Wednesday, May 31, 2006

World Cup - A fake Terror Attack Target?

I haven't been too active on the blog front lately, but the following article caught my eye. Very interesting speculation about the possibility of a false flag terror attack at the World Cup:

About a week ago, I started to wonder why those governments with most to gain from the "war on terror" - American, British and Israeli - had not been making a lot of noise (via their media lackeys) about the "very real possibility of a terrorist attack at the World Cup" which is scheduled to kick off in Germany on June 10th. After all, an international event attracting hundreds of thousands of people and a worldwide TV audience in the billions, must surely strike the war mongers as a perfect opportunity to ramp up the fear factor and further cement the 'reality' of worldwide Islamic terrorism in the minds of the planet's population.

Then I had a rather disturbing realisation:

Every previous terror attack, as opposed to high-profile warnings about terror attacks that did not materialise, occurred in a general absence of widespread public warnings about the potential for an attack. Consider 9/11, the Madrid bombings of 2004 and the London bombings of 2005. All of these attacks came 'out of the blue', at least as far as the public was concerned. Then contrast these attacks with the regular public hyping of 'possible' terrorist attack plans that have been shoved in our faces by the media over the past 5 years, none of which actually materialised. Of course, in the scenario that the real source of actual attacks is the very governments that claim to be fighting the war on terrorism, it is quite logical that they would not warn the public or admit to knowing of an actual attack in advance because they could not then reasonably claim to have been unable to prevent it.

So in essence, we can say that, when a lot of noise is being generated in the media about a potential terror attack, complete with warnings from American intelligence sources, it is quite probable that no terror attack will take place. However, that leaves us somewhat blind in attempting to determine when an actual false flag terror attack might take place. The best we can do is to look at events where an apparent act of "Islamic terrorism" would offer the war propagandists the best "bang for their buck"1 in the promotion of their claim that "Islamic terrorism" is real and a threat to the world, or, in the current global political climate, that "Iran is a threat to civilised nations". My point then is that the World Cup is just such an event, and it is the conspicuous lack of propaganda from government and the media about the potential for a "terror attack" at the world cup that gives us significant cause for serious concern.

While the policy adhered to in the lead up to a fake terror attack seems to be a relative blackout on any mention of the potential for such an attack, it seems that the same policy allows for low level murmurings in the fringe mainstream press. Such reports are usually left until a week or two before the attack and serve the purpose of setting up the designated fall guy. With this in mind consider the following report from last friday that appeared only in the Ynet News service out of Israel:
Israel warns of World Cup terror
May 26, 2006

Israel has warned European and American intelligence bodies of possible attempts by Hizbullah cells, led by Imad Mugniyah, to carry out terror attacks during the upcoming World Cup tournament in Germany, the Saudi Al-Watan newspaper reported on Friday.

According to the report, the terror plot is aimed at proving to the international community that Tehran is capable of retaliation if attacked.
Notice that Israel has not only identified the attackers - Iran - but has even gone so far as to inform European and American intelligence bodies of the specific reason why Iran is planning to carry out the attack - to warn the West that it is "capable of retaliation if attacked". How, we wonder, can Israel know so much about the Iranian governments intentions? How can Israel claim to know that Iran is determined to 'wage war on the infidels' when the Iranian government has repeatedly dismissed such claims and gone to great lengths to work out a peaceful solution to the impasse deliberately imposed by Washington and Tel Aviv? Does the Israeli government really not realise that it is a bit of a stretch to ask us to believe its claim that Iran is going to attack the World Cup, when such an attack would play directly into the hands of the Israeli war mongers who are chomping at the bit to find justification to attack Iran??

If we are to be reasonable and rational here, (and we like to be reasonable and rational as often as possible), we would have to say that, given that the Israeli government and lobby in the U.S. have been somewhat hysterical in their attempts to convince the world that Iran needs to be attacked, if an attack does occur at the World Cup, then the most obvious author of the attack will be Israel.

The Mossad has made something of an 'art' of such fake Islamic terror attacks, carrying them out with meticulous precision. Indeed, the Mossad's potential for such attacks was highlighted in a 68-page report by the [American] Army School of Advanced Military Studies (SAMS) which was drafted to analyse the daunting task facing any international peacekeeping force if Israel and the Palestinians ever reached a peace agreement backed by the United Nations. The report was part of an article in the September 10th, 2001 edition of the Washington Times entitled, “U.S. troops would enforce peace under Army study”, which detailed the findings of an elite U.S. Army study center plan.

The article tells us:
"[...] the School for Advanced Military Studies is both a training ground and a think tank for some of the Army’s brightest officers. Officials say the Army chief of staff, and sometimes the Joint Chiefs of Staff, ask SAMS to develop contingency plans for future military operations. During the 1991 Persian Gulf war, SAMS personnel helped plan the coalition ground attack that avoided a strike up the middle of Iraqi positions and instead executed a ‘left hook’ that routed the enemy in 100 hours.

