From: Andrew Johnson
Date: 2005-09-30 18:08:10
www.physics911.net/o… HOW TO FAKE A TERRORIST CAMPAIGN Report from the Panel The realization that the attacks of September 11 2001 on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were not the work of Muslim/Arab “terrorists” raises a natural question. Who was behind the attacks? The compass needle of suspicion quite naturally swings 180 degrees to point in the opposite direction. A confluence of three extremely powerful and influential interests may have motivated the attacks: new sources of oil for large American oil companies; a full order book for the US military industrial complex; carte blanche for the continuing takeover of Palestinian land for a Greater Israel and furtherance of Israeli Mideast hegemony through its surrogate, the United States of America. Means and opportunity for the attacks attach naturally to the spy agencies of the countries benefitting most from the attacks. The attacks of September 11 and subsequent “terrorist” activity were probably carried out, jointly or severally, by Israel’s Mossad, the CIA, NSA and FBI, as well as Britain’s MI6 and, quite possibly, spy agencies from other countries. It is by now well known that many, if not all, intelligence agencies around the world are involved, at one level or another, with so-called “black operations”, or just “black ops”. Such activities are denied by any and all agencies, as well as their governments. A black operation may be small, as in joining a demonstration to smash windows and overturn cars (giving the demonstrators a bad name), or large, as in staging a fake disaster or attack, then blaming a third party (“false flag” operation). The following summary has three sections. The first section describes a variety of methods for staging a fake suicide bombing. One or more of these methods could have been applied in virtually any of the bombings as described by the media since September 11, not to mention since before that date. The second section describes specific attacks and other incidents of a relatively minor nature under the heading of “small operations.” The third and final section describes the larger operations such as the bombing of the nightclub in Bali, Indonesia. No attempt has been made to be exhaustive or even to pick the best examples. The evidence of deception, taken collectively, is overwhelming. SIX WAYS TO FAKE A SUICIDE BOMBING If major operations like 9/11 are the pillars of deception, minor operations like suicide bombings are its walls. Without doubt, suicide bombings are the staple of destabilization, serving to generate sectarian strife. They also serve to inflame public opinion against Islam and Muslims, apparently a major goal of the group behind the continuing terror operations. Imagine for a moment that you happen to be nearby when a “suicide bomber” strikes. One moment you are pursuing your daily life, with all its comforting regularities. Perhaps you are approaching a bus stop, where you intend to wait with a gathering crowd. You happen to be wondering what you will have for supper that evening . . . BANG! The explosion takes your breath away, the concussion knocks you to your knees. For a few seconds you don’t where you are or even who you are. Your face is wet. Numbly you pass your hand over it, shocked to see it smeared with blood. A deep cut in your forehead, made by a jagged piece of metal, bleeds profusely. Otherwise, you are merely dazed. You struggle to your feet and walk uncertainly toward the blast scene to see what you can do to help. Everywhere there are people lying or sitting on the ground, some crying, some bleeding, some in shock, some dead. There is blood everywhere. Then you see a section of torso, with intestines slipping out and the remains of a belt that carried explosives. Ohmigod! You are too numb to reconstruct the scene, wondering where the bomber came from. You don’t remember. Frankly, you were paying very little attention to your surroundings. Sirens grow louder. You pass out. Given the realities of such scenes, it becomes rather easy to see how suicide attacks can be staged. Like the magician, the black ops specialist is concerned only with the “effect,” as stage magicians call it. In fact if you read a manual of stage magic, you are only one step removed from black operations. There you will read that the effect is the ultimate goal:
