Terror in Britain: What did the Prime Minister Know?

by John Pilger


The unsayable in Britain’s general election campaign is this. The causes of the Manchester atrocity, in which 22 mostly young people were murdered by a jihadist, are being suppressed to protect the secrets of British foreign policy.
Critical questions – such as why the security service MI5 maintained terrorist “assets” in Manchester and why the government did not warn the public of the threat in their midst – remain unanswered, deflected by the promise of an internal “review”.
The alleged suicide bomber, Salman Abedi, was part of an extremist group, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, that thrived in Manchester and was cultivated and used by MI5 for more than 20 years.
The LIFG is proscribed by Britain as a terrorist organisation which seeks a “hardline Islamic state” in Libya and “is part of the wider global Islamist extremist movement, as inspired by al-Qaida”.
The “smoking gun” is that when Theresa May was Home Secretary, LIFG jihadists were allowed to travel unhindered across Europe and encouraged to engage in “battle”: first to remove Mu’ammar Gadaffi in Libya, then to join al-Qaida affiliated groups in Syria.
Last year, the FBI reportedly placed Abedi on a “terrorist watch list” and warned MI5 that his group was looking for a “political target” in Britain. Why wasn’t he apprehended and the network around him prevented from planning and executing the atrocity on 22 May?
These questions arise because of an FBI leak that demolished the “lone wolf” spin in the wake of the 22 May attack – thus, the panicky, uncharacteristic outrage directed at Washington from London and Donald Trump’s apology.
The Manchester atrocity lifts the rock of British foreign policy to reveal its Faustian alliance with extreme Islam, especially the sect known as Wahhabism or Salafism, whose principal custodian and banker is the oil kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Britain’s biggest weapons customer.
This imperial marriage reaches back to the Second World War and the early days of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. The aim of British policy was to stop pan-Arabism: Arab states developing a modern secularism, asserting their independence from the imperial west and controlling their resources. The creation of a rapacious Israel was meant to expedite this. Pan-Arabism has since been crushed; the goal now is division and conquest.
In 2011, according to Middle East Eye, the LIFG in Manchester were known as the “Manchester boys”. Implacably opposed to Mu’ammar Gadaffi, they were considered high risk and a number were under Home Office control orders – house arrest – when anti-Gadaffi demonstrations broke out in Libya, a country forged from myriad tribal enmities.
Suddenly the control orders were lifted. “I was allowed to go, no questions asked,” said one LIFG member. MI5 returned their passports and counter-terrorism police at Heathrow airport were told to let them board their flights.
The overthrow of Gaddafi, who controlled Africa’s largest oil reserves, had been long been planned in Washington and London. According to French intelligence, the LIFG made several assassination attempts on Gadaffi in the 1990s – bank-rolled by British intelligence. In March 2011, France, Britain and the US seized the opportunity of a “humanitarian intervention” and attacked Libya. They were joined by Nato under cover of a UN resolution to “protect civilians”.
Last September, a House of Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee inquiry concluded that then Prime Minister David Cameron had taken the country to war against Gaddafi on a series of “erroneous assumptions” and that the attack “had led to the rise of Islamic State in North Africa”. The Commons committee quoted what it called Barack Obama’s “pithy” description of Cameron’s role in Libya as a “shit show”.
In fact, Obama was a leading actor in the “shit show”, urged on by his warmongering Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, and a media accusing Gaddafi of planning “genocide” against his own people. “We knew… that if we waited one more day,” said Obama, “Benghazi, a city the size of Charlotte, could suffer a massacre that would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world.”
The massacre story was fabricated by Salafist militias facing defeat by Libyan government forces. They told Reuters there would be “a real bloodbath, a massacre like we saw in Rwanda”. The Commons committee reported, “The proposition that Mu’ammar Gaddafi would have ordered the massacre of civilians in Benghazi was not supported by the available evidence”.
Britain, France and the United States effectively destroyed Libya as a modern state. According to its own records, Nato launched 9,700 “strike sorties”, of which more than a third hit civilian targets. They included fragmentation bombs and missiles with uranium warheads. The cities of Misurata and Sirte were carpet-bombed. Unicef, the UN children’s organisation, reported a high proportion of the children killed “were under the age of ten”.
