Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
#1][Image: barrett.jpg][/url]
Dr. Kevin Barrett, a Ph.D. Arabist-Islamologist, is one of America’s best-known critics of the War on Terror. 


Gladio B strikes London on Satanic holiday - one year after Brussels
Ole Dammegard recently predicted a false flag attack on Big Ben – he will appear tomorrow on 
Kevin Barrett

A MASSIVE, ICONIC terror event (a couple of people hit by a car, a policeman stabbed, an alleged perp shot) shocked and galvanized the world today. STOP THE PRESSES!

[Image: 1-brussels-640x597.jpg]

Another “radical Islamic attack” on a satanic holiday – one year to the day after]the big Brussels false flag

But wait a minute. More than 270,000 pedestrians are killed by vehicles each year, while well over a million are injured. That means more than a thousand are killed, and perhaps three or four thousand injured, every day. Of the thousands and thousands of vehicular casualties that happen every day all over the world, a tiny fraction just occurred near the Parliament building in London. The logical inference: Somebody spent a rather small sum of money to arrange a publicity stunt which did not even make a faint blip on the day’s (much less the year’s) accident statistics — but which reaped hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars worth of virtually free publicity for the perpetrators.

Now who would do a thing like that?


As in all criminal cases, we must answer that question with another: Cui bono? Who benefits?

More often than not, these things are blamed on “radical Muslims.” (The dead perp in the photo has the typical, iconically-“Muslim” salafi beard.) But it’s hard to see how actual radical Muslims, whose goal is to push Western imperialists and colonialists out of historically Muslim lands, gain anything from such deeds. On the contrary, attacks on Western civilians provide a huge PR boost to the imperialists and colonialists, and free up huge sums of money to be spent on military action against “radical Muslims.”

So whoever did this presumably wants to convince you to give up your hard-earned money, and perhaps your freedom as well, and support the hyper-militarization of the West — and an accelerated war against Muslims. Just like the previous London attack in July 2005! Watch terror consultant Peter Power confess that his company was running “terror drills” at the exact times and locations that the real bombs went off!

Another clue: The “vehicular attack” and “stabbing attack” motifs are Israeli. These are among the types of attacks that have characterized the latest Intifada, or Palestinian war of self-preservation against slow-motion Zionist genocide. (The real Palestinian attacks target Israeli soldiers and settlers, who are defined as Occupation forces and thus legitimate targets under international law; while any attacks targeting civilians should be assumed to be false flags.)

Israel wants the West to join its genocidal war on the people of the Middle East. As the Dancing Israelis, part of the Israeli team that blew up the Twin Towers and WTC-7, told the police who arrested them on September 11th, 2001:


“We are Israelis. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are your problem.” (ABC News)

After Israeli agent Michael Chertoff shipped the 9/11 perp “Dancing Israelis” home to Israel, they went on national television and stated:

“The fact of the matter is we are coming from a country that experiences terror daily. Our purpose was to document the event.” (ABC News)

The Israelis are desperate to drag the West into the Israeli war against Islam, Muslims, and Middle Eastern people in general. That is why virtually every major “Islamic terror” event since the Cold War ended in 1989 is a known or suspected Gladio B operation with Israeli fingerprints all over it.

Are “Islamic terror” events false flags? Read the 

Another sign of a suspected false flag is the “dead perps don’t talk” syndrome. If a terror event were real, the authorities would do everything possible to capture the perp alive in order to interrogate him and take down his terror network. But when terror perps are shot down like dogs, with no attempt made to save their lives so they can be interrogated, one must suspect that they are being silenced. (Seriously: How hard would it be to kneecap or otherwise incapacitate a guy with a knife?)

And yet another sign of a false flag is iconic location. London’s Parliament, with Big Ben in the background, is as iconic as they come. That’s why the filmmakers in V for Vendetta chose it for their most spectacular scenes.