effect: an elephant disappears into thin air For each trick in the manual, the effect is described first, then “preparation” and “execution” of the trick. Stage magic works because of certain predictable mental habits of humans under the circumstances that have been arranged. effect: a Muslim suicide bomber attacks a crowded bus stop Under the particular circumstances of the event just described, it might only be necessary to follow one of the methods outlined below, with no attempt to demonstrate that the bomber was a Muslim. In a middle Eastern country it would not be necessary to stuff the pockets of the bomber with religious tracts. In a western country, this would definitely be necessary. Here is a list of methods for staging a suicide attack. They are all perfectly feasible, given the shock and confusion of any potential witnesses after the event. In fact, in a place like Iraq, there are frequent opportunities to forego tricks of any kind. Since your target audience is mainly the western media, you merely plant the explosion and, at the appropriate time, press the electronic trigger. Then you simply describe the explosion (via your military contacts) as a “suicide bombing.” Since the reporters are all embedded, they will arrive only when the military takes them. They will see the blood and body parts of course, they will take a few photos, perhaps even talk to one or two selected witnesses. They will then return to the base by jeep or APC with yet another suicide bomber story in the can.1. Give a young person an “important package” to deliver, along with a large amount of cash as a delivery fee. When the person has arrived at the delivery point, press the electronic trigger that sets off the explosives in the package. 2. Prepare a car or truck with explosives, place a cadaver next to the explosives, drive the vehicle to the place where the explosion is to occur, leave the vehicle, walk to a safe distance, then press the electronic trigger. 3. Strap explosives to a cadaver, place it in a large cardboard box or other screening contrivance, drive it to the planned explosion point, unload the item as though making a delivery and let it sit there until most people have forgotten about it, then press the electronic trigger. 4. Strap explosives to a person who is so heavily drugged that he/she has no idea what you are doing and can barely stand up. Drive the person to a crowded venue, let him/her out of the vehicle, then drive quickly off and press the electronic trigger. 5. Locate a clinically depressed (suicidal) person who has no particular commitment to Islam, but who hates the target group. Then facilitate the bombing by adding the right drug, if necessary. The operation then proceeds as above, but with the full cooperation of the bomber. Simply press the electronic trigger.It took relatively little time to come up with these methods. Here’s yet another method, just in: 6. Haul someone over for a licence or other traffic violation and impound their vehicle while they pursue legal paperwork. Plant explosives under the back seat. When the owner of the vehicle returns to claim his car, direct him to a particular police station for final clearance. The charge is detonated as the driver passes the target area. We have good information that this last method, basically a combination of methods 1 and 2, is in actual use. Readers are encouraged to pursue the ghoulish task of arriving at even more ingenious schemes. SMALL OPERATIONS Faked Videotapes On November 15, 2002, Al Jazeera, the Arabic television station that would later release so many of Bin Laden’s statements to the world, received an audiotape that was claimed to have the voice of Bin Laden on it. In it, Bin Laden made the usual declarations of enmity for the west and threatened further action. Being somewhat skeptical of the tape, the France-2 Television Network commissioned an analysis by one of the world’s top audio recognition experts, Herve Bourlard. Working out of the Swiss Institute for Perceptual Artificial Intelligence, Bourlard declared himself to be “95 percent certain” that the tape was a fake. US officials, of course, differed. Undoubtedly, the most important channels by which the Bin Laden boogeyman is kept front and center in the west are the videotapes. Since September 11, 2001, Bin Laden pontifications have turned up in abandoned houses, caves, and other venues with a frequency sufficient to warrant charges of littering against Al Qaida. The tapes, which were made with unbelievable incompetence, have extremely fuzzy sound tracks which can be interpreted to mean almost anything. In the earlier tapes, this can be put down to casual incompetence, but in the later ones, which the makers would know were going to media outlets, the fuzzy sound tracks are highly unlikely. The tapes varied in content, from discussions of the Trade Center attacks to explanations of why Al Qaida is attacking western targets. The scripts are laid out in contemporary Islamic boilerplate which students of Middle Eastern politics would instantly recognize. In our opinion, a majority of the videotapes were most likely filmed during and after the struggle between the Mujahudeen and Russian forces in Afghanistan. Here also is the likely source of the footage showing a column of men clad in camouflage quick-marching toward the camera and invariably flagged as the armed element of Al Qaida. In reality, the men are most likely Mujahudeen fighters filmed during a drill session. Even after the Russians finally left Afghanistan, American and other spy agencies were looking toward the next phase of operations in the Middle East. Special attention was paid to Bin Laden, an especially active member of the Mujahudeen and an apparently charismatic speaker. Tapes of Bin Laden giving khutbahs (inspirational sermons) to the soldiers in the field might well have been circulating at the time. In any event, the