The last couple of weeks I had no internet access and very little access to news in any language I can understand. But still, when I heard about the London bombings,
I never believed that "Islamists" actually were behind those bombings. It just doesn´t make any sense.
Officials in London now say, that the 4 perpetrators were tricked by their "Islamist" group-leaders, since they still carried their IDs. "Those perpetrators were ready to transport the bombs, but not kill themselves".
Well, this makes even less sense.
Why would islamic radicals murder the members of their own group?
They could have told them, to just leave their backpacks behind and get off the bus or subway before the explosion.
While the investigators now admit that the transporters of the bombs were tricked, the taboo-subject is still to ask the quite logical question, if the people behind the bombings were actually "Islamists" or even Muslims at all.
I think Joh Domingo is right, when he asks Muslimic leaders to stop defending Islam by trying to distance themselves from those crazy mass-murdering radicals, when Islam should not be on the suspect list of those mass-murders at all.
And here I go again asking: "Who profits?"
In every criminal investigation this is a legitimate question, only in political crimes these questions are banned or only allowed to "crazy conspiracy theorists" like me.
And yes I agree that even in criminal cases the person with the strongest obvious motive is not allways the perpetrator of the crime, but to take him off the suspect list is surely a bit unprofessional, isn´t it?
Like in Spain a year ago, now in Britain the population is getting less and less enthusiastic about the American war in Iraq. Even war-mongerer Tony Blair did show notions that he did not want to help expand the war to Iran. He seemed to fall in line behind the European position about Iran and her nuclear energy program.
Could it be, that those attacks were a shot at Tony Blair, that if he would no longer support the Anglo-Saxon-Israel course, it would be easy to just murder his people?
Of course I might be wrong, and Blair was in on it from the get going.
But when we remember the Madrid attacks, then we can be quite sure, that the former Spanish prime minister Aznar was not in on the Madrid attacks or he would have handled the propaganda war a bit less clumsily.
Some people thought that Aznar needed a bit of help in the elections and then they also thought the Spanish would react like a vengeful mob craving for Muslim blood just like the Americans have done after 9/11. But Aznar knew his people better, so he tried to blame the ETA for the few days before the elections. It didn´t help him.
Possible the same people who were behind the Madrid attacks had now in London learned their lesson. They waited til after the reelection of Tony Blair.
And my guess is, that they didn´t ask his permission, just as they didn´t ask Aznar´s.
Maybe, just maybe, there are indications that Europe is not taking the whole thing laying down any more. By officially stating that the bomb-transporters were being tricked, officials leave a small door open to one day tell their people that backers of the attacks were false flag agents of some non-muslimic intelligenc agency.
The purpose of course might also be, to discourage Muslims from becoming patsies for those agencies by joining some sinister groups, telling them: " At least, be careful, your leaders might trick you and murder you."
But besides that, the anti-Muslim propaganda goes on unhindered. From normal decent people in Germany I hear things like: "I have nothing against those people personally, it´s just their terrible religion. I hope this religion will die out some day." (Being exterminated or what do you mean by this?)
No, I don´t think, there is any other way: We need the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth to prevent further slaughter of people, Muslim people and non-Muslim people alike.
And for this all people of good will, need to get the courage to become "conspiracy theorists". And there I mean especially the people from the left, who are more worried about their own reputation and credibility than about truth and the terrible consequences those propaganda lies, they themselves encourage, have on all the poor people of the world.
Look at the evidence produced by so many diligent people about 9/11. Yes, there are a few disinformant agents among them or a few others who love their own preconceived theories so much they do not care about evidence, but if you look at the bulk of the research of the 9/11 truth movement, you can say with certainty, that the official story is a lie: The events couldn´t have happened this way, there are physical and organisational impossibilities.
So lets be couragous enough to look, couragous enough to ask the obvious question: