: 4:59PM BST 22 Oct 2010

Wikileaks documents expected to be released as Nato warns of 'unfortunate situation'

In a statement via Twitter, Wikileaks, which specialises in publishing classified material, stated that there would be a "major Wikileaks announcement in Europe" on Saturday at 10am British time.

Wikileaks has not commented publicly on the material but as many as 500,000 documents, thought mainly to be incident reports compiled after the 2003 Iraq invasion, may be released.

Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Nato's Secretary General, said that any release of intelligence reports would create "a very unfortunate situation" for American forces and Iraqis.

"I can't comment on the details of the exact impact on security but in General I can tell you that such leaks," he told reporters Berlin, adding that the release "may have a very negative security impact for people involved".

The Pentagon has set up an "Information Review Task Force" of 120 people to assess the potential implications and damage of the disclosure of the documents, which promises to eclipse the July release of more than 70,000 classified US military files relating to the Afghanistan war.

Der Spiegel, The New York Times and the Guardian, the same publications that released the Afghanistan "War Logs", as well as Al Jazeera, are expected to publish the information simultaneously.


There is pure evil occuring this Friday afternoon. But it doesn't just happen on Friday afternoons. It happens every day. That evil is our banking and monetary system.

I am so disgusted and disappointed with our politicians for attacking the less well off to the benefit of the banks in the CSR announced on Wednesday by Oik that I am seriously considering starting a new political party. There is one party at the moment that addresses my anger at the moment, but it focuses on just one point, monetary reform, as stated in its constitution paragraph 2.
The purpose of the Party and its sole policy shall be to promote, by any legal means, the abolition of the power to create state-backed money (sterling) by private individuals or companies for private profit, and the investment of that power in national or local government for the benefit of the public purse.

[source :]

The Monetary Reform Party have proposed a new Bank of England Act, proposing that we as a nation create our own money and not private banks who expect to be immediately bailed out with public money, setting out how such a system would work.

This is a noble cause and would form the basis of a constitution but would not be the sole raison d'etre of the party.

Energy needs to be addressed.

Transport needs to be addressed.

Welfare needs to be addressed.

Education needs to be addressed.

I have my own policies but they really need to be clarified, but I would make monetary reform the first policy. Not the only policy, but the first policy.

Because I know deep in my heart that our current system is unfair, unjust, and when you sit down and think about how it has been used and abused against not just the ordinary British taxpayer but the whole world, just pure evil.

With the power to create our own money we could do so much more and build a nation we could all be proud of.

At the moment we are on an engineered road to hell.

Thursday, October 21, 2010


Just imagine what we could create if we created our own money instead of borrowing from Nazi bankers who tell us what to do and charge us interest for the privilege.

Just imagine what a nation we could build.

Just imagine what happiness there would be.

Just imagine, coz that's all you'll do.

You'll bow your heads and thank them for your slavery.

You'll dream of the public transport you could have had.

You'll dream of the education system, and the creativity in science, engineering and arts that comes from inspired students, young and old.

You'll dream of the clean, pleasant life-saving hospitals, not grubby buildings where treatment is denied.

It should happen, but X Factor's on.


They've done it now
They've gone too far
They've exposed themselves
as the Nazis they are.


Oik announced severe austerity yesterday to bring Britain back from the brink of bankruptcy and to keep our credit rating.

But what if we went bankrupt?

What would be wrong with that?

The first question we could ask is, why do we need a credit rating? We currently need a credit rating because we borrow money (but we are not allowed to know from whom we borrow). We currently need to borrow money because tax revenue is insufficient to cover expenses.

So we could ask, why do we not trace all tax that should be paid and is currently being avoided, take all that back, with interest and a charge for tracing, and possibly bang some tax avoiders in jail as examples.

But if we are not going to chase tax dodgers then how could we make up the difference between tax revenue and expenses without borrowing?


It really is that simple.

Banks create money out of nothing so, as Thomas Edison asked, why can't and don't we?

If we created our own money then we would not need a credit rating to borrow money, possibly from institutions who create the money we borrow out of nothing! And we wouldn't have to pay interest too!!

It really is a crazy and corrupt world.


Surely we can't create our own money.

Surely it is too hard, too difficult, beyond our ken.


It's so, so easy.

