Thursday, July 07, 2005

First Day Reports re London Bombings

As I watched the CNN coverage of the London bombings today, I heard multiple experts, including Octavia Nasser (also spelled Nasr), say the group claiming responsibility didn't use known signatures of Al Qaeda. They even quoted the Koran incorrectly! I wish I had taped what she said, as I knew this was likely truth. Sure enough, a few hours later, all anyone would say was that this was definitely an act of Al Qaeda. Sigh. Like so many other covert operations, the truth disappears quickly in the quicksand of the "official story."

Here are some things I'm wondering about.

1. London is the most surveilled city in the world. There are surveillance cameras all over town, including in the subway system. I passed by cameras affixed to buildings while taking a tour bus around town. I suspect strongly that whoever did this was caught on tape. If no tape surfaces, I'll have to consider that whoever was caught on tape was not someone British intelligence wanted us to know about.

2. Just two days ago, the British were talking about withdrawing from Iraq, leaving us alone to fight the enemy. I predict by tomorrow we'll see a "renewed commitment" from the British to keeping troops in Iraq. Here's a clip from the story in China Daily two days ago:

Britain's defence ministry has drafted plans for a significant troop withdrawal from Iraq over the next 18 months and a big deployment to Afghanistan.

When asked about the article however, a defence ministry spokesman stuck to the official position that British troops would be on the ground in Iraq for as long as
necessary to support the Iraqi government.

"In what would represent the biggest operational shake-up involving the armed forces since the Iraq war, the first stage of a run-down in military operations is likely to take place this autumn with a handover of security to Iraqis in at least two southern provinces," the Financial Times said.

Although I can find no transcript of Nasser's CNN comments, Al Jazeera captured similar comments, in an article titled "Phony reports link Al Qaeda to London attacks":

7/7/2005 9:30:00 PM GMT

A group calling itself "The Secret Organization of Al Qaeda in Europe" posted a statement on an internet site, claiming responsibility for the deadly attacks that hit London on Thursday.

But MSNBC TV translator Jacob Keryakes said that the statement in which the group claimed responsibility for the attacks contained an error in one of the Qura’nic verses it cited. That suggests that the claim is phony, he said.

"This is not something Al Qaeda would do," he said.

The first day after the Kennedy assassination, some incredible news was reported. Kennedy was shot from the front (Oswald was behind). Shots were fired from the Grassy Knoll (Oswald was in the School Book Depository). Six to eight shots were fired (but only two shots were made on the sixth floor, which Dallas police lied and stretched to three. They couldn't stretch that to eight - there wasn't enough time for one man to have made those shots in the window in which the shots transpired).

Within 24 hours, the spin was already in effect. Kennedy was shot from behind, not the front. Only three shots, all Oswald, etc. It took us years to pry out the files that put the lie to all of that.

How long before we know the truth about 9/11 and London? Let's hope it won't take another thirty years. We can't afford to be that patient. Patience is too easily mistaken for consent.


Blogger Real History Lisa said...

Interesting addendum from Newsweek ( last year. What did the FBI know and when did they know it?

"Some U.S. law-enforcement officers based in London, NEWSWEEK has learned, have become extremely concerned about evidence regarding possible active Al Qaeda plots to attack targets in Britain. According to a U.S. government official, fears of terror attacks have prompted FBI agents based in the U.S. Embassy in London to avoid traveling on London's popular underground railway (or tube) system, which is used daily by millions of commuters. While embassy-based officers of the U.S. Secret Service, Immigration and Customs bureaus and the CIA still are believed to use the underground to go about their business, FBI agents have been known to turn up late to crosstown meetings because they insist on using taxis in London's traffic-choked business center."

9:33 AM  
Blogger gary said...

Was the Koran quoted incorrectly? Professor Juan Cole on his site at gives two translations of the message--one of them his own and in English at least they seem to be correct, according to English versions of the Koran online. If it can be shown that the Arabic original is incorrect that would be interesting but to check that would require knowing Arabic.

10:04 AM  
Blogger Real History Lisa said...

Is Juan Cole a native Arabic speaker? I'm certainly more inclined to believe the translations provided by Nasser and the MSNBC translator. I love Juan Cole's work, in general, but I have no way of judging the credibility of his Arabic.

10:28 AM  
Blogger Real History Lisa said...

I had to ask Juan Cole on what he based his information. Here is my question, and his response.

Dear Mr.Cole,

I watched CNN as the events surrounding the bombing unfolded, and in the morning hours, Octavia Nasser (Nasr), their Senior Arab Correspondent, said several times, and in several ways, that the letter from the al Qaeda/Europe group—which no one had ever heard of before the bombing—did not have the typical hallmarks of other al Qaeda communications, which she said were so professional it was like they had a PR unit. The letter, she said, contained errors in the Quran and the wording was not like the grammar/word choice that al Qaeda used.

So imagine my surprise when I saw that you had written this:

“It is very likely the "Qaeda al-Jihad in Europe" group that claimed responsibility immediately. Their statement appeared very quickly after the bombings and yet had none of the appearance of being rushed. That suggests it was carefully composed before the fact. The rumors that the statement has errors in the Arabic or the Quran citation are absolutely incorrect, and al-Sharq al-Awsat came to the same conclusion in its Saturday edition.”

My question to you is, have you yourself seen the letter, or are you passing along the conclusions of people/news sources you trust, and if so, who/what are they? Octavia was not the only such commentator – but I believed her. One of the reasons I believed her is that I knew her story would not be allowed to stand, that the push would be to make this look like a ‘genuine’ al Qaeda operation. But do you know something about her specifically that lessens her credibility?


- - - - -
Dear Lisa:

Yes, I saw the Arabic of the Qal3a message, and yes, al-Sharq al-Awsat also did and I trust their conclusions. I have no idea why Octavia said that.

cheers Juan

10:16 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home