Ousama tapes are believed to be genuine these days only by people in the media and their ever-diminishing audiences. The people who have been sending these tapes off to Al Jazeera and other outlets have grown so sloppy that both the gentlemen shown in the images below are claimed to be Ousama Bin Laden. Is it really possible for anyone to argue that these are the same person? The tapes have been released at well-spaced intervals and the intention is probably to demonstrate that the poster-boy of the War on Terror not only survived the shock and awe of Afghanistan, but continues his campaign to undermine Islam on a global scale. Sydney Morning Herald , 2002 The Fake Saddam On December 13 2002 American troops discovered an underground bunker near Tikrit, Iraq, with a bearded, disheveled man inside. It appeared to be Saddam Hussein himself! He had a pistol in his possession, but did not use it and gave himself up peaceably. Headlines around the world – but particularly in the west – trumpeted the discovery. The war in Iraq received a boost in public support. Unfortunately the gentleman who surrendered so easily was not Saddam Hussein, as supported by at least two independent lines of evidence. First, the captured Saddam had rather uneven, somewhat discolored lower teeth, with particularly small and crowded incisors. The real Saddam had a very flashy smile that, in most file photos, reveals the upper incisors, but shows the lower ones imperfectly. But even in the latter photos one can see enough of the lower teeth to realize they are nothing like the teeth of the captured “Saddam.” However, we succeeded in locating a file photo of a younger Saddam in which the lower incisors can be clearly seen. Anyone who has difficulty accepting that these two people are not the same merely have to print out this page and make a few simple measurements: draw two parallel vertical lines that touch the outer edges of the four lower incisors and extend upward past the nose, In the real Saddam the lines have approximately the same width as the nose itself. Saddam had large lower incisors. But the same pair of lines barely cover half the nose of the captured Saddam. That proves the case. No further argument needs to be made, but we cannot refrain from adding that the captive “Saddam” was flown to Qatar for internment. Only after intense lobbying by Russia was Saddam’s wife, Sajiga Heiralla Tuffa, allowed to visit her husband in jail. She emerged in less than a minute: “This is not my husband but his double. Where is my husband? Take me to my husband”. The incident was reported in several Russian and eastern European newspapers. It is well known that Saddam kept doubles in his employ for additional security. The lookalike used for the “capture” had a long beard and hair, as if he had been living a hermit-like existence. However, even if the real Saddam had been hiding all this time in or near Tikrit, he would certainly have arranged minimal facilities, including those which allowed him to shave and keep his hair trimmed. (Vanity, thy name is Saddam.) The purpose of the “capture” was to provide added domestic support for the war on Iraq. Global Research , 2003 The “Shoe Bomber” On American Airlines Flight 63 from Paris to Miami, December 22 2003, a passenger sitting across the aisle from a young British Muslim, one Richard Colvin Reid, said he noticed Reid lighting a match and holding it to his shoe. The passenger immediately leapt across the aisle and wrestled Reid to the floor, in order to subdue him. A doctor who happened to be on the plane (and who also happened to be carrying heavy sedatives with him), injected Reid to the point of near insensibility. Upon landing, Reid’s shoes were examined and both proved to contain high explosives in the heels. A fuse led from the explosive to the outside of the heel, the point at which the passenger claimed to have seen Reid apply the match. The explosive was a puttylike substance initially identified as C4. When experts later pointed out that a quantity of C4 that would fit into theheel of a shoe would be insufficient to blow a hole in the floor of an aircraft, the story changed from C4 to another explosive called TATP, a crystalline substance quite unlike putty. This story has a number of troublesome elements. Apart from the fact that there was no detonator cap inside the heel (rendering the explosive useless, in any case), how did the passenger across the aisle conclude that Reid had bomb material in his shoes – and to conclude it with sufficient certainty to motivate a physical attack? How did he know that Reid hadn’t dropped something on the floor under his seat and was simply using a match to locate it? Other troublesome elements include the use of “Tariq Rajah” as Reid’s name when, in fact it was not Reid’s name. The media claimed that was traveling on a forged passport. Later investigations proved that was traveling on a perfectly valid British passport. It is naturally difficult to piece together what may actually have happened in this incident. But Reid is known to have traveled to Israel earlier that year, spending ten days there before returning to