More than “giving rise” to Islamic State – ISIS had already taken root in the ruins of Iraq following the Blair and Bush invasion in 2003 – these ultimate medievalists now had all of north Africa as a base. The attack also triggered a stampede of refugees fleeing to Europe.
Cameron was celebrated in Tripoli as a “liberator”, or imagined he was. The crowds cheering him included those secretly supplied and trained by Britain’s SAS and inspired by Islamic State, such as the “Manchester boys”.
To the Americans and British, Gadaffi’s true crime was his iconoclastic independence and his plan to abandon the petrodollar, a pillar of American imperial power. He had audaciously planned to underwrite a common African currency backed by gold, establish an all-Africa bank and promote economic union among poor countries with prized resources. Whether or not this would have happened, the very notion was intolerable to the US as it prepared to “enter” Africa and bribe African governments with military “partnerships”.
The fallen dictator fled for his life. A Royal Air Force plane spotted his convoy, and in the rubble of Sirte, he was sodomised with a knife by a fanatic described in the news as “a rebel”.
Having plundered Libya’s $30 billion arsenal, the “rebels” advanced south, terrorising towns and villages. Crossing into sub-Saharan Mali, they destroyed that country’s fragile stability. The ever-eager French sent planes and troops to their former colony “to fight al-Qaida”, or the menace they had helped create.
On 14 October, 2011, President Obama announced he was sending special forces troops to Uganda to join the civil war there. In the next few months, US combat troops were sent to South Sudan, Congo and the Central African Republic. With Libya secured, an American invasion of the African continent was under way, largely unreported.
In London, one of the world’s biggest arms fairs was staged by the British government. The buzz in the stands was the “demonstration effect in Libya”. The London Chamber of Commerce and Industry held a preview entitled “Middle East: A vast market for UK defence and security companies”. The host was the Royal Bank of Scotland, a major investor in cluster bombs, which were used extensively against civilian targets in Libya. The blurb for the bank’s arms party lauded the “unprecedented opportunities for UK defence and security companies.”
Last month, Prime Minister Theresa May was in Saudi Arabia, selling more of the £3 billion worth of British arms which the Saudis have used against Yemen. Based in control rooms in Riyadh, British military advisers assist the Saudi bombing raids, which have killed more than 10,000 civilians. There are now clear signs of famine. A Yemeni child dies every 10 minutes from preventable disease, says Unicef.
The Manchester atrocity on 22 May was the product of such unrelenting state violence in faraway places, much of it British sponsored. The lives and names of the victims are almost never known to us.
This truth struggles to be heard, just as it struggled to be heard when the London Underground was bombed on July 7, 2005. Occasionally, a member of the public would break the silence, such as the east Londoner who walked in front of a CNN camera crew and reporter in mid-platitude. “Iraq!” he said. “We invaded Iraq. What did we expect? Go on, say it.”
At a large media gathering I attended, many of the important guests uttered “Iraq” and “Blair” as a kind of catharsis for that which they dared not say professionally and publicly.
Yet, before he invaded Iraq, Blair was warned by the Joint Intelligence Committee that “the threat from al-Qaida will increase at the onset of any military action against Iraq… The worldwide threat from other Islamist terrorist groups and individuals will increase significantly”.
Just as Blair brought home to Britain the violence of his and George W Bush’s blood-soaked “shit show”, so David Cameron, supported by Theresa May, compounded his crime in Libya and its horrific aftermath, including those killed and maimed in Manchester Arena on 22 May.
The spin is back, not surprisingly. Salman Abedi acted alone. He was a petty criminal, no more. The extensive network revealed last week by the American leak has vanished. But the questions have not.
Why was Abedi able to travel freely through Europe to Libya and back to Manchester only days before he committed his terrible crime? Was Theresa May told by MI5 that the FBI had tracked him as part of an Islamic cell planning to attack a “political target” in Britain?
In the current election campaign, the Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has made a guarded reference to a “war on terror that has failed”. As he knows, it was never a war on terror but a war of conquest and subjugation. Palestine. Afghanistan. Iraq. Libya. Syria. Iran is said to be next. Before there is another Manchester, who will have the courage to say that?

Follow John Pilger on twitter @johnpilger

newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Remember Me
Reader

Reblogged this on Seeking The Good Life and commented:
I’m posting rather early this morning as I didn’t think this should wait. More local news of a good day in our household will be posted as normal at 7 am.

StAug
Reader

Oh the Humanity….

Sylvie
Reader
Sylvie

There’s footage from the supposed Westminster Bridge attack of EMTs taking victims into the Marriot Hotel right next to the bridge. Not to one of the waiting ambulances, and not into St Thomas’ hospital which is DIRECTLY OPPOSITE the hotel. WHY would EMTs take injured people to a hotel when there are waiting ambulances and a hospital right there? They actually wheel people PAST the empty ambulances to get to the hotel!! This man tried to contact doctor Colleen Anderson who is filmed wheeling one of the gurneys. She allegedly works at St Thomas – but the personnel lady says… Read more »

rosshendry
Reader

Timing is all. The Manchester and London Bridge attacks occurred after a similar time lapse following media reports of Labour gaining significant ground in the polls. They will definitely work in favour of the Tories – a change of government is not what people normally vote for in response to terror.
The question surely is who, apart from the Tories, might want to make sure that Corbyn and Labour don’t win? For my money there are one or two other countries who each have a major vested interest in maintaining the status quo and promoting the “war of on terror”.

CorbynextPM
Reader
CorbynextPM

Israel are top of the list in stopping Corbyn and they will do anything in their power to stop him!!

flaxgirl
Reader

So why the hell doesn’t he come out and call out these Trauma-based Mind Control Psychological Operations, aka false-flag hoaxes?
Surely, it’s a shoo-in and if there’s fallout on his side, so be it. I just do not comprehend.

Ross Hendry
Reader

Who would believe him? If he so much as intimates what he believes is going on then the usual “conspiracy theorist” and “anti-semite” slurs would follow as night follows day. But as time goes on people will increasingly get their information from the internet and give up completely on the MSM – that’s when the game will change. Unfortunately the ptb are beginning to appreciate this looming scenario. Thus we see initial baby steps to censor “Fake News” and May’s recent appeal to allow no safe space for terrorists on the web (and no doubt none for their “apologists” i.e.… Read more »

flaxgirl
Reader

He can PROVE it easily by pointing out what all the hoax analysts have pointed out. There is a modus operandi that they all follow with the event itself being drill, the practice drills beforehand, the crisis actors (who hires and pays them) and so on and all he has to do is say the people did not die and show there’s no death certificate. I would have thought it was very straightforward.

StAug
Reader

But that’s when he “hangs himself” or has a plane crash and so forth. Anyone who’s gone as far in the process as Corbyn has knows exactly what they’re capable of doing (to him or any loved one).

flaxgirl
Reader

Yes I have to admit the thought of mishaps did cross my mind. Easy for people in my position to demand others come out and speak the truth.

StAug
Reader

In the end, it’s better if the high-profile types go as far as they can, without crossing the Red Line That Gets you Suicided, while a mass of nobodies (like us) can take the narrative over that line, repeating the Truth whenever/however we can. If a lie becomes more true the more you repeat it (as either Goebbels or his little chum once asserted), imagine how much true the Truth becomes the more we repeat it? Just like (real) voting and boycotts, no one lone commenter can make anything happen, but a mass of unified Unfoolables can make something happen.… Read more »

StAug
Reader

erratum: “more true”

betrayedplanet
Reader
betrayedplanet

I posted the above Pilger article on The Guardian on Saturday, my account has since been pre-moderated and taken down.
We no longer live in a democracy in the UK, the path clear should May and her henchmen be returned to power. War will follow, a further cosying up to Trump, the regime change in Syria longed for by the criminal Allied Forces will also extend to Iran.
We are in deep trouble, getting further in every day.

Admin
Reader
Admin

Don’t suppose you screen capped your comment? When we are sent screen caps of unjustifiable censorship we always publish them. Anecdote alone isn’t enough unfortunately.

thefreeorg
Reader

Reblogged this on The Free.

