Sid Walker

Thanks Daniel. I think however that when you describe me as an outstanding webmaster, you are either poorly informed or taking the mickey. I'm sure on this forum there are some real computer experts. I can provide an amateur's input, that's all. A few wise heads would be best...

I can't think of a single aspect of the official 9-11 story that bears close scrutiny. Rich pickings for nimble minds like Ron, who has a knack of spotting anomalies and writing about them with wit and persistence.

You are not all ears you are all mouth and what pours forth from that orifice is neither instructive nor helpful. You are a fool if you believe that the religious attacks on the UK, Australia and the USA have been inspired by anything other than misguided god heads hoping for a quick route to paradise and a large number of virgins. In answer to your question cited above the banning of the religious indoctrinination of children would be a start Is that right, Andy? Well, whoever is correct about these troublesome topics, one thing I trust we can all agree about is the desirability of maintaining an accurate record of these discussions for posterity. I therefore have a few questions for you, Andy. I had been wondering whether to start a thread about this. Your interjection provides me with an opportunity to at least flag the topic and indicate some genuine concerns. Are you the only person who holds an archive copy of this forum - or do others have copies also? If the latter, who else? In the event of a major system crash or - heaven forbid - a deliberate attempt to hack or take down this forum, how can we all be sure that the forum can and will be successfully restored? What happens if - heaven forbid yet again - you are run over by a London bus? What happens if the iphost.com is taken over by agents of, let's say, the 'North Korean' Government? Once material is published on this forum, IMO, it effectively enters the public domain. I think we can be confident that various flavours of spooks have copies. What about the public - and those who act as trustees on our behalf? How are you protecting our interests... and ensuring historical continuity for this wonderful resource? I decided to start a new thread on this topic HERE, to avoid distracting this thread from its primary purpose.

My interest in raising this topic is not an attempt to cast doubt on the integrity or competence of the proprietors / managers of this forum. They are to be complemented for taking the forum thus far and keeping it running each day. However, it does seem to me this forum is an important historical resource. Once published on the forum, material is effectively in the public domain. It's important, IMO, that the public retains permanent access to it. I think it likely that various flavours of spooks around the world have their own copies. We need to make sure our interests are protected too. By its nature, this forum is potentially vulnerable. Material is published here that may well get up the nose of a variety of powerful interests around the world. A robust system of backups, existing of backups and distributed access to them is therefore desirable, IMO - even more so than in the case of a forum about less controversial topics. I'm not confident at present that it exists. Some time ago I emailed John Simkin and expressed some of these concerns. He emailed back that he had checked with Andy Walker, who assured him that iphost.com backs up the site daily. I have no doubt that's right... but it does not really get to the heart of my concerns. IMO, one needs to ask 'what if' questions and have each one of them covered. What if... (heaven forbid) Andy gets run over by a London bus? What if... iphost.com goes out of business overnight? What if... when needed, the back-up file is corrupted and does not serve to restore the site? I'm sure that's not a full list of all the possible disasters. Perhaps, with John and Andy's agreement, a small team of forum members, each with a modicum of computer savvy, could produce recommendations about this?

You are not all ears you are all mouth and what pours forth from that orifice is neither instructive nor helpful. You are a fool if you believe that the religious attacks on the UK, Australia and the USA have been inspired by anything other than misguided god heads hoping for a quick route to paradise and a large number of virgins. In answer to your question cited above the banning of the religious indoctrinination of children would be a start Is that right, Andy? Well, whoever is correct about these troublesome topics, one thing I trust we can all agree about is the desirability of maintaining an accurate record of these discussions for posterity. I therefore have a few questions for you, Andy. I had been wondering whether to start a thread about this. Your interjection provides me with an opportunity to at least flag the topic and indicate some genuine concerns. Are you the only person who holds an archive copy of this forum - or do others have copies also? If the latter, who else? In the event of a major system crash or - heaven forbid - a deliberate attempt to hack or take down this forum, how can we all be sure that the forum can and will be successfully restored? What happens if - heaven forbid yet again - you are run over by a London bus? What happens if the iphost.com is taken over by agents of, let's say, the 'North Korean' Government? Once material is published on this forum, IMO, it effectively enters the public domain. I think we can be confident that various flavours of spooks have copies. What about the public - and those who act as trustees on our behalf? How are you protecting our interests... and ensuring historical continuity for this wonderful resource?