So how can we create our own money?

We do as the banks do now; simply type some numbers into a spreadsheet!

It really is that simple.

That's how the banks were able to gamble with so much money by inflating a credit bubble, because not only does the money not exist physically, it's only numbers stored electronically so what would the banks lose anyway, but the process to create that money is so straightforward.

So how can the banks just create money out of nothing by typing a few numbers into a spreadsheet when we, as a nation, cannot and do not?

Ask the spineless, grovelling, corrupt MPs in London.

Ask the spineless, grovelling, corrupt MPs in London who sent our boys and girls unprotected into Iraq and Afghanistan based on a pack of lies after an engineered terror attack on 9/11.

Ask the spineless, grovelling, corrupt MPs in London who charged the taxpayer for a duck moat, pornography and chocolate bars for lunch.

Ask the spineless, grovelling, corrupt MPs in London who cheered the loss of a half million public sector jobs and slashes in pensions while they're alright, Jack.

Ask the spineless, grovelling, corrupt MPs in London who have allowed the banks to continue to create our money and continue their gambling after proving themselves so unworthy of that power.

See how easy it is to create money. Create a spreadsheet, in MS Excel for example, called Accounts. Entitle Column A "Name", and enter your name. Entitle Column B "Account Number" and enter a number. Entitle Column C "Balance" and enter 1,000,000. Congratulations! You've just made yourself a millionaire!

It really is that simple.

You may be reading this now in an office or at home lit by light bulbs. Where would we be without light bulbs? Living in the dark. The light bulb is a genius invention. But who was the genius who created the light bulb? Thomas Edison. What does Edison say about money and who should create it?

"If the Nation can issue a dollar bond it can issue a dollar bill. The element that makes the bond good makes the bill good also. The difference between the bond and the bill is that the bond lets the money broker collect twice the amount of the bond and an additional 20%. Whereas the currency, the honest sort provided by the Constitution pays nobody but those who contribute in some useful way. It is absurd to say our Country can issue bonds and cannot issue currency. Both are promises to pay, but one fattens the usurer and the other helps the People."

We can and MUST create our own money and free ourselves from the parasitic banks and the Nazi bankers.

Watch Money as Debt at


It's Children in Need (yes, they are still in need) Day next month. The inglorious BBC is beginning to advertise its coverage.

But why are children still in need, after all the fundraising and pranks and sketches and fancy dress and buckets full of silver and copper coins?

We've had QE1 and are discussing QE2, in which hundreds of billions of pounds were very quickly created out of nothing to save the corrupt, fraudulent and bankrupt banking system. So why not for the children in need?

Why? Because every day is Bankers in Need Day.

Oik yesterday announced an expected 490,000 job cuts in the public sector alone. About the same will occur in the private sector as a consequence. Just how many more children, due to the cuts, will be kept in and even plunged further into poverty is yet to be seen.

But why are the cuts being announced? Because the bankers needed all the money we could give them. Their free market Gods had deserted them, so they briefly worshipped at the altar of the common people, were bailed out, but then quickly paid themselves billions and shipped it off shore.

So enjoy Children in Need. Laugh at the funny sketches, the funny jokes, the funny costumes. You did it last year, and the year before, and the year before that...

But remember that every day is Bankers in Need Day, and you are paying for that every day without any humour in return.

Wednesday, October 20, 2010


Oik said this today in Parliament.
Fairness also means that across the entire deficit reduction plan, those with the broadest shoulders should bear the greatest burden. Those with the most should pay the most, including our banks.

Banks, that caused the crisis, will pay a levy that is expected to generate just £2 billion per year.

Yet the further cuts to welfare announced today (£11 billion was announced earlier this year) are expected to save £7 billion per year!

There is something deeply deeply unjust and ugly about this.

The banks have been given the God-like power to create money out of nothing, for the economy, for mortgages, for loans to SMEs, etc. They abused that power and mugged the British taxpayer. We bailed them out. They are not lending to SMEs so how is the private sector expected to pick up the half million jobs announced today? They are not lending to home owners, so where are people expected to live when they can't get a mortgage, housing benefit is being slashed and house building is being slashed?

And the banks have still not signed up to the tax avoidance agreement. Yet Oik announced nearly £1 billion to identify tax avoiders and recoup just £7 billion when it is estimated that tax avoidance amounts to over £120 billion per year!