StAug
Reader

Related (in a general sense): It’s been about a week since Brzezinski died (I will not resort to the euphemism “passed”! laugh)… I hope there’s a nice thick, chewy OffGuardian article in the works about him. After all, the World We Live In was, in no small way, shaped by his Strangelovian obsessions. Would there even have been a BHO without Zbigniew Brzezinski….? Or a Taliban…?

Lumpy Gravy
Reader
Lumpy Gravy

> I hope there’s a nice thick, chewy OffGuardian article in the works about him. … maybe they have something in the works. I don’t know. Obituaries and other texts have already been published all over the place and most of it of course total rubbish as one would expect. But there were a few exceptions. My favourite ones are by John Helmer about his personal experiences with Carter and Brzezinski: The Svengali Of Carter’s Presidency … The President’s Inferiority Complex … Canada Radio Comes To Bury Brzezinski … And then there’s of course the infamous How Jimmy Carter and… Read more »

StAug
Reader

(Not sure about Carter belonging in their ranks, though… wasn’t he just a Dupe?)

Lumpy Gravy
Reader
Lumpy Gravy

I don’t think so. This is what John Helmer writes about Carter in his Svengali article:
If Carter cannot tell the truth now about Brzezinski, after having 36 years to reflect on it, Carter reveals the principal source of Brzezisnki’s power, when he exercised it. For Carter was no innocent ventriloquized by the evil Svengali, as in the original Svengali tale. Carter was simply more mendacious than Brzezinski, and is entirely to blame for doing what Brzezinski told him to do.

StAug
Reader

Hmmm, I’m not sure I agree with John Helmer’s apparent vision of the power relation between ZB and Carter; does Helmer think Carter was actually ZB’s boss? Carter and ZB most probably answered to the same bosses, and while ZB may not have been Carter’s direct superior, he certainly wasn’t his employee… he’s one of those guys (like Cheney, Rumsfeldt, Kissinger et al) who just always seem to be in power, whichever figurehead is in office. Coming down hard on Carter now for giving ZB the standard eulogy just strikes me as melodramatic. And this is risible: “Only today, Russia… Read more »

StAug
Reader

I don’t believe in Hell, LG, but I certainly hope ZB is roasting in it on a rusty spit beside the recently-deceased Rockefeller monster.

BigB
Reader
BigB

Another day, another synthetic terror event. Who wears fake suicide belts: real terrorists don’t? We have the most draconian anti-terror and mass surveillance regime, possibly in the world. Yet when a bona fide terror suspect (Abedi) comes along, we are so inundated with mass data that we can’t single him out for targeted individual surveillance? Yet the FBI can? Come on, they must think we are stupid. No, really, they do. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it, right? There’s precious little evidence about what really happened in Borough Market last night. Call it confirmation bias, but I am already… Read more »

flybow.
Reader
flybow.

BigB. I could not agree more. Regarding london bridge. Since when to the met change into camouflage trousers.

BigB
Reader
BigB

If we are looking at the same photo, they ain’t the Met.comment image
I’m no expert, but they look more like special forces to me. There is another photo of CTSFO officers, notice how the guy in the first photo does Not have CTSFO on his back?
https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=TPfO7JAb&id=9B69DCF9B8FC2943F4CCECF77690ED7DD9FA79B1&thid=OIF.ZiltQ5zf8sUYfi4B0pvBmQ&q=borough+market+attack&simid=140402798316&selectedindex=14&ajaxhist=0&first=1
Also, when does a highly trained firearms officer approach a wounded man on the ground wearing an undetonated suicide belt?

flybow
Reader
flybow

BigB.
I meant this mate.

I did not know that the met changed into camouflag trousers. Must be because of all the desert/jungle terrain in London.

flaxgirl
Reader

You know, I wonder if this changing of clothes was staged as well to divert hoax analysts. It’s as if they’re taunting us, saying, “Oh yes, you’re going to assume the guy changing into the camo is the guy on the ground, but he isn’t.” To me, it’s just a dead end for people to get excited about, although it seems strange to me nevertheless – but perhaps changing clothes like this is normal. Or maybe it’s all part of “We just do this, that and the other – you never know what we’ll do next – to bamboozle you.”

