« Alex Jones - Terrorstorm | Main | Multidimensional lizard aliens and David Shayler »

September 17, 2006

Alex Jones' Terrorstorm - more details and more errors

I've been going through Terrorstorm a bit more closely, to pick out some more of the problems with its account of the LOndon bombings. Here's the details from the first 28mins of the film (will add more later on, but 28mins of this is enough for me to do this Sunday...

18:25- Jones claims that “Prime Minister Tony Blair – leader of the Labour Party – was facing an uphill battle in parliamentary elections.” However, the 7/7 bombings occurred 2 months after Labour one a majority in the UK parliament, in the national elections (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2005). Apparently these bombings were “right on time”; however, if this was an MI6 operation to boost Blair’s election hopes they were actually pretty late…
Terrorstorm claims that “national polls showed that [Blair’s] pro-war party was sure to lose” (even though elections has just been won). It is a bit beside the point, given that Labour had just won an election, polls from May 2005 show Labour in the lead - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/vote2005/polltracker/html/polltracker.stm.

19:00- God Save The Queen plays and Jones shows pictures which – brilliantly, establish that Britain has: armed police, CCTV cameras, and an army. I wonder what the next revelation will be…

19:50- Just to remind us whose graves he’s p*ssing on, Jones shows footage of the London bombs going off.

20:30 – Terrorstorm alleges that “we see the exact same earmarks, the same MO, in the London bombings that we witnessed in Madrid.” There was a similar MO, but it’s not exactly a revelation that terrorist groups learn from ‘successes’ elsewhere. Simultaneous detonation of bombs on public transport is a ‘good’ way of murdering a lot of civilians – terrorists are well able to figure this out. Obviously, Terrorstorm’s real hard evidence that this was an ‘inside job’ is coming up.

20:50 – Terrorstorm claims that the 7/7 bombs (sorry “explosive devices”) were “military-grade”. It does not say what it means by this, or provide any evidence for the claim. However, the evidence indicates that the bombs were relatively crude ‘home made’ devices; the ‘bomb factory’ used by the terrorists was also found (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/11_05_06_narrative.pdf p23).

21:20- they show an interview with an unidentified man, who interprets the initial confusion over whether the bomb blast was a power surge. Obviously, the hard evidence for this is coming up…

21:45 – refers to “the London Police Department”. Do they mean the Metropolitan Police Service (I’d guess this is who they mean), or other police in London? When accusing a police service of complicity in mass murder, it is best to be clear whom you are accusing.
Terrorstorm argues that the #30 bus on which a bomb went off is the only bus that the police “take special control of” and redirect; this is “mysterious”. However, Transport for London have confirmed that that Euston Rd. was closed on that day. Because the #30 bus route normally goes along Euston Rd, all #30 buses (not just that one) were therefore redirected. While London’s bus service is now pretty good, anyone who uses it regularly will confirm that road closures and redirection of buses are hardly rare events.
22:10- Jones claims that this is “the only bus that the police take special control of and direct to Tavistock Square”. This is simply wrong – the bus (along with all others using Euston Rd.) was redirected because of the road closure. If only a single bus in London had to be redirected in a normal morning, that would be something amazing; for only one bus to be redirected when bombs were going of in London is not a credible claim. Jones should have checked out this claim, but didn’t bother.
22:20- they check the bus stops to prove that the #30 bus doesn’t normally go to Tavistock Square. But – wait a minute – when buses are redirected doesn’t that mean they deviate from their usual route…surely not…
22:45- it is now asserted that “the #30 bus was the only bus that was redirected to a different area of the city.” OK, so with bombs going off in London, only one London bus was redirected? Does this sound odd…would a good journalist have checked this claim…

23:10- the “supposed bomber on the bus” looked confused and frightened. Now, if I were going to blow myself up, I might be a little nervous – but clearly Jones is made of sterner stuff.

23:20 – Jones asserts that the police investigating 7/7 said that the actions of the bombers did not fit the typical MO. Jones source – and the article pictured in Terrorstorm – seems to be this CBS article (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/07/27/world/main712368.shtml). Jones’ interpretation of the article is very misleading:
· The article doesn’t quote police but “experts who have been briefed by police”. Now, if he were a diligent journalist Jones could probably have got a quote from The Met, but it looks like he was just going on secondhand information.
· The article’s discussion of atypical MO does not come from a police source, but from security/defence expert Paul Beaver.
· The article goes beyond noting the atypical MO of the bombers. Here’s a few more quotes from the article:
· While Beaver did believe that the bombers may not have known that they were on a suicide mission, he also acknowledges that “The bombers' behavior also could have been designed to avoid suspicion, Beaver said. "The more normal you can be, the less conspicuous you are — you have to be a gray man,"”.
· The article also gives a different perspective: “The July 7 bombers could simply have been cautions, said Alex Standish, editor of Jane's Intelligence Digest. Also, the least expensive Luton to London ticket costs only about 15 cents more for a return fare.
Palestinian suicide bombers often leave videotaped messages. But the July 7 attackers grew up in Britain and would have known their families could be charged as accessories if told of the planned attacks, Standish said.
The fact that they carried identification — cited by some as evidence they planned to flee — was more likely designed to ensure the world would know who they were, he said.”
· Oddly, Terrorstorm does not find time to mention these more nuanced positions.

23:40 – Terrorstorm finds it unusual that one 7/7 bomber argued with a ticket clerk re. price. Terrorists do some odd things – for example, Mohammed Salameh was arrested for his involvement in the 1993 WTC bombings when he tried to get back the deposit on the hired van used in the attack (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2800297.stm) - and are not necessarily the most rational people. This is interesting, but not terribly surprising.

23:55: Terrorstorm notes that eyewitnesses believed that the bombers didn’t to know that they were carrying bombs in their bags. Jones claims that this “on the record” testimony was one of many “huge developments in the case”.
Given that the bombers were not wearing ‘waiting for paradise’ T-shirts, and did not have wires trailing out of their bags or timers making a loud ticking sound, it is not clear how eyewitnesses could tell from looking at someone if they know that they are carrying a bomb.
There is also the videos released by the bombers - which appear to be 'wills', and strongly suggest that they were committed to violence and did not expect to survive this operation (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22989-1761688,00.html and http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5154714.stm)

24:10: Terrorstorm claims that the “supposed” 7/7 ‘mastermind’ Haroon Rashid Aswat was a UK intelligence asset; its sole source is a single episode of Fox News’ Dayside. Clearly, Fox is a totally reliable source, and anything stated even once on it must be accurate. That must be why Jones does not appear to have looked into this story in more detail (I could not find other sources for the claim).
Dayside did not make this claim about Aswat as part of its editorial stance, but this was stated by John Loftus in an interview on the programme. Loftus is an interesting guy – former US army officer and Justice Dept. prosecutor, “oftus once held some of the highest security clearances in the world, with special access to NATO Cosmic, CIA codeword, and Top Secret Nuclear files. As a private attorney, he [now] works without charge to help hundreds of intelligence agents obtain lawful permission to declassify and publish the hidden secrets of our times.”
However, Loftus has made a number of inaccurate claims in the past. For example, he argued that Saddam was killed early in Operation Iraqi Freedom (http://www.spitfirelist.com/f406.html). Loftus also once provided the address of a suspected terrorist named Iyad K. Hilal on Fox News; owever, Hilal left the address three years previously and the home was currently owned by the family of Randy Vorick, who were subjected to threats and vandalism and required police protection. (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_08/006979.php and http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/29/when-fox-news-fans-attack/)
It is not possible to verify or falsify Loftus’ claims re. Aswat: either he had accurate ‘inside’ information, or he did not. Whether the former DoJ prosecutor retained the contacts to give him useful inside information – not available to others – so long after stopping work for the government is something you’ll have to decide for yourself. This is, however, a very significant claim to take ‘on trust’ from a single unchekable source.
24:44- to help establish Loftus’ credentials as an expert, Terrorstorm shows a very prestigious-looking webpage on him. This turns out to come from the Harry Walker Agency: an agency which arranges lectures/public speakers, and has Loftus on its books.
25:08- to show that the UK blocked Aswat’s arrest prior to the 7/7 bombings, Terrorstorm shows a picture of the headline from this CNN story - http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/07/28/london.tube/index.html. It’s worth looking at the story more closely than the film does: CNN states that “U.S. authorities had asked South Africa if they could take Aswat into custody. South Africa relayed the request to Britain, but authorities there balked because he was a British citizen, the sources said. While the debate was ongoing, Aswat slipped away.” Given the US use of dubious interrogation and detention tactics – extraordinary rendition, etc. – it is understandable that the UK government might ‘balk’ at British citizens entering US custody. This would particularly be the case if the US lacked evidence to tie a UK citizen to terrorist activity: as the CNN story states, “Aswat was an unindicted co-conspirator in [a] terrorist camp case”. It appears that the US had wanted to bypass normal extradition proceedings when taking Aswat into custody: “[t]he US, it is claimed, wanted to take control of Aswat using a process known as ‘extraordinary rendition’, which would bypass the normal extradition process and may have resulted in him being flown to Guantanamo Bay in Cuba or a country that allows torture.” (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1715122,00.html). Given that Jones objects so strongly to ‘police states’, one would think that he would be delighted that Britain had stood up to the US in this way.
25:10- even if one believes Loftus, he is not saying that Aswat worked for UK intelligence to carry out the 7/7 bombings: he is arguing that Aswat was both working to pass intelligence on Al Qaeda to UK intelligence, and engaging in terrorist activity himself.
26:30 – Loftus claims that Aswat was on a UK terrorist watchlist; again, no way to verify this. Aswat also claims that the only reason someone on a terrorist watchlist could get away with flying into/out of London is if working with British intelligence. Given history of agencies not talking to each other, watchlists not being enforced etc (as with 9/11) there are many other possible reasons for this. Moreover, as a British citizen it would be unusual for the UK to restrict Aswat’s freedom to enter the country.

26:50- introduces David Shayler as another ‘expert’. Before getting into his statements, it’s worth noting that Shayler appears to have used his intelligence expertise to conclude that “aliens have been negotiating with [Britain’s] government and 500 abductees are the only people who’ve got any real idea about all this 9-11 stuff. That includes 7/7 and 11/7 (date of Mumbai bombings by the way) - all evidence of an underground plot by a ‘shadow Zionist secret government’. Amongst other interesting points conjured forth [by Shayler] were that the Royal family is descended from multi-dimensional Annunaki lizards” (http://www.schnews.org.uk/archive/news559.htm). Yes, multi-dimensional alien lizards.

27: despite all the eyewitness reports of 7/7, and evidence re. where the bombs were Shayler focuses on the one anomalous report that suggests the bomb was under a train (metal pointing up). The specific witness in this case is Bruce Lait (http://69.93.122.250/~officia/77/witnesses/110705cenlait.html). Lait does state that “[t]he metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train. They seem to think the bomb was left in a bag, but I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag”. However, the same article acknowledges that Lait was knocked out, and was left disorientated. I’m sure Lait was being entirely honest, but a degree of confusion and gaps in his memory are not all that surprising.

27:44- Introducing Meacher, Jones states that he was sacked from Cabinet in 2003 “for raising important questions on the eve of the Iraq war.” Firstly, Jones timeline is wrong: Meacher was sacked in June 2003 ((http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/06/22/ngm22.xml) while Operation Iraqi Freedom began in March 2003. Meacher has therefore chosen to remain part of the UK government even while the UK played a major role in the invasion of Iraq.
Meacher may have been raising important questions about Operation Iraqi Freedom, but he actually supported war at the time. Meacher “did not, contrary to reports at the time, oppose military action. ‘What persuaded me was the idea that getting rid of a murderous, barbarous, genocidal regime responsible for millons of deaths overrode anything else,’ he said. ‘It was a justification for military action." He added: "It was not the reason why we went to war. My view is that we went to war because America wanted to establish a political and military platform in the Middle East, it saw a need for oil and of course it wished to support Israel.’” (http://www.epolitix.com/EN/MPWebsites/Michael+Meacher/2FA15560-AD0C-4262-B476-9E5580F8449B.htm).
At the time, Meacher’s scepticism about the case for GM food – instead of his position on the Iraq war – was seen as key to his sacking (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3010254.stm). As Environment Minister, GM food was certainly an issue that would have fallen more under Meacher’s remit than Operation Iraqi Freedom did.

28: For Meacher the bombings are “a very convenient way of ensuring there is fear, of ensuring that there is control, of ensuring that those who are in the know – and of course we cannot tell you because it is all secret – are in a position of extreme power.” However, while implying that the UK government benefited from these bombings, Meacher (and Terrorstorm) fail to substantiate their statements.

Posted by jon_mendel at September 17, 2006 02:04 PM