The Falsification of History: Our Distorted Reality

by John Hamer

  Following the day of the attacks, Daniel made several attempts to contact the police to give his statement, but they simply did not want to talk to him. Eventually he gave up trying in frustration but soon noticed that he was under supposed covert surveillance. He also received several intimidating phone calls warning him to stop trying to make public his suspicions and knows that he was being followed for almost a year after the event.

  Interestingly, it was later discovered that the day prior to the incident, this bus had been off the road all day for ‘maintenance’ work to be carried out. It is also noteworthy that both security cameras on the bus were ‘inoperative’ that day, despite the fact that the bus had just undergone a full maintenance check the previous day. How convenient this is, but of course why would we expect them to change a successful cover-up strategy when it is proven to be effective in incident after incident, with never a query or even a passing comment from the lapdogs of the media, let alone the general public.

  Daniel is absolutely 100% certain to this day that Hasib Hussain was not on the bus and did not carry out the bombing.

  The four alleged terrorists all had four or more mobile phones each; one of their own private phones and at least three other ‘operational’ phones that they are supposed to have used to confound anyone who might attempt to track their communications and obstruct their diabolical plan. However, I believe it much more likely that these phones were supplied by their handlers and that their possession of them facilitated the tracking of their every movement. For example Tanweer and Lindsay were easily traced to Canary Wharf after they had panicked and gone on the run. They were presumably, naively hoping to tell their story to the British press before the security services caught up with them, an endeavour which to their great personal cost, ultimately failed miserably.

  Anthony John Hill aka ‘Muad’Dib’ (named for a character in Frank Herbert’s sci-fi story ‘Dune’) produced an excellent video-film ‘7/7 Ripple Effect’ bringing much hitherto unknown information to the attention of the public and when in 2008 a group of ‘Islamic terrorists’, allegedly associates of Khan, were arraigned for trial at Kingston Crown Court, Hill mailed two copies of his DVD to the court. One envelope was addressed to the judge and the other to the foreman of the jury. Neither DVD reached its intended recipient but shortly afterwards a request for Hill to be extradited from Ireland (he lived in Kells, County Meath at the time) was sent to the Irish Ministry of Justice. The request was successful and Hill was arrested on a charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice by a British policeman, accompanied back to Britain and incarcerated in Wandsworth prison shortly before the start of the 7/7 Inquest. After much legal argument and a completely farcical and biased court case, Hill was eventually acquitted by a sympathetic jury much to the great chagrin of the presiding judge who had instructed them to find him guilty regardless of the fact that there was no evidence to support the Crown’s claims against him. Justice? What justice?

  A tragic but nevertheless interesting postscript to this whole sorry incident was the shooting of the Brazilian man, Jean Charles de Menezes two weeks following 7/7. The official version of events was that he was thought by a group of armed policeman to be a terrorist as he was (according to them) wearing a large overcoat on a warm sunny day and appeared to be hiding something underneath it as well as having a ‘foreign’ appearance. According to the police account, he was spotted and chased, at which point he fled in panic, vaulted the barrier at Stockwell tube station and boarded a train in his futile attempts to avoid arrest. At this point the police caught him and held him down and simply shot him seven times in the head. Not once, but seven times.

  Why would they do this when he was already under restraint? Again the official version stated that it was because they thought he had a bomb and was going to detonate it at any moment. Do they really think we are all so stupid? What purpose would shooting someone in the head seven times when already under restraint, serve? Why would simply handcuffing him not fulfil much the same purpose? There is no doubt in my mind that this action was taken in order to ensure that there was no way that de Menezes could survive and as with many aspects of this whole sorry story, there is far more to this particular incident than meets the eye.