BigBG
Reader
BigBG

As a general reply, the Met do have their own ‘SAS’ (CTSFO = Counter Terrorist Specialist Firearms Officers) which do appear to have deployed in khakis. I hadn’t seen the vid you posted – you meant one officer putting on camo while others did not. Hmmm? Could be nothing? I don’t know. (Its not the fellow who ends up ‘dead’ outside the Wheatsheaf – that would be incriminating.) What concerns me as to the authenticity of the event is the three ‘suspects’ gunned down outside the Wheatsheaf pub – as photographed by Gabriele Sciotto. You can clearly see the downed… Read more »

flybow
Reader
flybow

” ‘suspect’ that just took his share of a fifty round fusilade – he looks pretty good to me?”
Indeed.

Sylvie
Reader
Sylvie

The current supposed terror attack which will probably win the Tories the election already has people calling bullshit. I can’t vouch for any of it, but here is the Twitter hashtag #londonbridgehoax
https://twitter.com/hashtag/LondonBridgeHoax

Sylvie
Reader
Sylvie

This is supposed to be an aftermath if the London attack, which was just to get it in perspective, some men with knives, not a bomb. what is this picture showing? Why are these people walking on foot in a mass like this? Why are some of them wrapped in blankets? And why were there so many little kids out late on a Saturday night? I just don’t see why this would happen except to create a photo op of bedraggled people to make people think this is a war zone or something. If they were injured or shocked they’d… Read more »

StAug
Reader

“British PM May’s election gamble in doubt as poll lead falls to one point
2 Hours Ago” is the headline I read before then seeing The Brand New Terror Headline.

flaxgirl
Reader

The real seemingly unsayable by anyone in the public eye, the massive elephant in the room is, of course, that the event was staged. For goodness sake. We’ve thrashed this out BTL on https://off-guardian.org/tag/salman-abedi/. What I want to know is, do none of these public people ever go to YouTube and see all the videos and comments about events being staged with perfectly good evidence backing their claims? I mean, it just baffles me. They seem to live in this little bubble, regardless of what frontlines they’ve been on. There is absolutely zero clear evidence that this event took place… Read more »

StAug
Reader

“That’s just part of their not-all-Muslims-are-terrorists-but-actually-Muslims-are-terrorists schizophrenic message they put out.” Yes, the highly effective “The exception proves the rule” paradigm… with bonus points for “why would a supposed-Muslim lie about this…?” “Also, it is evident that the NIST (National Institute for Standards and Technology) team who conducted an investigation into the collapse of the three towers at the World Trade Centre on 9/11 lied about there being no evidence of explosions…” The NIST report is an excellent case in point. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (under the US Dept of Commerce) involves hundreds (thousands, perhaps) of professionals/… Read more »

susannapanevin
Reader

Reblogged this on Susanna Panevin.

Dead World Walking
Reader
Dead World Walking

And how will it all end, climate catastrophe or nuclear conflagration ?
Either way it’s not far off.

tommytcg
Reader

It’s ended. There’s no more Libya.

Dominic Pukallus
Reader

“Blowback” implies some unintended consequences, at least officially. Given the state of strategic tension we’ve been in for some time, that seems more and more unlikely.

JGarbo
Reader
JGarbo

I get the suspicion that “blowback” is quite intentional, the expected outcome of a false flag op carried out by proxies of the intelligence services. The patsies are lead into these ops, carry them out then are conveniently killed to prevent disclosure of any connections with their handlers. Standard stuff. Only question: Do the intel guys warned their friends & family before the op goes down, or don’t they care?