The exercise was undertaken by 60 officers dubbed ‘Jedi Knights,’ as all second-year SAMS students are nicknamed. The SAMS paper attempts to predict events in the first year of a peace-enforcement operation, and sees possible dangers for U.S. troops from both sides. It calls Israel’s armed forces a ‘500-pound gorilla in Israel. Well armed and trained. Operates in both Gaza [and the West Bank]. Known to disregard international law to accomplish mission. Very unlikely to fire on American forces. Fratricide a concern especially in air space management.’

Of the Mossad, the Israeli intelligence service, the SAMS officers say: ‘Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target U.S. forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act.’”
Just for the record then, anyone with a problem about my suggestion that the Mossad can and does carry out attacks on nominally friendly targets in such a way that it looks like an "Arab terror" act, needs to take it up with the members of the elite U.S. Army School of Advanced Military Studies.

According to ex-Mossad agent Victor Ostrovsky, the Mossad, like other intelligence agencies, works out of their consulate office (embassy) in any given country. Different from other intelligence agencies however, the Mossad can rely on what are termed 'Sayanim', or members of the local Jewish community in the country. Due to this additional 'help', the Mossad can operate with a significantly reduced number of operatives when carrying out a mission. An article from the April 22 2004 edition of Scoop states:
Mossad insiders, now on the outside, say the Mossad has just 30 to 37 case officers called katsas operating at any one time. The Mossad is able to function on a low number of core katsas due to a loyal Jewish community outside Israel. The loyalists are networked via a system of sayanim, or volunteer Jewish helpers. Sayanim loyalists are usually Jewish, live outside of Israel, and are often recruited via Israeli relatives. There are reportedly thousands of sayanim around the world. Their role will be specific to their professions: A loyalist in the travel industry could help Mossad obtain documents. Sayanim offer practical support, are never put at risk, and are certainly not privy to classified information.

A sayan in the tenancy business would find accommodation, financiers, doctors, civil servants, care-givers employed caring for the severely disabled -- all have a part to play without knowing the complete or bigger picture, and will remain silent due to loyalty to the cause. Katsas in charge of active sayanim will visit once every three months involving both face-to-face meetings and numerous telephone conversations. “The system allows the Mossad to work with a skeleton staff. That's why, for example, a KGB station would employ about 100 people, while a comparable Mossad station would need only six or seven.”

In terms of what it would take to stage an attack at the World Cup, we can see that the job, while requiring meticulous planning, could in fact be quite easy for the Mossad. Regardless of the specifics of the attack, the Mossad would require Sayanim contacts within the extensive security apparatus surrounding the World Cup matches and teams taking part. They would also likely require confidants within the international football body FIFA, and even perhaps those involved in catering and advertising etc etc. Essentially, anyone with official and therefore free access to the numerous aspects of the World Cup infrastructure. With 105,000 members of the Jewish community living in Germany ( this estimate does not include the many Jews not affiliated with the country’s main Jewish organization, the Central Council of Jews), it is very possible that there will be a pool of 'sayanim' involved with the World Cup from which the Mossad can draw in order to plan and implement an "Arab terrorist" attack.

Please note that the 'Scoop' editor states that, while used to facilitate such attacks, the members of the Jewish community or 'sayanim' are certainly not privy to classified information, i.e., they are not aware that they are part of a false flag terror attack and the murder of innocent people. It is almost certain that they 'prepped' by the with some patriotic spiel about Israel and are lied to about how their 'help' is being used. If they are told anything it is that the operation is to thwart a suspected Arab terror attack, in which case they enthusiastically offer any help they can. Who wouldn't? The fact is that ordinary Jewish people are as deceived as anyone else by the propaganda over the 'reality' of Arab terrorism. The Mossad's motto is "by way of deception", clearly, this deception is not limited to non Jews but includes deceiving Jewish people also.

If an attack occurs at the World Cup and the blame is pinned on Iran, an attack on Iran by Israeli and American war planes, possibly carrying nuclear devices will follow quickly. If this occurs, the very obvious existing threat to the lives of Jews in Israel, a threat that clearly arises from the actions of the Israeli government, will be increased tenfold. For over 100 years, ordinary Jews have been manipulated and forcibly corralled into a part of the Middle East which, up until 58 years ago, was inhabited by Palestinians for thousands of years. For Zionist leaders to have pursued such a policy while at the same time claiming that their only goal was the protection of the Jewish people is contradictory and therefore entirely disingenuous.

I fear for the future of the Jewish people, and all Semitic peoples, of the Middle East. But that fear is not based on the existence of any so-called "Arab terrorism", but rather the actions of the Israeli, American and British governments who seem determined to carelessly (or rather carefully) stoke the fires of hatred in the Middle East in full awareness of the fact that, when the fuse really ignites, all (save them) will be consumed in the ensuing war of strangely biblical proportions.

Monday, April 03, 2006

V for Vendetta Review

Just got back from watching the Watchowski's latest production "V for Vendetta", and my general impression is:


I'll admit to knowing absolutely nothing about the comic on which the movie is based so I had no real expectations of the film, although I have a great deal of respect for Hugo Weaving's acting skills. In that regard, I was not let down in the slightest. Despite the fact that "V" (the main character) never removes his mask throughout the film, Weaving breathes such life into the role that his presence seems to burst from the screen. He commands any scene he's in, although never in such a way that he seems to overly "dominate" the movie - for example, the scene where he takes Evey (Natalie Portman) to the roof after her prison experience, he is both present, yet recessive - melding into the background to let Portman play her part in arguably one of the finest points in the entire movie - possibly surpassing even the "finale".