  For a start, it was subsequently proven that de Menezes was not wearing a large overcoat as the police had falsely claimed; he was wearing a t-shirt, lightweight jeans and a short, light denim jacket. He had no bag with him and nor was he carrying anything else that could have been mistaken for a bomb or explosive device. In fact the whole story about him fleeing and the police giving chase into Stockwell tube station was a complete fabrication. Jean actually sauntered into the station, used his ‘Oyster’ pre-paid travel card in the normal fashion and headed for a train bound for his destination of North West London where he happened to be working at the time. Having disembarked from the escalator at the appropriate platform, a train was just arriving and so he jogged leisurely along the platform and boarded the train carriage. He sat down at a convenient seat and took out the newspaper he had with him, to read on the journey. At this point an undercover, plain-clothed police officer standing in the tube carriage identified Jean to nearby (similarly plain-clothed) officers at which point they raced onto the tube-train carriage, dragged him out of his seat, held him down and shot him as described previously, killing him instantly. Incidentally, the bullets used were known as ‘dum dum’ bullets which are particularly vicious, causing maximum possible damage to human flesh and bone. These bullets are ‘illegal’ in international warfare so it really does beg the question as to why the Metropolitan police were issued with them – or indeed was this a ‘special’ case that warranted their use?

  Jean’s family were not informed about his killing until more than 24 hours after it happened despite the officers on the scene finding Jean’s wallet with his Brazilian driving licence inside it. The Metropolitan Police immediately began briefing the press with ‘off the record’ statements saying that Jean was a terrorist, that he was acting suspiciously, that he was wearing a bulky coat and that he was challenged but refused to co-operate. All of these statements have of course subsequently proven to be absolutely, totally false.

  Usually in the event of a death at the hands of the police, an immediate investigation is begun by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC). However, one hour after Jean was killed; the head of the Metropolitan Police, Sir Iain Blair contacted the Home Office asking for the immediate suspension of any investigation by the IPCC. He ordered his officers to close Stockwell tube to any investigations and as a result of this it was six days before the IPCC could begin their investigations. This of course was six days during which vital evidence could have been fabricated or destroyed and a cover-up could have been instigated.

  Five hours after de Menezes was murdered, Sir Iain Blair appeared on national television stating that the ‘incident’ at Stockwell tube was related to the anti-terrorism operations and that Jean was challenged and resisted (a blatant lie). He also claimed that he was not told until the next day that Jean had been an innocent man but this must be a blatant lie, I feel. Do they seriously expect us to believe that a man was shot to death in this brutal, illegal manner and yet the head of the force was not told about it until the next day? In any event it was subsequently discovered that Blair had contacted the Home Office regarding the matter, one hour after the incident.

  The family of de Menezes firmly believe that the actions of police officers and of Sir Iain Blair constitute an attempted ‘cover-up’ operation. The disappearance of the CCTV from Stockwell tube (that old trick again), the attempt to block the IPCC from commencing their investigations, the tampering of the police records on the day, the police briefings suggesting Jean was acting suspiciously, all suggest that the police knew far more than they were admitting. To this day, no officer has yet been prosecuted or disciplined for the de Menezes killing, thus confirming the impression that the police in the UK are free to act w
ith impunity and without consequence to their actions.

  So, was this really all a huge mistake or could it have been something more sinister? The undercover police officers obviously knew where to find de Menezes on that day, unless we believe that they just happened to be loitering at Stockwell tube station, armed to the teeth, at that precise moment with nothing particularly better to do with their time. If this was not the case, then what was the reason for the elaborate cover-up and frantic attempts to cover their tracks? The primary justification from the police for de Menezes’ shooting was that they suspected him of being a terrorist simply because he was wearing a large coat which they ‘believed’ was concealing a bomb but as this has since been proved to be a gross lie, it also negates the excuse given for shooting him seven times in the head, which even assuming the police were telling the truth, was extremely flimsy at best. So what could the real motivation have been?

  Jean Charles de Menezes was an electrician by trade, a fact never disclosed by the police at the time. In fact at one point in the aftermath of the event they actually point-blank refused to name his occupation. This I believe to be highly significant in the light of subsequent information I received.

