completely skirts the israeli or jewish side of things, natch

Dear Great Britain, Blame Your Intelligence Agencies and Government, Not the Internet
Michael Krieger, Jun 5 2017


The dishonest and dangerous response of Theresa May’s UK government to the horrific terrorist attacks of the past month is unfortunately all too common when it comes to those in power. Rather than look inward at the glaring shadiness and corruption inherent throughout UK government polices, its “leaders” are looking to use these barbaric acts as a excuse to push through an authoritarian and illiberal expansion of state power. Specifically, Theresa May’s government is despicably using the attacks to push for regulation and censorship of the internet. As reported by the Independent:

New international agreements should be introduced to regulate the internet in the light of the London Bridge terror attack, Theresa May has said. The Prime Minister said introducing new rules for cyberspace would “deprive the extremists of their safe spaces online” and that technology firms were not currently doing enough. “We cannot allow this ideology the safe space it needs to breed, yet that is precisely what the internet, and the big companies that provide internet-based services provide,” Ms May said. The Conservative manifesto pledges regulation of the internet, including forcing internet providers to participate in counter-extremism drives and making it more difficult to access pornography.

Silly me, I thought this was about terrorism.

The Act, championed by Ms May, requires internet service providers to maintain a list of visited websites for all internet users for a year and gives intelligence agencies more powers to intercept online communications. Police can access the stored browsing history without any warrant or court order. Ms May’s speech is thought to be the first time she has publicly called for international cooperation in bringing forward more red tape to cyberspace, however. The intervention comes after the introduction of the Investigatory Powers Act 2016, dubbed the “Snooper’s Charter,” which expands the powers of spying agencies and the Government over the internet.

It’s important to understand that May’s government was aggressively pushing for internet censorship well before both the recent terror attacks. For example, here’s some of what I highlighted in last month’s post, UK Government Moves Aggressively to Censor and Control the Internet:

Theresa May is planning to introduce huge regulations on the way the internet works, allowing the government to decide what is said online. Particular focus has been drawn to the end of the manifesto, which makes clear that the Tories want to introduce huge changes to the way the internet works. It says: “Some people say that it is not for government to regulate when it comes to technology and the internet. We disagree.”

It would be bad enough if the UK government was actually doing its best to prevent terrorist attacks, but harsh reality paints precisely the opposite picture. Moreover, today’s post proves without a doubt that the UK government is not only in bed with terrorists, but seems to be actively covering it up. In that regard, over the weekend I read one of the most disturbing and enlightening pieces on just how complicit UK intelligence agencies are when it comes to supporting terrorism and allowing terrorists to come back to Great Britain. The piece is a collaboration between Nafeez Ahmed and Mark Curtis, and is a lengthy must-read. It’s titled The Manchester Bombing: Blowback from British State Collusion with Jihadists Abroad. Prepare to be outraged:

The evidence suggests that the barbaric Manchester bombing, which killed 22 innocent people on May 22 is a case of blowback on British citizens arising at least partly from the overt and covert actions of British governments. The British state therefore has a serious case to answer. We focus primarily here on UK policies towards Libya but also touch on some of those related to Iraq and Syria.

In summary, the evidence so far shows that there are six inter-related aspects of blowback:

  1. Salman Abedi and his father were members of a Libyan dissident group, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), covertly supported by the UK to assassinate Qadafi in 1996. At this time, the LIFG was an affiliate of Osama Bin Laden’s AQ and LIFG leaders had various connections to this terror network.
  2. Members of the LIFG were facilitated by the British ‘security services’ to travel to Libya to fight Qadafi in 2011. Both Salman Abedi and his father, Ramadan, were among those who travelled to fight at this time (although there is no evidence that their travel was personally facilitated or encouraged by the security services).
  3. A large number of LIFG fighters in Libya in 2011 had earlier fought alongside the ISI, the AQ entity which later established a presence in Syria and became ISIS. These fighters were among those recruited into the British-backed anti-Qadafi rebellion.
  4. UK covert action in Libya in 2011 included approval of and support to Qatar’s arming and backing of opposition forces, which included support to hardline Islamist groups; this fuelled jihadism in Libya.
  5. One of the groups armed/supported by Qatar in 2011 was the February 17th Martyrs Brigade which, some reports suggest, was the organisation which Ramadan Abedi joined in 2011 to fight Qadafi.
  6. Qatar’s arms supplies to Libya in 2011 also found their way to Islamist fighters in Syria, including groups affiliated with AQ and ISIS.