Natalie Portman does an excellent job as Evey, but I think her best roles are still to come. There is a subtle, but definitely discernable, difference in the way she plays her role compared to Weaving. Of course the two characters are completely different, yet Weaving seems to really become his character in a way that Portman only touches on at various points throughout the movie. No doubt many viewers will disagree with me, but that's the impression I received.

The story and script itself are quite simply inspired. The Watchowskis have again interwoven many different themes throughout the film, adding a level of depth and meaning to what could have otherwise been typical comic book fare (Fantastic Four movie, anyone?). Simple and blunt on a level that will appeal to the typical action fan, it also contains a rich tapestry of thought-provoking philosophical, moral and esoteric content for those who have more than a passing interest in such subjects. Themes such as "Mask as Personality" are among the more obvious, with others like Reincarnation and Jungian-esque Universal Archetypes are hinted at and left for the viewer to explore in their own space. The previously-mentioned rooftop scene had me wondering if perhaps the Watchowskis are familiar with Boris Mouravieff's writings on the subject of the esoteric "Second Birth"?

The plot can be considered a fairly simple one - a man fights back against the forces of a repressive totalitarian regime - yet the way that the plot unfolds and the various characters and themes are developed are what makes this age-old story a breath of fresh air. The political allegory is extremely pointed and relevant to the current world situation - even going so far as to drop some veiled references about a few of the more popular "conspiracy theories" people are discussing at the moment. Eg: Economic downfall and civil war in the US; Biologically-engineered viruses unleashed by madmen; fake terror attacks; the establishment of the surveillance state and the draconian enforcement of law; fusion of church and government; establishment of a climate of fear to increase the grip on citizen psychology - and of course, the role of the media as a "mind control" mechanism that enables only selective information and perceptions to reach the general public.

One might wonder if the film will be somewhat prescient given the rhetoric being expounded by various world leaders at the moment, but then one might wonder if one is perhaps being a tad cynical? ;-)

Speaking of world leaders, Jon Hurt's performance of dictator Adam Sutler is also excellent. It is somewhat ironic (perhaps intentionally on the part of the Watchowskis and director James McTeigue) that although we never see the face of "V", the face of Sutler looms large in Big Brother-esque style in virtually every scene he is in. Sutler's generals and thugs are characterised quite well, and it seems that a good deal of thought went into the construction of a realistic portrait of the pathological psychology that drives them.

There are also quite a few other supporting cast members that play important roles in the film, with Stephen Fry bringing his trademark warmth and good humour to the movie in the form of a popular late-night comedy show host. I'm not too familiar with many of the other actors, but whomever did the casting deserves a pat on the back for their perspicacity.

One other pleasant aspect of the film was its British "flavour". The accents, slang terms and curses were undeniably British, and the reference to the "Benny Hill theme" was a great piece of comic relief in what is otherwise a fairly dark movie. The production values and cinematography were slick and very Hollywood-esque, yet the America-centric cultural focus that always tends to creep into even the most "neutral" blockbusters was refreshingly absent in this film. The very few references made to the US were only in passing and depicted a decaying, humbled nation - something that you don't see very often in American movies!

There is so much more that I would like to say about this film, but I'm going to try and keep this review spoiler-free, so I'll leave it at that for now.

Overall - 5 out of 5 stars. I think I'll be seeing it a few more times before the DVD release!

Thursday, March 23, 2006 - Disinfo Stooges?

A while ago I posted about an interesting encounter between the and websites, as reported by Laura Knight-Jadczyk in her blog. Now it appears that a lawyer acting on behalf of ATS tried to get the Signs of the Times server shut down by using strong arm intimidation tactics. And this from a so-called "conspiracy site" with the motto of "Deny Ignorance"!

I've been an interested reader of SOTT for some time, but this latest episode really has me wondering if they're on to something here. Why is a site that claims to be the "#1 conspiracy discussion portal on the 'net" getting so upset over a piece of 9-11 analysis done by another website? To the point of getting lawyers to harrass their webhost with stories of "death threats"? Seriously, what is the big deal?

In my opinion, it's starting to look like ATS have something to hide, and it could well be government connections. If that's the case, then what are the implications regarding what SOTT have been saying about 9-11? Could they be one of the few sites on the 'net with a good idea of what really happened on that day - thus requiring they be silenced in as covert a manner as possible? "Plausible Deniability" and all that?

Ironically, the lawyer involved works for a firm that can be found on the 'net at Appropriate, or what?

If you're interested in reading the whole saga, SOTT have just published a synopsis on the ATS attack on their latest daily news page. It's well worth reading all the posts regarding the subject on LJK's blog, too.

It's probably just coincidence, but it's interesting that this seems to have happened just after actor Charlie Sheen spoke out in support of the 9-11 truth movement, too. Are the American people starting to realise that Bush and Co are giving them the proverbial "mushroom treatment"?