StAug
Reader

“conveniently killed” Or recycled. The images/ identities used as “culprits” need never be of people who were at the scene (or who ever existed, necessarily). The people used to drive the vehicles used in whatever Event would be part of a (paramilitary) team, I should think, that’s used more than once. Very soon after Iraq War 2.0 commenced I read a “news” item about British Special Forces being caught dressed up as “natives”, with a car full of explosives… clearly up to something. Well, such teams would continue to exist after or outside of the War(s), no? In their “minds”,… Read more »

Prole Center
Reader

Reblogged this on Proletarian Center for Research, Education and Culture and commented:
Great article by John Pilger, but I do resent him referring to Gaddafi as a “dictator” in the pejorative sense, as if every country didn’t have one or more dictators. A “pure democracy” as it is commonly understood is a myth. – PC

Paul Baker
Reader
Paul Baker

Only 2 weeks ago Trump, Saudia Arabia, some 200 Sunni Leaders from countries across the World – and Israel – made it perfectly clear that The Islamic Republic of Iran was next in line for the Regime Change treatment. The Saudis say they will take the war into Iran rather than spill blood in the Kingdom. Presumably that means suicide bombs in Teheran while money is pumped into any nut case willing to have a go and make his fortune – or just plain nut cases. Civil war is the lead in to “having to sort it out”. Same old… Read more »

Greg Bacon
Reader

ISIS came out of the CIA’s Al Qaeda franchise called Al Qaeda in Iraq. In 2010 its name was changed to ISIS. Then as Israeli journalists pointed out the embarrassing fact that the English acronym for the Hebrew spelling of Mossad was ISIS (Israeli Secret Intelligence Services abruptly they decided to call their band of mercenaries with their black flags and US M16 assault rifles, IS for Islamic State. http://journal-neo.org/2017/05/30/the-cia-s-cloddish-isis-attack-on-duterte/Our Dear Leaders are nothing more than blood-thirsty pirates, psychotic ones at that, since they knew that busting up Libya would create a Hell on Earth there, and allow all sorts… Read more »

BigBG
Reader
BigBG

I know it upsets some people that Pilger won’t do 9/11 – but he went to Vietnam, Laos/Cambodia (with a price on his head), East Timor (probably likewise), even his native Australia – where he broke stories that may never have seen the light of day otherwise. So he’s good with me, and he’s pretty much nailed it here. What did Treason May know? I can extrapolate from what Attack Dog Rudd said the other night – that she spends two hours a day reading intel and signing warrants. So if a flight restriction was lifted, she (May) would have… Read more »

Peter
Reader
Peter

I am coming to the conclusion that the intelligence ‘services’ are out of political control. Political leaders come and go, the spy agencies remain. Some politicians are closer to the spies than others (e.g., Bush Sr, Bush Jr’s close aides, Putin, HRC), but the power struggle in Washington since Trump was elected – against the script, because the Democrats’ scuppering of Sanders ended up backfiring – has brought the issue into the open. Politicians like May are – as BigBG says – probably just as clueless as the rest of us; May clearly didn’t have a clue about anything when… Read more »

StAug
Reader

Re: Incompetence Theory
“On this subject, Michael Parenti has been a lucid and incisive critic for years. Parenti has long advocated that progressives and leftists drop the idea that Republicans like Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush are stupid. In a 2004 interview, Parenti claimed ‘I’m not one of those critics that believes U.S. foreign policy is confused, or stupid, or misinformed, or well-intentioned but it goes awry. I think it’s a brilliant policy filled with many brilliant, terrible, horrible victories.’ ”
https://lorenzoae.wordpress.com/2016/05/31/chomsky-vs-parenti/#Inept Empire

flaxgirl
Reader

But as the evidence shows that the terrorist attacks are mostly false flag hoaxes perpetrated by intelligence, government and media, there is never going to be discussion about them in the mainstream media. There’s very few media of any kind willing to touch these hoaxes.
Hoax analyst Peekay goes through the Staged Terror Checklist in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Px-J4g7zvYA and his video doesn’t cover them all.

StAug
Reader

” there is never going to be discussion about them in the mainstream media…”
Which is the brilliant mechanism of the self-confirming nature of The Propaganda State: we are trained from early on to trust the symbols/ institutions invested with Authority (and created) by The State. When The State is accused of wrongdoing, who do we turn to, to confirm or refute the charge? The State! I pity the fascist cabal that doesn’t have such Powerful Toys to play with.

Dominic Pukallus
Reader

The conundrum of figuring out where incompetence ends and malevolence begins is a fiendish one, which is far beyond this poor Serf to solve. This would require membership of that particular circle, and who knows how many of those exist concentrically and intersectingly. The Venn diagram on that one would be a masterpiece of abstract Art, I imagine.