Fidel's remarks are on target, IMO. How rare to read informed commentary on these topics by an intelligent statesman!

Sid, the Lord Stevens, mentioned in the BBC report in my previous post, has (when just plain John Stevens, notice how one can also get promotions doing this work) performed 3 investigations into the murder of Pat Finucane, amongst others, but primarily Finucane. (Interesting aside, his right hand man on the first inquiry was Hugh Orde now chief of the PSNI) None of which have wholly been made public, national security and all that. A few abridged pages from Stevens 3 made it into the public domain. Despite institutionalised refusals to co-operate by MI and RUC Special Branch and the naming of many of these as murderers or puppet masters for murderers in the report, there will be no prosecutions (see Pat Finucane thread). Demands for a public independent inquiry have been made by his family, Irish Nationalists and Republicans, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Washington etc. etc. and what....nada. Oh sorry the promise of a public inquiry was initially agreed and the wheels set in motion only for, wait for it, portions of the 'public inquiry' to be held behind closed doors and not to be made available to the report. Cory, who set the scope of the inquiry has stated many times that this is not what he had in mind when he initiated the inquiry. Furthermore, International lawyers groups have petitioned and stated that no member of their profession should participate in this farce of an inquiry under the new pre-conditions laid down by...basically the people who carried out the murders. Then add to that the fact that in this case, the Intelligence operatives, soldiers and police all went to court so they could not be identified and won. Appearing, behind screens as A, B etc. Their case hinging on the fact that to do so would put them in the firing line of the Provies. HA!!!!! Put this template on top of your suggestion in your previous post and tell me that "DEMANDING honest public inquiry which genuinely investigate these atrocities is a very useful line of defense open to the public." Unfortunately it just don't work like that, never has, never will. Gary I hear the frustration and the despair. But what's the alternative? If the public completely gives up the demand for any form of official investigative follow-up, it gives the perpetrators of false-flag murders, fake terror crimes etc a completely free hand. Imagine if public confidence in the police and coronial system fell so low that no-one bothered to ask for a police inquiry, inquest or coroner's inquiry any more in the event of any suspicious death. Killers would then be able to murder with complete certainty that their activities will remain uninvestigated. What the Axis of Cynicism has achieved, in effect, is to erode faith that crimes for which it is responsible will ever be investigated properly. The justice system remains in place, but simply doesn't apply to crimes for which they choose exemption... That's a real shocker. Anyhow, if anyone can think of an alternative approach that may be more efficacious, I'm all ears. But it seems to me most unwise to give up on the investigative and justice system. That is exactly what these guys are counting on. They turn the intelligence and skepticism of significant sectors of the community to their own advantage. I don't think we should let them get away with it.

An exploding butt plug, perhaps? By the way, did either of the two look, well, Caucasian to you? If there's much more erosion of civil liberties, fair judicial process and honesty in media reportage, our spooks may be able to use entirely virtual patsies. Just actors... who disappear deep inside the memory hole when their 15 minutes of fame is over. It would be a humane reform. No need to bother with bodgy trials, long, expensive incarcerations and outraged families campaigning for justice.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this, Sid, as there's not much either of us could offer to change minds. But I take your point regarding the thuggy Pentagon and Langley - the exterminatory tactics might be theirs, but the strategy? Agreeing to differ is fine, Paul. I imagine we're both open to further evidence either way. All I'll add for now is that if the "Anglophile elite" within the western spookdom hasn't been taken over by Zionists, they do a bloody good job of faking it. History, Sid, will settle this one definitively. For what it's worth, I believe the Anglo-American crackerjacks will shed Zionism with all the emotional concern of a snake disgarding an old skin when the time comes; and the Israeli elite knows this better than anyone. But we'll see. One must always permit the possibility of error. Paul Perhaps. But these 'crackerjacks', if they really function as a team at all, may discover they actually reside inside the belly of another, even larger python. I think they already have.

An Evertonian. Nope, never met the coves in my life, and I'm inclined to agree: But O'Hara on Shayler is very good. Thirded - and this is where I came in... I also thought O'Hara raised some interesting points. I'd like to see more detail... but I'm disinclined to fork out ten quid to buy the DVD and find out whether it exists. Call me stingy , but there it is. Unfortunately, the link to Steve Booth's summary cited by O'Hara doesn't work. Everton? I presume you mean the suburb of Liverpool - the city that hosts England's most successful soccer team? Just teasing.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this, Sid, as there's not much either of us could offer to change minds. But I take your point regarding the thuggy Pentagon and Langley - the exterminatory tactics might be theirs, but the strategy? Agreeing to differ is fine, Paul. I imagine we're both open to further evidence either way. All I'll add for now is that if the "Anglophile elite" within western spookdom hasn't been taken over by Zionists, they do a bloody good job of faking it.

Agreed. The second series of attacks in London - the ones following 7/7 - represented a blatant attempt to distract from, and retrospectively fudge, a considerable number of anomalies in the original. Paul Broadly speaking, this has been the strategy of the perpetrators of the global 'WoT' ever since it was publicly launched back in September 2001. A hypnotic cavalcade of terror. No sooner does one rabbit disappear into obscurity than another pops out of the hat. Watch me eyes, not my hands... ignore at all costs the man behind the curtain!

Why's that, Paul? Sid, By way of reply - and a plug for a fellow "bluenose" - try this link for very important reasons to view Shayler with extreme scepticism: http://www.borderland.co.uk/notes_from_the...derland_002.htm But the fact remains that the above-linked doc is still very well done. Paul Thanks Paul. I find this very interesting. What's a 'bluenose'? On the webpage you cited as a reference, additional links are provided for further information. Having just read the homepage of http://www.911cultwatch.org.uk/, my first impressions are that the authors - not Shayler and Machin - are probable disinformationalists (or perhaps honestly misguided souls). Likewise http://paulstott.typepad.com/911cultwatch/. I hope I'm not talking about friends of yours I do agree with you, having now viewed the video, that the 9-11 Conspiracy Files demolition is superb. Well done to Shayler and the Bristol 9-11 Truth people!

David's right, Sid, we have nowhere to go with our protests. Our politicians are terrified, and our media firmly under the spook heel. There are no mainstream outlets for serious questions, reasoned objections etc. In Britain, and I suspect the same is true in Oz and the United States of Torture, knowledge, even if one can acquire it, is impotence. I appreciate both your comments and the sentiments behind them. FWIW, here's a brief anecdote from recent Australian history that supports the thesis that resistance is indeed very hard. Australia's only publicly acknowledged act of 'terrorism' on home soil took place in the late 70s. I refer to the so-called Sydney Hilton bombing. This mysterious bomb atrocity, which took place at the time of a Regional Heads of Government meeting in 1978, caused the death of three and injuries to several other people. Members of the Ananda Marga sect were blamed for the outrage. Several served jail terms. But despite various murky twists and turns in the saga, they were exonerated and the mystery about who was really culpable remains to this day. One of the seriously injured victims, policeman Terry Griffiths, fought a long battle for justice. He believes it was an inside job and claims he was told as much by 'insiders'. In the early 1990s, a brave and incorruptible independent MP in the NSW Parliament, John Hatton, forced a vote on a call for a public inquiry (there had been no inquiry by that time - well over 10 years after the bomb blast). This led to a veritable stampede of courage and me-too righteousness in the State Parliament. Hatton's resolution passed with bipartisan support. However, the Commonwealth Government declined to support an inquiry (as it happens, Labor was in power at the time, God help us). So it never happened. Today, nearly 30 years on, no inquiry. So... was it all a waste of time? Was Hatton's work in vain? Should Terry Griffiths have just given up? I don't think so. The campaign, I believe, put Australian spookery on the defensive. It gave them pause for thought before they did it again. Now, take the Warren Commission - an inquiry that was clearly a corruption of due process, from the terms of reference onwards. Would it have made no difference if it had simply never happened? I don't think so. The Warren Commission's report provided a basis for critics to mount an attack. It did, at least, provide explanations for the assassinations - however inadequate. Critiques of the Warren Commission helped launch a public movement to discover the truth. Historians can now pick the Report apart. The same is true of the 9-11 Commissions in more recent times. In the case of the Hilton bombings and 7/7, however, the respective Governments and spookdoms got away scot free. They didn't even have to provide a detailed account of the events. Blair was able to rely on such deep public cynicism about inquiries that even many of those inclined to support an inquiry didn't bother to make the demand. This frees up the time of these State-sponsored criminals and empowers them to go again... and again... and again. If they don't even face a serious investigation, they have nothing to fear. In such circumstances, their best strategy is to increase the frequency of attacks so no-one can keep track in all the confusion. That. I fear, may be what's happening.