London’s Parliament is also the site of the false flag that created the modern world as we know it: the gunpowder plot, in which “radical Catholic” patsy Guy Fawkes was set up with a barrel of wet gunpowder beneath Parliament in a fake terror plot designed to whip up hatred of Catholics and unleash a century of war against Spain and Portugal.

Did we just witness a modern-day “gunpowder plot” false flag? The perp with a car and a knife posed relatively little threat, statistically at least, but garnered billions in free publicity; just as Guy Fawkes posed no threat whatsoever to Parliament with his wet gunpowder, yet provided British imperialists with the equivalent of billions in free publicity and launched the wars that created the British Empire.

As the freemasonic Satanists invoke Isis (or ISIS) on 3/22, they also pay homage to another female deity: Ishtar, the “goddess of fertility, love, war, and sex.”
And it gets better (or worse, depending your point of view): Ishtar “was particularly worshipped in the Upper Mesopotamian kingdom of Assyria (modern northern Iraq, north east Syria and south east Turkey).” That would be the territory that is currently ruled by … you guessed it … ISIS.

So to sum up: It seems the ISISraelis are continuing their heroic efforts to convince the West that “radical Islam” (i.e. the Palestinians that Israel is exterminating) are a threat to all of civilization. Maybe it’s time to set off the chimes in Big Ben’s belltower and wake the world up to the truth?

UPDATES: Here are some of the questions being raised about this suspected false flag:

*Is the guy in the kippah taking selfies in front of the “carnage” another Dancing Israeli getting souvenir photos of an operation he participated in? (The Dancing Israelis famously took photos of each other celebrating and flicking cigarette lighters in front of the burning and then exploding Twin Towers.)

The views expressed herein are the views of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of VT, VT authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, technicians, or the Veterans Today Network and its assigns. LEGAL NOTICE - COMMENT POLICY 

Shrimpton “Westminster Bridge Attack Was Allowed To Happen By British Intelligence.” Fri 7:38 pm UTC, 24 Mar 2017  5 
posted by Gordon
[Image: C7nAXBzXwAAx8aS-1-1.jpg-large-1-1.jpg]

Joe Quinn
Thu, 23 Mar 2017 
[Image: westminster_terror_attack.jpg]  

Another 'terror attack'. Another outpouring of sympathy, this time 'for London'. Another round of media hypocrisy that willfully ignores the obvious explanation for and solution to these kinds of incidents. 

On Wednesday 22nd March, around 2.40pm, we're told that a 'lone wolf', named as 52-year-old Khalid Masood, drove a black SUV along the sidewalk of the 252m-long Westminster bridge, knocking down at least 12 pedestrians and killing two of them. The SUV is about 6 feet wide and the sidewalk about 12 feet wide. There are vehicles on one side and the stone balustrade of the bridge on the other. The SUV was traveling at at least 60mph. So this was a rather difficult, if horrific, feat to carry out.

Leaving the bridge, Masood turned left towards the 'front' of the Houses of Parliament where he mounted the sidewalk and crashed the SUV into railings near the Carriage Gate entrance which is a 'weak spot' guarded by unarmed officers.

Exiting the vehicle, he tried to enter the grounds of the building and was confronted by a police officer whom he stabbed. The attacker was then shot dead by another plain clothes police officer. This was a clear attack on the 'center of power' in the UK that was designed to and succeeded (no doubt) in striking a particular chord with the British political elite.

As is often the case with such attacks in Western nations, news reports released immediately after the attack cited eyewitnesses who claimed there were two people in the car, one described as black with a goatee beard (matching the description of the man shot by police outside Parliament) and the other a white, bald male. But with only one man shot and killed and the official narrative reflecting this, these initial eyewitness reports have been shunted down the memory hole, never to be heard again.

While eyewitness reports are inherently unreliable, this is not always true. In the case of yesterday's attack in London, how is it possible that multiple eyewitnesses saw two people in a car (clearly enough to define skin color) when there was, in fact, only one person in the car? In other similar 'terror car' attacks that involved only one person, like in Nice and Berlin last year, there were no eyewitnesses who said that there were two people in the trucks used. The reason is that there was only ever one person driving.