StAug
Reader

“The Venn diagram on that one would be a masterpiece of abstract Art, I imagine…”
Sounds like the work of the late great Mark Lombardi, in fact… whose untimely death must have been convenient…
https://tinyurl.com/ydynxor7

Dominic Pukallus
Reader

I remember one website in a conspiratorial vein with a similar but much more bewildering spaghetti of links between well (and lesser) known people, bodies, and institutions. Each one could be clicked on for deeper analysis of the links. As a piece of Art in itself it was magnificent.
I do like to be able to see the forest AND the trees but some things are best comprehended like a Bach fugue, by avoiding reductionism and being sensitive to what may be emerging from their overall complexity. It’s more Art in itself than Science.

StAug
Reader

Of course, any capable homicide investigation will work to situate the trees, with regard to one another and within the forest, in order to build a case. Mark Lombardi’s work was so clear, on the one hand, and so allusive, on the other hand, that quite a few of his closer friends and acquaintances seem to think it got him killed. He was an artist in his early 40’s who suddenly found himself on the cusp of the fame he’d worked so hard for all of his adult life… his profile in rapid ascent… and he hanged himself (in March… Read more »

Dominic Pukallus
Reader

When you’re unable to edit your comments and replies, there arises an Internet sort of “esprit d’escalier”. I have to qualify the previous reply with the observation that in any Human system the capacity for plain old cock-ups increases exponentially with its complexity and opaqueness. Make that geometrically. Welcome to Spook Country, there be no maps it seems.

StAug
Reader

“I know it upsets some people that Pilger won’t do 9/11…” As long as JP doesn’t actively disparage MIHOPers (a la Chomsky), he gets a free pass on being careful with his language regarding that event, because high-profile people who go full-“Truther” have their reputations and/or their bodies destroyed. The best way (if you’re high profile) is to insinuate. JP is not a stupid man; he can’t believe that (two of the three of) those buildings collapsed, as they did, from plane-strikes. And he can’t believe that “turrists” could have surreptitiously wired those buildings for controlled demolition. But what can… Read more »

Prole Center
Reader

I would think that at the PM or executive level they are in the know even if they don’t know all the details for sake of plausible deniability.

StAug
Reader

I’d argue that they’re in the know but not in control. They are on the team but not leading it; figureheads. I think this was made apparent when the Wikileaks Clinton-email leak revealed the BHO had been told who who he could and couldn’t choose as a running mate… by some shadowy figure in the Corporate Sector nobody had ever heard of.

Prole Center
Reader

Who is BHO?

StAug
Reader

Former POTUS (the one preceding Trump)

BigB
Reader
BigB

That, and that he was emailed his cabinet by Citigroup. This time round, Trump got the email from Golden Sucks, no doubt! 😉

duplicitousdemocracy
Reader

If the suspects parents were Libyan exiles due to fear of Gadaffi, then shouldn’t he have been ‘thanking us’ instead of blowing ‘us’ up? Logically, his parents have been able to return to Libya as a direct consequence of ‘our’ foreign policy. That aside, the incompetence of the Intelligence Agencies is at Keystone Cop levels. He was all but walking around with ‘I’m a terrorist’ tattooed on his forehead. The Security industry is having money thrown at them but clearly the quality of officers leaves a lot to be desired. If everything is as we are being told (and I’m… Read more »

Prole Center
Reader

Did you read the article? British intelligence is NOT incompetent. Everything went more or less according to plan.

Lumpy Gravy
Reader
Lumpy Gravy

> the incompetence of the Intelligence Agencies
… doesn’t even begin to describe what MI5 and their US, French and German accomplices have been up to since decades. Recklessness, maliciousness, mendacity and murderous criminality of genocidal proportions are terms that more realistically describe the activities of these so-called “intelligence agencies”. And of course, it goes without saying, the same terms apply to elected politicians who are supposed to oversee and control them.

Prole Center
Reader

If anything the intelligence agencies control the politicians, especially your low-ranking MP’s or congressmen.