I get the feeling that you might be making the above statements in sarcasm, but if not; Per the Hudson Institute and the Economist, Putin, former high ranking KGB officer, has filled most of the Russian Government posts with former KGB and FSB officers and agents. Criticism of Putin is quite typically met with retribution, often violent. From the Hudson Institute ....... Wall Street Journal....... Guardian....... It goes on and on. Indeed it does, Peter. And that's my point. Ironically, to refute my argument, you have quoted sources I said I believe are showing serious bias in their coverage of Putin's Russia. No, I was not being facetious at all. I think the western mass media's criticisms of Putin's Russia are not 'balanced and fair'. Your claim that the USSR, not the USA, had a 'first strike' policy on nuclear weapons is quite incorrect, IMO. The USA came closer to abandonning 'Mutual Assured Destruction'' than the Soviet Union. The Star Wars program was - and remains - a unilateral US attempt to 'break out' of the MAD paradigm, and has been justified on that basis. IMO, the case that the US is now seeking to go beyond 'deterrence' towards an intimidatory 'compellance' was well made in Whitney's article. In general, I think you give far too much credence to sources that have shown themselves very unreliable in the context of other major news stories. That's understandable, for someone who apparently buys the official line on topics such as 9-11. I surmise you don't think western political culture is anything like as corrupted - at the highest levels - as I believe it to be. I hope you are right, but fear you are not.

Spot on. And ditto for Australia. Australians will know - but others may not be familiar with - a classic from the 1960s, in which then Australian Prime Minister Menzies handed over Pine Gap to the US occupier for a peppercorn, in a ceremonial act of obeisance. It is excruciating to watch. I'm sure someone has put it on Youtube. My belief remains, however, that Israeli/organized Jewish interests are top of the food chain in the aggregation of western spookdom that has taken place since World War Two. The most crucial decisions taken by this beast are made outside the Pentagon - or Langley. The US military-industrial-spook complex is like a very large pair of biceps, complete with bone, sinews and claws. The brain is elsewhere.

Why's that, Paul?

Once again, we have the spectacle of increasingly strident western attacks on a democratically-elected nationalist leader with: - strong and stable popularity - the determination to assert the interests of the part of the world community he represents above the interests of global corporations and banking interests I'd be interested in comments about the following paragraphs from Whitney's article: Are these statistics accurate?

In recent times, there has been rather hyped up talk of a 'New Cold War'. Putin is increasingly portrayed in the western mass media as a despot, winding back democratic reforms within Russia and posing a threat to world peace. It's a useful corrective to hear Putin's point of view. Unfortunately, he gets less airtime these days in the western mass media than London-based Mafya bosses. Here's Putin’s Censored Press Conference - the transcript you weren’t supposed to see by Mike Whitney, whom I believe to be one of the best current affairs commentators in today's world. Before Putin's words disappear down the Memory Hole... _____________________________

Michael, IMO, is one of the most fair-minded, thoughtful, well-read and generally intelligent members of the forum. A true independent spirit. It has surprised and saddened me on occasion to see him attacked by other good people. I'm glad this thread provides me with an opportunity to say so, on the record.