The evidence points to the LIFG being seen by the UK as a proxy militia to promote its foreign policy objectives. Whitehall also saw Qatar as a proxy to provide boots on the ground in Libya in 2011, even as it empowered hardline Islamist groups. Both David Cameron, then Prime Minister, and Theresa May, who was Home Secretary in 2011 when Libyan radicals were encouraged to fight Qadafi, clearly have serious questions to answer. We believe an independent public enquiry is urgently needed. This combination of Anglo-Pindosi policies across the region has contributed to further instability and the rise of violent jihadism. In fact, an even stronger conclusion may be warranted based on the evidence of the extent of UK covert and overt action in the region in alliance with states consistently supplying arms to terrorist groups: that agencies of the British government itself have, in some senses, become part of the broader ‘terrorist network’ with which the British public is now confronted.

Further very lengthy detailed quotes omitted – RB

The more you look, the deeper the rabbit hole goes. Indeed, it appears the UK government will go to remarkable lengths in order to specifically protect its terrorist supporting allies. For instance, take a look at this article published by the Independent a few days ago:

An investigation into the foreign funding of extremist Islamist groups may never be published, the Home Office has admitted. The inquiry commissioned by David Cameron, was launched as part of a deal with the Liberal Democrats in Dec 2015, in exchange for the party supporting the extension of British airstrikes against Daesh into Syria. But although it was due to be published in the spring of 2016, it has not been completed and may never be made public due to its “sensitive” contents. It is thought to focus on Saudi Arabia, which the UK recently approved £3.5b worth of arms export licences to. Tom Brake, the Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman, has written a letter to the Prime Minister pressing her on when the report will be published and what steps she proposes to take to address “one of the root causes of violent extremism in the UK.” He wrote: “You will agree with me that the protection of our country, of the British people, is the most important job of any government. Certainly, more important than potential trade deals with questionable regimes, which appear to be the only explanation for your reticence.” Accusing the Conservatives of being “worried about upsetting their dodgy friends in the Middle East,” he said party had “broken their pledge to investigate funding of violent Islamist groups in the UK” and added: “That short-sighted approach needs to change. It is critical that these extreme hard-line views are confronted head on, and that those who fund them are called out publicly.”

This is straight-up insanity but it goes back a long way. For example, how about this from a 2008 Graun article:

The Toads threatened to make it easier for terrorists to attack London unless corruption investigations into their arms deals were halted, according to court documents revealed yesterday. Previously secret files describe how investigators were told they faced “another 7/7” and the loss of “British lives on British streets” if they pressed on with their inquiries and the Saudis carried out their threat to cut off intelligence. Prince Bandar, the head of the Toad national security council and son of the crown prince, was alleged in court to be the man behind the threats to hold back information about suicide bombers and terrorists. He faces accusations that he himself took more than £1bn in secret payments from the arms company BAE. He was accused in yesterday’s high court hearings of flying to London in Dec 2006 and uttering threats which made the prime minister, Tony Blair, force an end to the Serious Fraud Office investigation into bribery allegations involving Bandar and his family.

But yeah, it’s the internet’s fault. Let’s blame YouTube videos. Finally, the Toads don’t only use the stick, they also brandish the carrot. As Lee Fang at The Intercept wrote yesterday:

New figures released by British Parliament show that, at a time when UK PM Theresa May’s ties to the Toads have become an election issue, conservative government officials and MPs were lavished with money by the oil-rich Toads with gifts, travel expenses, and consulting fees. Tory MPs received the cash as the UK backs the Toads’ brutal war against Yemen, the poorest country in the Middle East. Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has made the UK’s uneasy alliance with the Toads an election issue, with voters going to the polls on Jun 8. The Tories’ ties to the Toads, Labour leaders charge, have resulted in record weapons sales, conservative governments have licensed £3.3b in arms sales to the Saudi military since the onset of the Yemen campaign, and a reluctance to criticize human rights abuses. While Tory politicians have defended the arms sales to the Toads as a move to shore up Britain’s allies in the region, Tory MPs have collected about £100k in gifts, travel expenses, and consulting fees from the Toads since the Yemen war began.

Once the Toads funded 9/11 (sic! – RB) and saw they could get away with it, they knew they could get away with anything. Now let me just end this post with the following suggestion.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s