I used to be a communist, but then I also used to believe in Santa Claus…
Actually, only half of that statement is true. And I am not the one that said it. It was John Reid, a UK minister of parliament, and the Home Secretary. It was John Reid that lept before the microphones to announce the biggest terror bust since…well…ever. John Reid, a post-Stalin communist. Marvelous. Ann Coulter must be fanning herself. It only adds to his glory that he once spent three days on Lake Geneva as the guest of Serbian war criminal, Radovan Karadžić. He considers himself a Bevanist. Anti-fascist, my ass.
It’s no wonder that former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, is skeptical of the London Plane Bombing Scare.
I have been reading very carefully through all the Sunday newspapers to try and analyse the truth from all the scores of pages claiming to detail the so-called bomb plot. Unlike the great herd of so-called security experts doing the media analysis, I have the advantage of having had the very highest security clearances myself, having done a huge amount of professional intelligence analysis, and having been inside the spin machine.
So this, I believe, is the true story.
None of the alleged terrorists had made a bomb. None had bought a plane ticket. Many did not even have passports, which given the efficiency of the UK Passport Agency would mean they couldn’t be a plane bomber for quite some time.
In the absence of bombs and airline tickets, and in many cases passports, it could be pretty difficult to convince a jury beyond reasonable doubt that individuals intended to go through with suicide bombings, whatever rash stuff they may have bragged in internet chat rooms.
What is more, many of those arrested had been under surveillance for over a year – like thousands of other British Muslims. And not just Muslims. Like me. Nothing from that surveillance had indicated the need for early arrests.
Then an interrogation in Pakistan revealed the details of this amazing plot to blow up multiple planes – which, rather extraordinarily, had not turned up in a year of surveillance. Of course, the interrogators of the Pakistani dictator have their ways of making people sing like canaries. As I witnessed in Uzbekistan, you can get the most extraordinary information this way. Trouble is it always tends to give the interrogators all they might want, and more, in a desperate effort to stop or avert torture. What it doesn’t give is the truth.
The gentleman being “interrogated” had fled the UK after being wanted for questioning over the murder of his uncle some years ago. That might be felt to cast some doubt on his reliability. It might also be felt that factors other than political ones might be at play within these relationships. Much is also being made of large transfers of money outside the formal economy. Not in fact too unusual in the British Muslim community, but if this activity is criminal, there are many possibilities that have nothing to do with terrorism.
We then have the extraordinary question of Bush and Blair discussing the possible arrests over the weekend. Why? I think the answer to that is plain. Both in desperate domestic political trouble, they longed for “Another 9/11”. The intelligence from Pakistan, however dodgy, gave them a new 9/11 they could sell to the media. The media has bought, wholesale, all the rubbish they have been shovelled.
We then have the appalling political propaganda of John Reid, Home Secretary, making a speech warning us all of the dreadful evil threatening us and complaining that “Some people don’t get” the need to abandon all our traditional liberties. He then went on, according to his own propaganda machine, to stay up all night and minutely direct the arrests. There could be no clearer evidence that our Police are now just a political tool. Like all the best nasty regimes, the knock on the door came in the middle of the night, at 2.30am. Those arrested included a mother with a six week old baby.
For those who don’t know, it is worth introducing Reid. A hardened Stalinist with a long term reputation for personal violence, at Stirling Univeristy he was the Communist Party’s “Enforcer”, (in days when the Communist Party ran Stirling University Students’ Union, which it should not be forgotten was a business with a very substantial cash turnover). Reid was sent to beat up those who deviated from the Party line.
We will now never know if any of those arrested would have gone on to make a bomb or buy a plane ticket. Most of them do not fit the “Loner” profile you would expect – a tiny percentage of suicide bombers have happy marriages and young children. As they were all under surveillance, and certainly would have been on airport watch lists, there could have been little danger in letting them proceed closer to maturity – that is certainly what we would have done with the IRA.
In all of this, the one thing of which I am certain is that the timing is deeply political. This is more propaganda than plot. Of the over one thousand British Muslims arrested under anti-terrorist legislation, only twelve per cent are ever charged with anything. That is simply harrassment of Muslims on an appalling scale. Of those charged, 80% are acquitted. Most of the very few – just over two per cent of arrests – who are convicted, are not convicted of anything to do terrorism, but of some minor offence the Police happened upon while trawling through the wreck of the lives they had shattered.
Be sceptical. Be very, very sceptical.
Bush has cried wolf many too many times. Neither the Brits nor the Americans trust their government any longer. Even the co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission (a gloss job if there ever was one) have just released a book accusing the Pentagon of flagrantly obstructing their investigation.
Be skeptical? Don’t worry. I am beyond skeptical. My default position is now ‘bullshit’. And it is far past time that the media started using that standard too. Our government lies. They tell BIG lies. They tell small lies. They tell lies even when the truth would be more advantageous. Condi Rice wrote a whole column in the Washington Post yesterday in which not one complete sentence was true.
Come January, we need to impeach the Vice-President. And then we need to impeach the President. And then we need a unity government to hold us together while we unravel the crimes that have been done in our name.
to this so called terror group and only the gullible or those who had never read a thriller would believe this plot.
.
The famous Goebbels‘ quote, “A lie repeated a thousand times becomes a truth.”
… the truth has become totally irrelevant in the present state of mass-media culture.
In a report prepared during the war by the United States Office of Strategic Services (OSS) in describing Hitler’s psychological profile:
His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it. OSS report page 51.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
▼ ▼ ▼ MY DIARY
Gosh Boo, I appreciate you spelling Karadzic’s name right but he isn’t a war criminal, just accused of being one! Not that this means he’s a saint or anything of the sort but there’s plenty of other muck to hang on Reid than just lunching with Radovan 😉 it would be a lot more scandalous if he had lunched with that snake Alija Izetbegovic… ugh dont get me started.
As for Murray, he’s solid gold and so is his analysis. Right on.
Pax
Bullshit, as Professor Frankfurter noted and illustrated by example, is the art form of our age.
What I don’t get is why so many find it so tasty.
Bullshit, as Professor Frankfurter noted and illustrated by example, is the art form of our age.
How, exactly, did “Professor Frankfurter” illustrate this by example?
I thank you for the response, Indianadem, but I’m well aware of Frankfurt’s essay-cum-book.
I was asking about citizen k’s claim that Frankfurt “illustrated by example” that bullshit is the art form of our age.
That looks like an accusation that Frankfurt’s piece on bullshit is itself bullshit. (Illustrating by example is exemplifying; illustrating with examples, a less tendentious way of describing what Frankfurt does, is something else.) What I was asking for was an explanation/justification of this charge.
Have you read the book? I liked it, but it was bullshit.
Yes, I’ve read it. And I know that you think it’s bullshit. My initial comment was probing as to whether you were willing to offer any grounds for that judgement.
Because, you see, it’s very easy to say of this or that piece, “It’s bullshit.” All too easy, you see; it smacks of the carelessness, the laziness, the indifference to the truth that Frankfurt, rightly or wrongly, associates with bullshit.
Saying that Frankfurt’s account is bullshit is quite different from saying that it’s inconsistent, overly broad, overly narrow, formally correct but unilluminating, etc. These could be specific criticisms, honest criticisms, criticisms that can be defended by reference to specific features of the text and that could, by the same token, be proven wrong. Unlike the smug, sloppy, “It’s bullshit”.
So, since you seem not to have understood my original question, k, let me raise it again in blunt terms: What are your grounds for saying that Frankfurt’s piece is bullshit? And please, before you do, explain to me what it is for something to be bullshit. And obviously, you need to do a better job than Frankfurt.
Perhaps you could offer some specific criticisms?
Perhaps you could offer some grounds for those criticisms?
Or would you rather just toss off again, “bullshit,” thinking yourself clever by having done that, while exemplifying the very thing that Frankfurt — or, according to you, “Frankfurter” (talk about a concern for getting things right!) — rightly inveighed against?
I’m waiting and hoping that my pessimistic expectations are wrong.
(For what it’s worth, I certainly don’t think that Frankfurt’s essay/book is unflawed. I would not, on that account, describe it as a piece of “bullshit.”)
I apologize for the abrasiveness toward the end of the post above. Chalk it up to my own obviously diminishing patience with certain kinds of bullshit.
I would like answers to my questions, though. What exactly are your criticisms, and what are their grounds?
“Come January, we need to impeach the Vice-President. And then we need to impeach the President. And then we need a unity government to hold us together while we unravel the crimes that have been done in our name.”
If only this would happen!!!
But until we TOTALLY dismantle the propaganda machine…it will not.
AG
If only it were just a machine.
More like a cancer, I think.
Think “metastasis”.
The right metaphor might be a clue to the solution; who knows? Just a thought.
That’s all I have to offer here.
out of my mouth! Splendid!
we should realize that in doing so we may endanger yourself. This is happening to Christopher Bollyn. It just shows us that where there is smoke there is fire.
and
I was pleased to see Murray’s statement, but it got no play on television. I’ve been saying from the beginning that the entire “British terrorism plot” was a hoax, not just the timing, but everything.
But since it’s on TV, and propounded by the Brits, everything assumes it must be true. Maddening.