Yet they will get charged just £2 billion per year!

The banks should be squeezed until their pips squeak.

If they go abroad then great!

Who do we borrow from anyway? You can ask the UK Debt Management Office, but you can't find out. That information is secret...BY LAW! WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO KNOW WHO WE ARE BORROWING FROM! But we can all make an educated guess...

The banks caused the crisis. We don't need them. We can create our own money, thank you very much!

We can create our own money for massive infrastructure and house building projects.

We can create our own money for scientific research (but not for technology that can be used to enslave such as microchip implants).

We can create our own money to equip our current and new hospitals with more technology and staff.

We can create our own money to pay for more schools and teachers.

We don't need to borrow anything from anybody.

With the power to create money in our hands we would have the broadest shoulders and could rebuild broken Britain into something we can be proud of.


On the UK MSN website the headline article is entitled "Why we need spending cuts".

We don't need spending cuts.

We need to catch the tax dodgers and evaders.

But we also need bankers in jail.

Not one banker has been prosecuted for causing this global crisis.

We need bankers in jail or our law has failed.

Let's review The Fraud Act 2006 because the savage cuts to be announced today are a result of violations of ALL THREE sections 2,3 and 4 of that act. Section 3(b)(ii) is particularly applicable today as approximately 500,000 people will lose their public sector jobs in the very near term, with more to lose their jobs in the private sector as an effect of spending cuts.


(1)A person is guilty of fraud if he is in breach of any of the sections listed in subsection (2) (which provide for different ways of committing the offence).

(2)The sections are—

(a)section 2 (fraud by false representation),

(b)section 3 (fraud by failing to disclose information), and

(c)section 4 (fraud by abuse of position).

(3)A person who is guilty of fraud is liable—

(a)on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum (or to both);

(b)on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years or to a fine (or to both).

(4)Subsection (3)(a) applies in relation to Northern Ireland as if the reference to 12 months were a reference to 6 months.

2 Fraud by false representation

(1)A person is in breach of this section if he—

(a)dishonestly makes a false representation, and

(b)intends, by making the representation—

(i)to make a gain for himself or another, or

(ii)to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

(2)A representation is false if—

(a)it is untrue or misleading, and

(b)the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading.

(3)“Representation” means any representation as to fact or law, including a representation as to the state of mind of—

(a)the person making the representation, or

(b)any other person.

(4)A representation may be express or implied.

(5)For the purposes of this section a representation may be regarded as made if it (or anything implying it) is submitted in any form to any system or device designed to receive, convey or respond to communications (with or without human intervention).

3 Fraud by failing to disclose information

A person is in breach of this section if he—

(a)dishonestly fails to disclose to another person information which he is under a legal duty to disclose, and

(b)intends, by failing to disclose the information—

(i)to make a gain for himself or another, or

(ii)to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

4 Fraud by abuse of position

(1)A person is in breach of this section if he—

(a)occupies a position in which he is expected to safeguard, or not to act against, the financial interests of another person,

(b)dishonestly abuses that position, and

(c)intends, by means of the abuse of that position—

(i)to make a gain for himself or another, or

(ii)to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

(2)A person may be regarded as having abused his position even though his conduct consisted of an omission rather than an act.

Tuesday, October 19, 2010


There is a small event occuring tomorrow in the Parliament of The United Kingdom called the Comprehensive Spending Review. Massive cuts in public spending will be announced.

There was an hors d'oeuvres in June this year, and also today in which Prime Minister David "Dave" Cameron announced how the public spending axe is being used to chop defence. We've just spent nearly £4 billion on Nimrod, but that's being scrapped, i.e. nearly £4 billion wasted. Harriers are being scrapped in favour of Tornadoes because Tornadoes are more suitable for Afghanistan, which clearly indicates that Great Britain at least is staying in Afghanistan for the long haul (and for the opium and heroin). At least we are not renewing Trident for five years at least, but perhaps that we are to build a few new aircraft carriers that will not carry aircraft indicates that there is to be more collaborative military adventures across the globe. To me Cameron implied that the MoD will be one of the "winners", i.e. not cut as harsh as other departments.