Sid...my old Mac no longer will play videos except Quicktime. Can you give a brief summary of what this is about? A sentence or two will do. Jack Jack, the best one-liner is "upgrade ASAP!" If you're missing Youtube videos you're missing too much. The video focuses on a handful of interviews that were run on network TV very soon after the twin towers fell. Key elements of the official story were woven into these interviews, notably: - the twin towers fell because of the planes' impacts causing structural failure (NOT controlled demolition) - Bin Laden was responsible for the atrocities being witnessed One interviewee was purportedly a 'man on the street' eyewitness; another was an 'expert' apparently able to offer informed instant opinion. In both cases, they promoted key elements of the official story within minutes of the atrocities taking place. The video points out that in any 'normal' crime, behaviour like this would be regarded as highly suspicious - and a probable indicator of complicity. Of course, 9-11 was all about suspending normality, so judgment preceded investigation and punishment preceded evidence.

The 911 Solution the Big Clue Everybody Missed How the 9-11 mass murder mystery was 'solved' within an hour on network TV.

Self-promotion? Perhaps. But there must be fairly strict rules governing that. Otherwise we'd have spooks and 'private contractors' dropping tidbits of insider knowledge all over the show. I surmised that Power hadn't been in the loop at the time of his interviews - and simply didn't realize the import of his remarks. Anyhow, given that the fearless and incorruptible British mass media have - as far as I'm aware - studiously exercised their power to overlook this astonishing story ever since 7/7, no harm done. Which leads to another possible theory about what these guys are up to when they open gigantic cans of worms, deliberately, in full view - then close them up again and waft off into the ether of unaccountability. In common parlance, it's called 'taking the piss'. You asked about the time, David. It's nearly 10pm and the moon is just about full. A blue moon for this time zone (I gather you had yours last month).

Very interesting, David. Thanks also for the timely transcript of Power's notorious 7/7 interview, which has had me gobsmacked since I first saw it all those moons ago. The thing that has had me puzzled from the outset about that Peter Power interview is why on earth he gave it. If I recall correctly, he gave both a radio interview and the Channel 5 interview in which he repeated the same astonishing story. Hardly, therefore, a slip of the tongue. Any ideas?

Of course, it is 'possible' this latest bomb scare is the work of Islamic extremists. It is also possible there are little green men on Mars. Any member of the public who says it isn't so speculates with excessive certainty, given the paucity of information available to us. But I also believe that any sensible person with their eyes open who has been tracking the 'War on Terror' attentively must admit there is a reasonable prospect that the latest, widely publicized 'bomb scare' in London is once again the work of spooks - whether British, American, Israeli or perhaps some other flavour of kindred anti-Islamic extremists. It was, in my opinion, quite appalling that the British public did not DEMAND an independent inquiry into the 7/7 bomb blasts. Its failure to press home this demand greatly increased the probability of more such nonsense occurring again. On the occasion of 7/7, the authorities asked us to believe that the CCTV system largely failed on the day. Will this improbable story be repeated again? Is there no limit to the absurdities we are expected to swallow without complaint? I understand skepticism about inquiries that investigate terrorism, assassinations and/or the ludicrously misnamed 'security services'. The Hutton Inquiry was the latest fiasco. Yet arguably, the highly restrictive terms of reference was the greatest problem of all with the Hutton Inquiry - and the Warren Commission before it. Neither inquiry was assumption-free. Both were premised on the guilt of those already accused of the crimes. If my inference is correct - and incidents such as 7/7 and the recent car bomb discoveries are some form of 'inside job' - then DEMANDING honest public inquiry which genuinely investigate these atrocities is a very useful line of defense open to the public. It's a very reasonable demand. It puts pressure on the perpetrators. On the other hands, if the public continues to allow Secret State Agencies to get away with spinning their narratives investigation-free, we hand them a charter to blow us up at will, like disposable pyrotechnic props.