[Image: Masood_knife.jpg]

The knife allegedly used by Masood to kill PC Palmer  

So rather than dismissing the London reports as the traumatized imagination of ordinary people unaccustomed to such carnage, a much more reasonable conclusion is to assume that there was a white bald guy in the car, and that he fled the scene, and that that was his intention all along, leaving his 'partner' to take the fall, literally. 

This scenario raises the specter of the Muslim patsy having a handler, possibly someone with nerves of steel and a heart to match. It may have been the white bald guy driving the car along Westminster bridge, mowing down people, as the Muslim patsy sat beside him. As a general rule, ignorant patsies can't be relied on to carry out 'terror attacks' on their own; they might, after all, balk at the last minute.

Now, I understand that this scenario is highly implausible for those who fervently believe that there are no dark corners within the British government that actually benefit from terror attacks against British civilians to the extent that they would have a hand in carrying them out. But to hold that belief a person has to be totally ignorant of the hard official evidence that some section of the British government has, in the recent past, consciously carried out terror attacks against British citizens, and then pointed the finger at someone else.

[Image: Masood.jpg]

Khalid Masood shortly after he was shot by Westminster police
I won't go into the details here, but those familiar with the 'troubles' in Northern Ireland will understand. For those unfamiliar, here's a brief introduction. You might also have a quick glance at this (if only the headline) and then this for the connection to yesterday's London attacks

Getting back to London: the only video of the SUV speeding along Westminster bridge emerged late last night and was shown on the BBC evening news. I found the same footage on the Twitter account of BBC home affairs correspondent Dominic Casciani and published it on (Casciani removed it from his Twitter account soon thereafter). While the footage has since appeared on several other news sites, was the first news website to host the video and carried it as an 'exclusive' (meaning it was not, at the time of publishing, available anywhere else). 

As a result, I was contacted this morning by two AP journalists asking if owned the video or if we knew the source. I replied in the negative on both counts, but suggested it might be CCTV footage and therefore the legal property of Westminster city council. One of the AP reporters was able to tell me that he had contacted Westminster city council and they had denied that it was from any of their cameras. 

First, check out the video. 

There are three initial things to note: 1) the vertical angle is quite steep, suggesting that the video was taken from a relatively high altitude. 2) the video is low quality, suggesting a high zoom level. 3) the position of the camera is to the left of the center of the bridge, making it possible that the camera was located somewhere on the north bank of the river Thames. 

With that information, to get an idea of the approximate locations for the camera, we need to look at some images. 

Here's the view up the Thames, looking back at the view from where the video was shot. 

[Image: Westminster_view_MI5.jpg]

And here's a zoom of that area with significant buildings marked 

[Image: millbank_tower1.jpg]


The next image is taken from this Google 'street view' link at the 'altitude 360' restaurant at the top of Millbank tower. I zoomed the image further after processing and it seems like a pretty good candidate for the location of the camera (not excluding, however, that it may have been situated on top of MI5 HQ). 

[Image: zoom_westminster.jpg]


Just for the record, I can find no evidence that there is an automated CCTV or webcam in this restaurant or on the exterior top of the tower that points at Westminster bridge (there might be one at MI5 HQ, however). In case you were wondering why, in a city like London that is infamous for its preponderance of security cameras (where the average Londoner can expect to be photographed 300 times per day), there is no better footage of the attack, last September all CCTV cameras in Westminster were shut off to 'save money'

So the only question left unanswered (well, sort of) is who happened to be filming Westminster bridge on a grey Wednesday afternoon in March at the precise time that a black SUV containing at least one terrorist was mowing down pedestrians? The answer, of course, is easy: it was a member of ISIS who works undercover as a cleaner at the altitude 360 restaurant (or MI5 HQ). After all, today ISIS "claimed responsibility" for the attack, which was, of course, carried out by one of their "soldiers of the caliphate" who was, apparently, known to MI5 (what a surprise).
[Image: 14]

Joe Quinn is the co-author of [url=]9/11: The Ultimate Truth (with Laura Knight-Jadczyk, 2006) and Manufactured Terror: The Boston Marathon Bombings, Sandy Hook, Aurora Shooting and Other False Flag Terror Attacks (with Niall Bradley, 2014), and the host of's The Sott Report Videos and co-host of the 'Behind the Headlines' radio show on the Sott Radio Network.

An established web-based essayist and print author, Quinn has been writing incisive editorials for for over 10 years. His articles have appeared on many alternative news sites and he has been interviewed on several internet radio shows and has also appeared on Iranian Press TV. His articles can also be found on his personal blog

Rolling “mainstream” media coverage has been doing its part to strike fear into the people of London since a crazed man ran over pedestrians in Westminster before stabbing a police officer to death outside Parliament this afternoon. The Met Police confirmed four people dead—including the assailant—and 20 injured.[1]

Despite only this very little information, almost all of the news outlets have successfully labelled this a “terror attack”. Sky News’ voiceover ominously took it to the extent of a “terror attack at the heart of British political life.” All that is known about the assailant is that he appears to be a brown person with a beard.

Even if it turns out that this was an attack carried out by ISIS or similar organisation, it does not legitimise the jumping to conclusions and the state media’s propensity for spinning any tragic incident by a minority as “terrorism” with the inevitable self-fulfilling prophecy that brings. As a result, any new piece of information is bent and twisted to try to fit through this paradigm to keep it a “terror attack until proven otherwise”, rather than what it actually was as a matter of fact: a tragic case of criminality perpetrated by ostensibly a member of a minority, which is otherwise statistically so common as to be ‘background noise’, tragically. After all, the Office for National Statistics’ most recent annual homicide statistics for England and Wales are 695, with knife crimes a tragic 30,838. [2]

The point of terrorism is to terrorise and cause chaos for a clear political motive. The main reason people in Britain are being terrorised at the moment, is by the sad current state of those media outlets which are wanting to portray this as a terror attack at all costs, with their reasons ranging from a rare, juicy story that brings website traffic or boosts ratings, to a more malicious agenda pandering to securocrats and populists. Those who actually want to fight terror should not fuel it and give it the oxygen of publicity. That is, if it does in fact turn out to be carried out by a political or reactionary group.

“Don’t let a good crisis go to waste”

This appears to be the motto of those securocrats and right wing populists that have already shamefully hijacked this tragedy to score points against their chosen bogeyman, rally for more funding and power for the Counter Terror Industry, or to persuade the public to exchange their civil liberties for “security”. We have seen, predictably, the same talking heads wheeled out on the mainstream news faithfully speaking for their respective lobbies. Again, while the motives of the attack are still purely speculated.

This opportunism is arguably even more harmful and dangerous than the incident itself, because it fuels a cycle of violent rhetoric and securitisation. Populists use it as political currency to spread their hate further, even after it has been shown to precipitate in the murder of a British MP last year.[3]

We are seeing people from media outlets to governments, bending over backwards to appease and pander to populist tendencies, at a time where far right and fascist political parties stand a genuine chance of gaining power in Europe. This is not being “soft on terror.” On the contrary, opposition to this makes perfect genuine counter-terrorism sense. This leads to more racism, and more demonisation, disenfranchisement and alienation of minorities—which happen to be the actual, empirically-determined causes of terrorism and political violence in the first place. The cycle is complete.

The real attack on democracy
The condemnable negligence of our political establishment and our “most right-wing media in Europe,”[4] in choosing juicy, fear-provoking headlines and populism over our long term stability needs to be challenged, and people should push news outlets to deal with events as they are, instead of fuelling fear, paranoia and terror to the nth degree.

This may have been one “lone wolf”’s attempted attack against “democracy”, but the real attack against democracy which very few people care to cover or think about is the fact that MPs have faced a record number of death threats since one of them was murdered by a white right-wing nationalist shouting “Britain first” months ago. One in eight MPs face “serious threats” according to the police,[5][6] to such an extent that 85 MPs need extra protection, since Jo Cox’s tragic death. No prizes for guessing why that does not make the front pages.

Tragic events like these and their reprehensible, sensationalist coverage remind us of Herman and Chomsky’s ‘propaganda model’ in Manufacturing Consent, particularly the importance of manufacturing a “common enemy” to keep the public distracted and subdued. If this event does turn out to be claimed by a “terrorist group”, Muslim or otherwise, the public has to take responsibility into their own hands to oppose those who seek to push their malicious agendas using it.

Not only do we have to remind people of facts, simple logic, statistical significance, and so on, but while powerful media magnates with an agenda seek to put a magnifying glass on crimes commit by demonised minorities (inevitably seeking to call it “terrorism”), the public must raise awareness of those actually suffering terrorism from superpowers elsewhere. Only days ago, for example, Trump’s New America carried out targeted multiple strikes on a mosque in Jena in Syria—bombing it, then again to seal the main exit, and then a third time to hit the crowd of 56 worshippers as they fled from the remaining exit to a nearby field.[7]

Whilst we are told by media corporations obedient to such terrorism to instead focus our attention on ‘lone wolves’—tragic as any loss of innocent life is—we must resist the temptation to fall for the trap of being drawn into a cycle of fear and bloodshed that only benefits those with a malicious agenda to disempower people here and abroad.





London Bridge terror attacks: ISIS claims on attacks – Rita Katz's SITE and Amaq News Agency – NATO backed terrorism;  Charles Shoebridge – can MI5 be trusted as they keep getting it wrong – no accountability for security services;  SIS recruiter who radicalised London Bridge attackers was protected by MI5  article by Nafeez Ahmed – MI5 leaning on police not to investigate people – past  MI5 Islamist informers e.g. Abu Hamza – 7/7 bombings – London Bridge attackers members of Al Majaharoon; London attacker Khuram Butt 'cautioned by police over extremist behaviour' six months before rampage ;  Westminster Bridge attack;  PETER OBORNE: Why MI6 must share the blame for the jihadis in our midst .  Talk in Frome 'Media on Trial' on Sunday - including talks by Venessa Beeley and Peter Ford.  Interview with Peter Ford, former Ambassador to Syria:  how did Syria get to where it is now? - UN resolution 242 from 6 Day War to Iraq War to now – Syria turned to Russia for support;  Assad family connections with Britain; 1983 Beirut barracks bombing killed 250 US marines - how balanced is media coverage of Syria? What was Damascus like and how is it now? Attack on Tehran by ISIS;  permanent US bases in Syria now – Mad Dog Mattis & general McMaster – British in Syria too now with no mandate – training and equipping Jihadis to topple Assad. Trump's mad generals just bombed pro-Assad forces on the ground in Syria. New strikes from US on pro-Syrian forces.  Terrorist attack on Tehran, Iran.


Investigative reports: including a look at whether UK secret services, MI5 and MI6, were complicit in Monday's terrorist attack at Manchester Arena. Manchester terror attack: was it timed to effect election? History of Western secret services backing Islamic terrorists - Gladio style pattern of destabilisation. Interview with journalist Amandla Thomas-Johnson from Middle East Eye wrote article yesterday 'Sorted' by MI5.


Interview with Charles Shoebridge, former police Special Branch and Army Officer, about failings of MI5 around the Manchester terror attack. Shooting of PC Yvonne Fletcher in 1984 at Libyan Embassy in London - to set up a case against Gaddafi – 'Murder in St. James' Dispatches film about this. Charles Shoebridge discusses lack of MI5 and MI6 accountability – has their conduct been seen as a failure or an achievement? 


Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)