But tomorrow is going to be the real bloodbath. It has been cleverly pre-leaked that almost 500,000 public sector jobs will be axed. It has been leaked that spending on the Department of Justice will be savagely cut (and I am extremely interested in exactly how these cuts will be implemented in the DoJ precisely because Big Bilderberg Ken is in charge).

This is the announcement that I expected in June, which although harsh was not devastating.

Tomorrow will be savage.

Tomorrow Bilderberg George "oik" Osborne will announce savage cuts to drag us closer to the New World Order of us v them, the poor masses v the super rich elite, the expendable v the mass murderers.

Or so they think.

Such savage cuts will only expose the complete and indubitable injustice of the massive fraud, the monetary system, the banks, and the New World Order.

So, read my lips; No New World Order.

Monday, October 18, 2010


Why since July this year has the New World Order begun to openly call for
1. eugenics
2. mass genocide
3. world government

Was it Willy Claes' confirmation that Bilderberg, as was suspected, does indeed set the global agenda?

Or was there another factor, perhaps more important, or in addition to Claes' confirmation?


Why the rush?

Why the panic?

Why the amateurish ineffective propaganda?

Why the smell of the brown stuff from their panties?



I've just finished reading Fool's Gold by Gillian Tett.

If you want a reasonably accurate story of how the current financial crisis evolved, with dates and names and definitions, then this is the book for you.

But, and it is a big but, I am disappointed.

It clearly states in the epilogue that J P Morgan was the winner, and because of its 'victory' over the derivatives beast, which had consumed some of J P Morgan's competitors leading to J P Morgan becoming "the biggest bank in the world in terms of market capitalization", J P Morgan won several banking awards at a dinner for investment banks in London in January 2009.

But several astronomically big questions remain unanswered.

The first is why is it that J P Morgan, who created the derivatives in the first place and still rules the derivatives market, came out of the crisis as the winner?

A second is why did Hank Paulson allow Lehman Brothers to go under, which really started the crisis?

A third is why was J P Morgan effectively simply given Bear Stearns and Washington Mutual?

A fourth is why was there so much regulation of the ordinary people, such as through the Patriot Act in the USA (which was not even read by Capitol Hill) and in the UK dustbins were microchipped and schoolchildren followed to discover where they lived so that they attended the school they should be, while the plethora of derivatives and unpayable mortgages were hardly regulated at all?

A fifth is why, when the bankers believed in free markets, were they quickly persuaded to accept hundreds of billions in bailouts from the taxpayer which were then used to buy up failing competitors and pay billions in undeserved bonuses?

But a sixth question, and this is the most disappointing, is why did Tett not address the Bilderberg factor? She writes for the Financial Times, yet she could have easily asked Gideon Rachman and Martin Wolf for advice on what was said at Bilderberg about the crisis. The key players, Geithner, Paulson and Bernanke and the banks who were the major beneficiaries of the crisis are Bilderberg.

Tett's account of the evolution of the crisis pushes the "shit happens" theory of history.

But we know that shit does not just happen.

World War 1 did not just happen.

The crash of 1929 did not just happen.

World War 2 did not just happen.

Shit does not just happen, particularly when J P Morgan and its ilk come out as winners and the ordinary people are the losers, suffering severe austerity such that the likes of Bill Gates can openly call for killing little old granny to pay for the bank bailouts.


It looks like Osama bin Laden has moved yet again. The last I heard he was in Iran, just when Bilderberg had given the green light for an attack on Iran. But apparently he is now back in Pakistan, which just happens to be the country where alleged plots to blow up Europe are currently being planned, and NATO and CIA drones are blowing up villages and killing civilians.

The following information is provided by yet again an unnamed official.


Kabul, Afghanistan (CNN) -- Osama bin Laden and his deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri are believed to be hiding close to each other in houses in northwest Pakistan, but are not together, a senior NATO official said.

"Nobody in al Qaeda is living in a cave," said the official, who declined to be named because of the sensitivity of the intelligence matters involved.

Rather, al Qaeda's top leadership is believed to be living in relative comfort, protected by locals and some members of the Pakistani intelligence services, the official said.

Thursday, October 14, 2010


Just in case you
1. care about the lives of yourselves, children and grandchildren,
2. wish to enjoy so much more freedom and not live under a tyranny,
3. do not know about the Infowars moneybomb to launch several new fronts in the infowar for the above aims

then watch Alex Jones and guests live at

and donate to significantly improve Jones' infowars media apparatus to help freedom through

You and I and our friends and families are under chemical, biological, radiological and financial attack.

The prize is control of this planet; either they and their genocidal tyrannical satanism wins, or we win and implement much much more freedom and true justice.



Thursday, October 07, 2010


The mysterious Abdul Jabbar was the alleged Pakistani alleged man of alleged British origin who was allegedly killed in a strike by unmanned CIA drones on an alleged terrorist camp in North Waziristan. The alleged Jabbar was allegedly to lead the alleged terrorist organisation The Alleged Islamic Army of Great Britain in alleged Mumbai-style terrorist attacks against alleged targets in Europe.

So who was this mysterious alleged Abdul Jabbar?

"I have no knowledge of any such militant. No one with this name existed and I will say no one of British origin died in recent drone attack," a senior security official at Islamabad told AFP.

“We have no report of anyone with the name of Abdul Jabbar,”

[source : Pakistan rubbishes report on death of British militant, The Dawn 07/10/2010]

This denial that Jabbar existed by Pakistani intelligence comes on the same day that senior Pakistani diplomats and European intelligence officials comes straight out with accusations that Soetoro Obama is hyping the alleged terrorist attack for political reasons, including the coming elections and to support drone attacks inside Pakistan that are killing Pakistan civilians and setting "the country on fire"!

The non-specific US warning, which despite its vagueness led Britain, France and other countries to raise their overseas terror alert levels, was an attempt to justify a recent escalation in US drone and helicopter attacks inside Pakistan that have "set the country on fire", said Wajid Shamsul Hasan, the high commissioner to Britain.

Hasan, a veteran diplomat who is close to Pakistan's president, suggested the Obama administration was playing politics with the terror threat before next month's mid-term congressional elections, in which the Republicans are expected to make big gains.

[source : Barack Obama accused of exaggerating terror threat for political gain, The Guardian 07/10/2010]

Looks to me like someone is telling pork pies and that Pakistan ain't happy it.

ps All mainstream media in the UK, BBC included, reported on Jabbar and the Islamic Army of Great Britain. Will they now retract those reports?

pps But "they" did Pearl Harbour, Oklahoma City and 9/11 so we shouldn't be surprised if something similar does indeed happen soon.

Monday, October 04, 2010


This report from The New Economics Foundation is extremely interesting, and at times funny.

Where Did Our Money Go?

For example, it addresses the question of why government should not create money.

Have they [the banks] earned their privilege of credit creation and allocation?

There is a reason why commercial banks enjoy this enormously profitable privilege. The belief has been that were the government to create all the money in the economy, it would lead to three negative consequences:
1. it would do a very bad job of choosing economically useful projects to spend the money on;
2. it would be unable to resist the temptation to create too much money, leading to inflation or even hyper-inflation; and
3. the end result would be a financial crisis.

Instead it has been an article of faith that governments must not create money, that the independent central bank should try to control inflation only through the indirect tools of interest rates and money market operations, and that clever and professional private bankers should use their skills to assess the quality of each application for credit and ensure that it is an economically viable loan.

Unfortunately the events of 2008 have revealed that the privatised system of money creation has led to three negative consequences as outlined in this report:
1. the banks did a poor job of choosing economically useful projects to lend the money to;
2. they were unable to resist the temptation to create too much money, leading to asset price inflation (particularly in property); and
3. the end result was a financial crisis.

The response from the banks as to where OUR money went shows their complete contempt for the British taxpayers who bailed them out. In general when asked the question, Where did our money go?, the reply from the banks was silence or an answer to a different unasked question, much like a consumate on-the-take politician would reply.

The report does not propose that government should create money, but it does at least raise the question.
In a quite fundamental way, the analysis and conclusions of this report suggest it is time to review the current monetary system that puts the power of credit creation almost entirely in the hands of commercial banks – banks that have not only failed to look after the interests of society and the environment, but cannot even manage to look after the interests of their own shareholders.

Sunday, October 03, 2010


This last week we've been told that there is a plan being hatched in Pakistan to blow up Europe in a series of coordinated Mumbai-style attacks on major cities in Europe, and that this was the reason for the escalation in missile attacks from CIA unmanned drones inside Pakistan, which have also been killing civilians, including women, children and some in their old age.

When the first leak occured we were told that the authorities were really pissed off because now they could not make any arrests, while at the same time warning us that the plotters were still out there.

We were told that the alleged perps had been located and were being listened to, that their phone calls from North Waziristan to Europe were being intercepted, and an alleged British citizen who was allegedly plotting the attacks called Abdul Jabbar had been killed.

There were conflicting reports about just how advanced the plan was, ranging from just a concept to almost imminent. However, the threat level was not increased.

And now the USA and the UK have warned citizens travelling to Europe of an increased threat of terrorism, particularly in France and Germany.

So what is going on?

Have the alleged perps been located and their communications intercepted? If so then why not arrest those in Europe right now, this very second, instead of waiting for the alleged attacks to occur?

How will it look if such attacks do occur?

Cui bono?


My stomach is still churning from seeing No Pressure, the fearmongering incitement to murder advert for 10:10.

Richard Curtis CBE should really hang his head in shame. He has done some really great work. I really enjoyed Blackadder, particularly Blackadder Goes Forth, and I was very moved by the last episode of that series in which our beloved characters go "over the top" to certain death. Curtis has also been instrumental in some highly respected charity organisations, particularly Comic Relief and Make Poverty History.

So the question is, how can a man with such obvious good intentions find it appropriate to blow up school kids if they don't agree with the bogus theory of man made global warming? Something must have really got into his head and twisted it real bad.

This is the genius of using the environment as a weapon against us. We know that without an environment we are screwed.

Without water we will die.

Without food we will die.

Both come from our environment, so protecting it is as natural as breathing.

Is it naivety? Comic Relief makes about £20 million every year. To the individual £20 million is a lot. But in the great scheme of things it is just a drop in the ocean of what is really needed. All it does is act as a life support, maybe not even that. All the time and effort invested into Comic Relief may well be better spent educating people on the monetary system and how it has been used and abused against them for the benefit of a handful of Satanist families who are well behind in their plans for overt world government. But I doubt the BBC would devote a single second to such an expose...

When The Club of Rome decided to use the environment as a weapon against us to create world government and implement mass genocide they really knew what they were doing.

Just look at well-intentioned Curtis' head. They've really fcukt that up!

We must inform Curtis of where he is, how he has been led astray, and where he should be, and that is making adverts exposing the Bohemian Grove Moloch monstrosity and all it stands for, and blowing that up instead of school kids.

ps I wonder if he will now be stripped of his CBE?

Saturday, October 02, 2010


Franny Armstrong founded 10:10, the makers of the No Pressure advert for the campaign to reduce carbon emissions.

Armstrong directed McLibel, a documentary about the prosecution of a postman and a gardener by McDonalds for libel. The synopsis for the film states
McLibel is not just about hamburgers. It is about the importance of freedom of speech now that multinational corporations are more powerful than countries.

Yet what do we see in No Pressure? Schoolchildren blown up for simply having an opposing view to the school teacher!

The multinational corporations that she refers to are indeed more powerful than countries. And if she took a closer look she would find that some of her partners in her quest for green tyranny are very closely linked to those same multinational corporations, some of whom have a very bloody history.

For example, take 2degrees, listed on the 10:10 website as a partner. A partner of 2degrees is IBM, who processed the Jews for the Nazis on their IBM Hollerith machines.

But then again perhaps the tyranny as proposed in No Pressure suggests that IBM and 10:10 could form a congenial relationship, with 10:10 demanding the eradication of climate sceptics and their intolerable free speech while IBM implements the technology to carry out that eradication.

But the classic is The Club of Rome. How Armstrong has never heard of them and realised how she and the whole green movement are being used to implement world government and mass genocide is beyond me.


They also blow up David Ginola and Gillian Anderson.

Why? Because they portray climate sceptics who aren't active in reducing their carbon footprints.

This infomercial called No Pressure produced by 10:10 really does expose the true death cult behind the green movement.

They don't argue rationally. If you don't believe them they just blow you away!

I am surprised they didn't torture a pregnant climate sceptic before ripping out her baby and feasting on its flesh, all because she didn't believe in manmade global warming.