Britain. Any number of cover stories can be invented to explain how he may have been lured there. During a security check, when Reid’s shoes were removed, the size and make may have been noted and a duplicate pair acquired, broken in, and specially fitted with explosives. Ten days would easily suffice for the operation. To ensure that Reid would live to make the flight in question, no detonator cap was inserted in the shoe bombs. For example, if he walked too close to a bonfire, spilled coals, or any other intense heat source, the fuse could have been accidentally ignited and Reid would have lost his feet. In asubsequent security check before leaving Israel, Reid’s old shoes would be switched to his “new” ones, with Reid returning to Britain none the wiser. Aboard the aircraft, the passenger across the aisle may have been no ordinary passenger, nor might the doctor have been an ordinary doctor. The passenger could have launched his attack on Reid at a moment of his own choosing. The match to the shoe, not witnessed by anyone else, could be a pure fabrication. There is no record of this passenger’s name, a surprising omission for the hero that saved the life of everyone on that flight! Reid protested his innocence until a sudden change of heart just before the case went to trial. The change shocked both the prosecution and the defence. The reason he gave was to “spare his family the difficulty of . . . a lengthy trial.” There may be a particle of truth in this statement – if he was told that his parents “might not survive” a lengthy trial. Besides keeping the Muslim “terrorist” boogeyman alive in the public imagination, this incident may have had a secondary purpose to implicate a Muslim convert. Conversions in the west have grown phenomenally over the last ten years, an unwelcome development to the group behind the continuing campaign of public terror, both at home and abroad. Vialls Investigations, 2002CNN, 2003 The Nick Berg Beheading The body of Nick Berg, a well-meaning social worker and peace activist, was discovered May 8, 2004 on an overpass in Baghdad. The body had no head. On May 11, a video appeared on a website* allegedly linked to Al Qaida. Although the western media and public absorbed the video with uncritical horror and outrage, attentive physicians were skeptical. Prominent medical experts later described the taped sequence as “staged.’ Mr Berg was clearly already dead when the head was cut off from the body. There was a complete absence of arterial bleeding during and after the operation. The corpse, as well as the perpetrators would have ben covered by blood spurting from the carotid arteries. There is a relatively long list of other suspicious (not to say damning) elements in the video. First, the white plastic chairs, the decor of the walls, and the orange jump suit in which Mr Berg was clad were all standard features of Abu Ghraib prison. The perpetrators, moreover, cried “Allahu Akbar” in what some commentators described as imperfect Arabic, they stood at military “Parade rest,” and some had gold rings on their fingers – an impossibility for someone following the strict form of Islam attributed to “terrorists.” Nick Berg alive in chair (left), dead on floor (upper right), and beheaded (lower right) The tape is composed of two parts, with a cut between them. In the first part Mr Berg sits in a chair, apparently alive and confronted by his captors. In the second part, Mr Berg sits on the floor, his back to the wall, quite possibly dead. His captors lean over, guide his body to the floor, and proceed with the grisly operation of removing the head. How did Nick Berg get into such a fix? In March 2003, Berg was detained and imprisoned by US forces in the city of Mosul for what they claimed were irregularities in his papers. Back in the US, Berg’s father became thoroughly alarmed at the news of his son’s detention and began lobbying for his immediate release. Berg was subsequently released on April 6. The beheading must have happened within 24 hours of the release. The origin of the tape appears to have been Abu Ghraib prison itself. There are unsubstantiated claims that the digital signatures of the beheading camera were the same as those recording the Abu Ghraib torture scenes. Moreover, on frames 9306 through 9368 of the video, someone who appears to be wearing a US military cap pokes his head part way into the video. The purpose of this hastily-organized beheading was to counter the stories of torture emerging from Abu Ghraib a mere week or two earlier. It was to imply that “if we’re bad, they’re badder,” morality being a strictly relative virtue. Asia Times, 2004Jones Productions, 2004 * www.al-ansar.biz (no longer an al Qaeda site, apparently) LARGE OPERATIONS The Beltway Sniper Beginning with the shooting of a James D. Martin in a parking lot in Wheaton, Maryland on October 2, 2003, the “beltway Sniper” began a campaign of sudden, random assassinations that would terrorize the Washington area, not to mention the nation, for weeks. Here is a list of the Sniper’s 11 victims (nine fatalities, two woundings): Time Name Place Oct02 6:04 pm James D. Martin parking lot, