|
Media
|
|
| 29/8/05 |
The last Big Mac – Did Hasib Hussain suddenly fear that Allah might be a vegan? Gavin Gatenby
|
|
29 August 2005 www.brushtail.com.au/july_05_on/last_big_mac.html
Somehow Hasib’s mundane act of gustatory desperation doesn’t seem to square with the picture of a fanatical Islamic terrorist on a mission to send as many infidels as possible to their doom. If he’d hung out for half an hour the 18-year-old alleged jihadi could have asked the houris for a whole feast (and much else besides), but apparently he couldn’t resist the lure of the Quarter Pounder. It is as though, in his last hour on this mortal, corrupt, coil, he suddenly wondered with horror whether Paradise might be strictly vegetarian. Nuts. If you believe buying a Big Mac was the act of a man certain he was soon going to A Better Place, I have a Russian watch to sell you. The Independent’s intrepid scribblers, Jason Bennetto and Kim Sengupta, didn’t see it that way. To them the little scoop was somehow more proof of the always off-the-record “official” position that the bombing was the work of an unaffiliated, spontaneously-forming, self-acting jihadi cell. They also insisted that Hussain’s choice of the bus had nothing to do with problems on the tube because he could have reached his supposed destination by other rail options and they denied previous definitive assertions that mobile phones had been used to detonate the bombs with a “disclosure” (that journalistic whore-word): the bombers pressed a button to detonate the bombs. Oh yeah, really. That line has been on and off like a whore’s knickers since about 8/7 – but always off the record. But wait, there was more. The Independent was also able to tell us that Hussain made “a number” of phone calls “at least one to one of his fellow bombers” and that “he may also have spoken to the other two bombers”. Come on guys, if they’re talking about phone records – the only certain way of knowing – either he called or he didn’t. The day before The Independent prostituted itself to the police leakers, the London Evening Standard’s very own anonymous source inside the investigation had come on with a line completely different to The Independent’s man (Wednesday 24 August): Hussain had planned to detonate his bomb on a train but was forced by the closure of the Northern Line to take out the bus instead. As the Standard tells it, Hussain phoned his accomplices with “increasing panic”, failed to get a reply, and then made his “snap” decision to bomb the bus. Oh really? How did the police arrive at this psychological insight? It’s easy to establish, from phone company records, from and to, which number a call has been made, and exactly when, but this PI has never seen a panic rating on a phone company printout. And note that while The Independent’s source implies that Hussain may actually have spoken to his fellow bombers, the Standard scribblers think he didn’t get a reply because they were already dead. Well which was it? We know that the three train bombs exploded at 8.50 am. Were Hussain’s calls before or after 8.50? And the printout tells you the exact time of his calls. Simple. The only way the cops could tell that Hussain’s calls were panicky is if he left a message on the recipient’s answering service. Is that what they’re saying? I’d love to see a transcript. Or is the nameless source saying that police had been recording the alleged bombers’ conversations on 7/7? Now that would put a whole ’nother face on what was really going on that day! And if they had been recording his conversations, the crime would have been solved within hours. Indeed, it might have been prevented. The only possible alternative is that somebody close by was watching and listening to Hussain make the calls. But how could the watcher be sure Hussain was panicking if he couldn’t get an answer? Where does the British media find the “journalists” who write this crap? People who’ll accept whatever lame garbage their “trusted” anonymous source tells them and whatever dumb spin he puts on it; people who never ask the most basic and obvious questions? Let’s face it honestly: the overwhelmingly more likely scenario is that if Hasib Hussain did phone his friends he did so because he had heard from people streaming out of the tube that there had been explosions, or big trouble of some sort. He phoned them because he was worried. If he really was a suicide bomber, and not a dupe, why would he need to check up on them? He would have known that his confreres had accomplished their mission and gone to meet Allah. The fact that he rang them is, in fact, more proof that the bombers were innocent dupes who were asked to deliver packages, knowing nothing of their real nature and purpose, or believed they were merely actors in a security training exercise. Until this investigation is taken out of the hands of the secretive, dissembling, politically-motivated cops who are currently running it and dragged into the light of day by a full-scale public inquiry, the truth will never be known. AND SEE ALSO: Who duped the London bombers? In the Mirror’s scenario the master bomber cynically tricked his team into thinking that when they pressed the button, they were setting off a timing device that would give them sufficient time to leave the target area. Instead, they pressed the buttons, detonated the bombs and killed themselves as well as their victims. … There are considerable problems with the version of the dupes scenario publicized by the Mirror. READ THE FULL ARTICLE >>> www.brushtail.com.au/july_05_on/london_bombers_duped.html Taking down the wrong man at Stockwell tube And the only logical reason for killing Osman is that whoever arranged the killing knew that whatever Osman might have said under interrogation would lead to the conclusion that the “failed” 21/7 bombings and possibly the 7/7 bombings were false flag operations. READ THE FULL ARTICLE >>> www.brushtail.com.au/july_05_on/taking_down_wrong_man.html A fast-moving investigation |
|
|
|
|