They created The Club of Rome to use the environment in their lust for world government.

They first terrorised us with global cooling.

They then changed their minds and used global warming to scare us.

Now they've changed it back to global cooling again, as discussed at Bilderberg this year!

But one thing that has remained constant is their bloodlust for world government and megadeath, as spelled out in their Georgia Guidestones and UN documents. They engineered and financed two world wars to get the world government apparatus of the UN and IMF etc. established, and are now in full panic mode because they are way behind in their plans. And as they panic they reveal their true disdain for humanity, including your children. We are sent into engineered wars to fight and die for them, and if we question or don't believe what we're told then tough ; BANG!

They pretend to love the environment but are actually polluting it with mercury, flouride, aluminium, bisphenol-A and a whole laboratory of poisons to dumb you down and slow kill you!

I wouldn't blow up anyone's kids, teachers, footballers etc.

But I wouldn't shed a tear if that Moloch monstrosity at Bohemian Grove was turned into rubble.

Friday, October 01, 2010


And once again I was there, and I knew it was a classic. I had to stop and soak it all in.

see for link to 45 minutes of classics.

Just been going through some weird couple of months and needed a break before the next level.


Funkytown, nasty
(Hey, listen to the man)
Yeah, I'm the Godfather (baby)

People, people
We got to get over
Before we go under
People, people
We got to get over
Before we go under

Hey, country
Didn't say what you meant
Just changed
Brand new funky President

Stock market going up
Jobs going down
And ain't no funking
Jobs to be found

Taxes keep going up
I changed from a glass
Now I drink out of a paper cup
It's getting bad

People, people
We got to get over
Before we go under

Listen to me
Let's get together and raise
Let's get together
And get some land

Raise our food like the man
Save our money like the Mob
Put up a fight down on the job

Tell em, Godfather

Turn up your funk motor
Get down and praise the Lord
Get sexy, sexy
Get funky and dance

Love me, baby, love me nice
Don't make it once
Can you make it twice
I like it

People, people
We got to get over
Before we go under
People, people
Well, well, well
Before we go under

Turn on your funk motor
I know it's tough
Turn on your funk motor
Until you get enough

Hey, give yourself a
Chance to come through
Tell yourself, I can
Do what you can do

Hey, listen to the man
I'm the Godfather
Payback, cold-blooded

People, people

People, people
Hey, people, people
Don't you see what's going on

People, people
We got to get together
Get on the good foot
Change it, yeah

Got to get together
And get some land
Raise our food just like the man
Hey, hey, hey, hey, hey

I got to say it again
We got to get together
And buy some land
Raise our food just like the man
Save our money, do like the Mob
Put up your fight right on the job

We gotta get over
Before we go under
Time's getting short, Lord

Country, do you know
Just what I meant
We just changed, we got
A brand new funky President

I need to be the Mayor
So I could change
Some things around here
I need to be the Governer
I need to be the Governer


Here is a much calmer and reflective analysis of the blitz in the Mockingbird media on the alleged plot to blow up Europe with Mumbai-style attacks.
But the facts available aren't nearly as sensational as the reports suggest. The uncovered plot, which was based in Pakistan, was apparently so early in the planning stages, it might better be terms a "concept" or "project."

The author does not address the reason or reasons as to why the alleged plot should be hyped up so much and why now.

I still think there is more to this "leak" of the alleged terrorist plot and its alleged "foiling" by CIA drone attacks which kill women, children and old-aged civilians. Reasons include,
1. to hype up the terror threat before the elections later this year,
2. to continue support for such drone attacks that obviously kill civilians to fuel the jihad so that the military remains there to continue the opium trade

There may be other reasons, but as with any Mockingbird media blitz ;
Don't, don't, don't,
don't believe the hype!
Don't, don't,
don't believe the hype!


Has the European Terror Threat Been Overhyped?

By BRUCE CRUMLEY / PARIS Bruce Crumley / Paris – Thu Sep 30, 11:45 am ET

Okay, let's all calm down, take a deep breathe and try this again.