  Several years ago whilst in London at a conference, I happened to sit next to a local man who claimed that he had known him vaguely. He told me that de Menezes' occupation was electrical engineer and that he had been working as a contractor on the London tube immediately prior to 7/7. This person then told me that he strongly believed that de Menezes was brutally murdered not because he was mistaken as a terror suspect at all, but simply because he had been privy to aspects of the plot, in particular relating to the planting of the explosives under the floors of the trains which were detonated by means of ‘power surges’ and afterwards, despite serious threats against him and his family, he could not resist telling what really happened, to anyone who would listen.

  This is complete speculation as I have no proof whatsoever that it is true but it does have a certain ‘ring of truth’ to it and would neatly explain the mystery.

  However, no matter what the real truth, the fact remains that the illegal shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes was certainly no mistake and was, I am convinced, part of the cover-up operation of the 7/7 tragedy.

  The fake ‘War on Terrorism’ and the real ‘War on Islam’

  Despite the fact that you may not believe it to be possible, terrorism was actually created by Western governments to justify perpetual war. It is not an expression of dissent from a suppressed minority as we are constantly led to believe (except in rare, minor cases). For example, the Taliban is not a terrorist organisation as we are always told by the compliant media, but a movement attempting to unify Afghanistan under Muslim law and the only westerners threatened by the Taliban are the ones sent to Afghanistan by their ‘governments’ to kill Taliban and to impose a puppet state on the Afghan people in order to facilitate the expansion of corporate profits and interests, currently denied them by the actions of said Taliban. One man’s terrorist is indeed another man’s freedom fighter.

  In George Orwell’s 1984, the fake terrorist threat is very effectively used as a tool to spread fear and compliance among the population of ‘Airstrip One’, the new name for Great Britain. Whenever the government wishes to impose a new law or further restrict freedoms in any way, they wheel out their utterly invented, fake nemesis, ‘Emmanuel Goldstein’ who is then, along with his band of terrorists, said to have committed such and such an atrocity, effectively smoothing the way for further draconian restrictions of freedoms by invoking the Hegelian Dialectic (problem, reaction, solution). Does this sound at all familiar? For ‘Emmanuel Goldstein’ simply read ‘Osama bin Laden’, ‘Colonel Gaddafi’ or ‘Saddam Hussein’ and all may become clearer.

  The utterly ridiculous assertion that Iran is supplying sophisticated arms to the Palestinians is like the similarly false assertion that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. These assertions are propagandistic justifications for killing Arab civilians and destroying civilian infrastructure in order to further US, British and Israeli hegemony in the Middle East.

  The current perceived threat posed by Islam is the main barrier to the widespread expansion of Elite Zionism and therefore this makes it necessary for the Zionists to totally eliminate this threat. They do this by painting all Muslims as potential terrorists and then infiltrating Muslim dissident groups and by the use of coercion and the funding of their activities, these groups are subtly enticed to carry out minor acts of terror that can be inflated beyond all belief by the lackeys of the press and then used as examples of ‘the horrors of Islamic extremism’.

  It may thus be seen therefore, that the ‘war on terror’ is a gigantic hoax among many others that combine to make-up and sustain our fake reality.

  Consider these numbers for a moment; the reason will soon become apparent...

  In the USA in 2008, heart disease killed 870,000 people, doctor and hospital errors 200,000, road deaths were 43,000, salmonella poisoning 600 and terrorism 6 (and even that low figure is being extremely generous!)

  In 2009 the heart disease prevention budget was $2.9 bn whilst the anti-terrorism budget was $160 bn.

  What is wrong with this picture? Where is the war on heart disease, the war on medical inadequacy, road deaths and salmonella?

  Unfortunately, heart disease does not generate profits for the Elite military-industrial complex on the same scale as terrorism or indeed further the Elite agenda in any significant way. ‘Fighting terrorism’ is a wonderfully expedient way of continuing a war economy without end against an enemy that cannot even be adequately defined let alone conquered, has no discernible borders and no national identity to destroy. It is in fact the perfect ‘enemy’ for those who wish to deceive and enslave us and keep us in a permanent state of poverty and disenfranchisement by waging perpetual, unwinnable war, exactly as described in glorious detail by George Orwell in 1984.

