Lest We Forget

September 11th and July 7th

In these times, we should all remember just how important ‘Truth’ is. Lies can kill, whereas truth can save life. We should remember this in the context of governments as well as individuals. Governments in the past have been known to lie- in the case of Totalitarian dictatorships this has been the norm. In the case of democracies, perhaps this is the exception that proves the rule- but it has been known to happen- for instance in the case of Richard Nixon.

In our present situation in the ‘War on Terror’ there can be little doubt that the stated enemy is indeed quite capable of evil. It is indeed an ideology that leads to the grossest abuse of human rights and also lacks the respect for the sanctity of life which we hold so dear. Much like ‘Bolshevism’ before it, it is an ultimately irrational and dishonest doctrine which leads to evils too numerous to elucidate here. Yet, just as Fascism rose, ostensibly to combat Bolshevism, in its day, we should beware of something similar arising in the midst of our societies- perhaps a more refined one, relying less on Nationalist aspirations- but a threat to that which we hold dear none the less.

We should, therefore, cling to Truth, that which can keep us in a state of inner peace. Guns don’t kill and imprison innocent people- it is lies that do that. We should look at the available evidence before reaching conclusions. I mention this more specifically in the context of large-scale atrocities carried out against our own people, which are creating a climate of ever-greater fear and in some instances of outright panic. We should look closely and critically at the evidence of how they happened and who was responsible. This is not so much to point fingers- this is not about accusing people, much less social groups. This is so as to have the necessary skepticism towards any false claims that may be forwarded. ‘Justice at any price’ should not be our motto- protecting the innocent should. After all this may, one day, include us, or someone we know.

Take for instance the case of the atrocities committed on September 11th. On this day we have been lead to understand that high jacked airliners being crashed into buildings actually destroyed the World Trade Center Towers and part of the Pentagon. Yet other evidence has come to light which brings an element of doubt to this proposal- a proposal widely accepted as fact. For instance, the air-defense squadron responsible for security in the area was strangely inactive at the time. This is because they were involved in a training exercise at a nearby base. This exercise was nothing other than a mock-up of exactly what happened that day. Any off-course planes that they may have seen on their radar would have probably havebeen ignored, and treated as part of the exercise. Also, eye-witness reports from firemen at the time, available on the internet, describe seeing explosives going off within the lower levels of the towers themselves, something which close-ups of the external views also show, with shoots of flame bursting out from the doomed buildings. Experts surveying the damage afterwards also reported what they could only describe as the effects of high-explosives from within the building. Such evidence, much like the lack of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, will not easily go away. They cast doubt on the official explanation for the days’ events, however preferable it may be to accept official explanations as a matter of course and thereby avoid difficult and uncomfortable questions. Yet if the official explanation is a premeditated forgery, where does that leave us? These are issues that we cannot easily ignore, lest we be lead to accept further lies, as well.

A much more recent event is that of the tragedy in London on 7/7, which due to it’s recency is probably fresh in our minds. Much like in the case of September 11, the images we saw of this through the portal of the media are truly shocking and horrible. The response to the events by those in the area was equally brave, inspiring and, showed an incredible amount of self- control. Yet, nevertheless, it is important that we keep our minds clear and find out what really happened on that day- and the sooner the better. Facts inconsistent with the official position have already come to light. I hope it does not seem disrespectful to the suffering participants in this atrocity and also to the truly heroic emergency workers, to be asking such questions at such a time. On the contrary, I believe it honours their memory to do so. Let us remember that we are first and foremost called upon to protect innocent lives and also, may I add, the reputations of the innocent. The importance of this outweighs the importance of finding quick, emotionally-satiating ‘answers’. Also, it is essential to our long-term security that we can be safe from whoever really did carry out such attacks.

Here are some of the unsettling contradictions and inconsistencies so far found-

Peter Power, working for the consultancy group Visor Consultants, was doing a drill of the exact same sequence of events- bombs exploding simultaneously on three underground trains at those specific stations- at the time when it happened. This reminds us of the ‘out of action’ air defense squadron in New York, so caught up in a simulation of the events unfolding nearby that they would have been unable to interfere had they noticed it.

In the Evening Standard, passengers report being turned away from ‘tube’ trains in the early hours of the morning. If the authorities knew nothing about what was to happen, why would this have been the case?

There were false bomb alerts in other major cities in Britain before the attacks. This indicates perhaps that something was known, though maybe the information was not exact enough to pinpoint it taking place in London. So far we have been told of no such advance knowledge of the events.

The Israeli ambassador was warned of the first bomb going off near the hotel in which he was to attend an economic conference. Yet while he was being warned, the explosions were being officially blamed on a ‘power surge’. Which version of events did the authorities really believe? Why have Israeli officials been asked to stay quiet about the entire set of incidents- was there a warning given from them to the British government that was too vague to be effectively acted upon? Was it unclear which city the attacks would take place, which the bomb scares in other major cities would point to? Or, more chillingly, was it seen as somehow better for the government to let them take place anyway, for monstrous geo-political reasons?
The later has often been suggested in the case of the September 11th Attacks- that the government did nothing at the time, but then used the incidents as ‘political capital’ to carry through with prearranged plans. In the case of London, the alert level had been lowered a month earlier- this in spite of the G8 conference being held at the time and any possible advance warnings- however unclear- from intelligence agencies, that something was about to happen.

The story about who was responsible changed very quickly. This could be in response to new evidence gradually coming to light, discounting earlier theories. At first they were said to be backpacks filled with explosives, detonated remotely. The detonations were said to be ‘seconds apart’, an indication of military-level precision. Then, only a day or two later it was said that all were suicide bombers from suburbia. This would mean that there are no direct culprits who could be interviewed. Perhaps, on the other hand, the negative publicity making it’s way to the government for it’s participation in the Iraq War and also for letting foreign extremists settle in ‘Londonstan’ made blaming foreign Al-Qaeda terrorists too politically damaging to contemplate for very long. In other words, the official story may have been changed to avoid government embarrassment.

Is it not possible that in reality the accused were not really responsible? One was an apolitical chap who liked cricket, another had a Hindu wife- not the usual model of ‘extremists’. Unless, as we are asked to believe, they had an immensely different double-life, is it not more possible that they were either victims of the bombings or in some other fashion ‘set up’? Such has happened before and been admitted to later- for example the case of the Guilford Four. The authorities must have been under immense pressure to end the period of uncertainty and be seen to be ‘doing their job’. Yet no such retrial is possible in the case of ‘suicide bombers’. That there are dangerous Islamic radicals who have been born in Britain there is little question. That would mean that it would be possible for such a thing to happen as ‘bombers to come from suburbia’. The fact that something is possible does not, however, make it likely, and as in any criminal case, proper evidence is needed before guilt can be established. So far, none has been released and we are left with ‘reports’ of CCTV records in the train stations. On the bus itself, all the CCTV cameras were mysteriously not working.


So here we reach the end of this study- for now. With all said above in mind, let one thing be clear-

Our duty is to protect the innocent- innocent lives as well as innocent reputations. Only by taking the trouble to examine the truth, clearly and free from bias, will this be possible. This is no time for intellectual laziness. It is a time for intellectual rigueur and for honesty. Only then can we do our best, in an uncertain world, to make it as safe as we possibly can. For the present, this is as much as we can do.

And also let us remember that by bitter coincidence, just as the suspects were being accused, 120 people died when three trains collided in a station in Pakistan. The event received a mere note in the press and little commentary. Yet the passengers suffering was every bit as real as that experienced in London.