For two days straight this week, media outlets blared the alarming news that U.S. security forces uncovered al-Qaeda plans to stage a trio of terror attacks in European cities - some involving "Mumbai-style shooting sprees" modeled on the horrific three-day, multi-target siege in 2008 that killed 166 people. To add to the drama, reports of the plot suggested it was the reason for the current heightened terrorism concerns in France, which has experienced a spate of bomb alerts this month like the one that caused the Eiffel Tower to be evacuated Tuesday for the second time in as many weeks. (See TIME's cover on the London terror attacks.)

But the facts available aren't nearly as sensational as the reports suggest. The uncovered plot, which was based in Pakistan, was apparently so early in the planning stages, it might better be terms a "concept" or "project." Nor does it have any link to the French terror threat, with its roots in North Africa. What's more, the primary lesson in the news was all but ignored: that in discovering a Pakistan-based plot planned for export to Western countries early on, intelligence agencies once again successfully disrupted terror preparations long before they could evolve to dangerously operative stages. It seems effective counter-terrorism - like trains running on time - just doesn't make for catchy headlines.

So what is the reality of the plot that U.S. security forces uncovered? Based on reports detailing information from intelligence sources - and comments by French counter-terror officials to TIME - the "three-nation" plot was revealed by Ahmed Sidiqi, a 36-year-old German national captured in July in Afghanistan after receiving combat and explosive training with jihadists allied with Taliban forces. Sidiqi has reportedly given U.S. interrogators information that he knew of a multiple attack plan in Europe - specifically France, Germany and Britain - that al-Qaeda's Pakistan-based Haqqani network had decided to mount. At least one of those attacks was to involve a small group of well-armed militants laying siege to a "soft" public target, similar to the Mumbai attacks, which hit hotels, a hospital and a railway station, among other locations. Operatives were either to be dispatched to Europe for the strike or selected from jihadist loyalists already living there. (See pictures of terror in the U.K.)

Scary and serious as that is, the plan doesn't seem to have gotten much further than intention, security officials say. Little if any concrete steps appear to have been made toward putting it in motion. Given that, in an attempt to prevent the plot from moving ahead, U.S. forces have made it a priority to disrupt - or better yet, kill - the Haqqani leaders behind it. This, authorities say, is one reason why the U.S. has conducted an unprecedented (and, in Pakistan, controversial) number of drone strikes in the tribal areas of Pakistan that al-Qaeda networks like Haqqani use as headquarters. It's uncertain whether the U.S. operation has killed the chief plotters or would-be operatives, but experts say the raids have almost certainly thrown the project into real disarray.

"This is another example of an activity we're all focused and working together on: watching that region, looking for signs there that plans of attack for here are taking shape, and moving to prevent that before they can advance too far," says one French security official, adding that European nations have a rising stake in that activity, given the growing numbers of young Muslims heading for Afghanistan to wage jihad there or back home. "There are more successes in that effort than the public hears about." (See pictures of Pakistan subcultures.)

The world heard about it this week - even if many accounts tended to make the Haqqani plot sound like a near-miss rather than nipped-in-the-bud. Meanwhile, the French official says the terror alerts in France were provoked by closer enemies. Though France continues to monitor plots coming out of Pakistan carefully, its most immediate concern is the North Africa-based group al-Qaeda in Islamic Maghreb, which has increased its threats against France in recent months, and on Sept. 15 kidnapped five French nationals. It is that menace that has led French authorities to warn of an increased terror risk - which, in turn, is the main reason for September's dozen or so false bomb alarms or out-right hoaxes in France. (Comment on this story.)

Security officials also note that independent experts and media accounts comparing the embryonic Haqqani plot with the Mumbai attacks are doubtlessly over-reaching. Unlike in Pakistan, where guns are rife, jihadists in Europe would have a hard time procuring large stocks of weapons for use in a siege. They'd also face greater challenges transporting them to targets in bustling European cities than the boat-borne Mumbai assailants did sneaking in from Pakistan.

Authorities also point out that this isn't the first time a multi-target plot has been thwarted. In July, Norwegian police arrested three extremists on the evidence that they were preparing bomb attacks - one as part of a scheme ordered up by a central al-Qaeda planner in Pakistan that also included strikes on a Manchester, England, shopping center and the New York City subway. When police progressively busted that trio of attacks, they apprehended operatives and, in two cases, bombing materials. Curiously, that story caused far less consternation in the media than this week's news that the nascent Haqqani plot had been identified, and apparently dealt with.