  “According to US government propaganda, terrorist cells are spread throughout America, making it necessary for the government to spy on all Americans and violate most other constitutional protections. Among President Bush's last words as he left office was the warning that America would soon be struck again by Muslim terrorists. If America were infected with terrorists, we would not need the government to tell us. We would know it from events. As there are no events, the US government substitutes warnings in order to keep alive the fear that causes the public to accept pointless wars, the infringement of civil liberty, national ID cards, and inconveniences and harassments when they fly. The most obvious indication that there are no terrorist cells is that not a single neocon has been assassinated.” Paul Craig Roberts, The War on Terror is a Hoax, 2009

  The evolution of western societies as genuine democracies with the ability to unify mankind on a broad basis, has been derailed consistently and perhaps irreversibly, by corporate cartels that have taken these countries down the path of global conquest and total exploitation of many poor but resource-rich countries, committing genocide in the process.

  “The world does not hate the freedoms of Americans. They hate the assumptive power and presumptive freedoms of the US government that thinks it can tell any lie, fabricate any war, kill entire villages and destroy entire nations to terminate one alleged 'terrorist.' After one egregious act after another, and with no disregard for life whatsoever, they have the gall to pass yet another law to defend them from having to face the truth and be held accountable for their actions that have besmirched and defamed the name of America and all of its citizens.” Karl W. B. Schwarz, 16th December 2011

  The Elite corporations involved in this insidious plan, operate secretly, often illegally, sometimes within utterly immoral ‘laws’ lobbied-for by themselves and without regard for the wider interests of humanity in general. Thus, the exploited countries see the western democracies, in particular, the US, the UK and Israel as a power of unprecedented and unmatched ruthlessness. The US i
s not only the greatest super-power in history, but it is also the greatest subversive power ever to inflict itself upon humanity.

  “Every 10 years or so [even more frequently than that recently – JH] the US needs to pick up some crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show we mean business.” Michael Ledeen

  This ‘business’ is corporate business. Corporations have infiltrated the White House, the US legislative bodies and judiciary, as well as the US ‘alphabet soup’ agencies, some of which, such as the CIA, were created at the behest of Wall Street financial interests anyway in order to further their own agendas on foreign soil. And this is also true of America’s allies’ secret services. Indeed, not one of the so-called ‘western democracies’ have escaped corporate infiltration and in effect a secret takeover by Elite, corporate interests. This corporate ascendancy in the western power structure is now a constant and deeply-embedded feature of international politics. The people of the world are now almost ‘out of the loop’ completely as democracy has been totally hijacked. This is in fact the real danger to the future of mankind, not so-called ‘terrorism’.

  How often are we warned of the extreme dangers posed to our ‘democracy’ and ‘way of life’, by the ‘terrorist’ group Al Qaeda that according to the Elite, has cells everywhere in the world simultaneously, all in possession of unlimited funding? The popular translation attributed to ‘Al-Qaeda’ is ‘the database,’ which is said to refer to the CIA records of supposed Muslim extremists. However, the correct translation of the Arabic term Al-Qaeda is ‘the toilet’. The Arabic verb ‘Qa’ada’ means ‘to sit on the toilet’. Arab homes have one or more of three kinds of toilets: ‘Hamam Franji’ or ‘Al-Qaeda’ or foreign toilet, ‘Hamam Arabi’ or Arab toilet, and a potty used by children called ‘Ma Qa’adia’ or ‘Little Qaeda’. ‘Ana raicha al Qaeda’ is a colloquial expression for ‘I am going to the toilet’. Why would a terrorist group call itself ‘the toilet’? Simply because Al-Qaeda is CIA/MI6/Mossad-Zionist fiction and a pathetic, humourless attempt at an ‘insider’ joke. These entities love nothing better than a good old laugh at our ‘ignorance’.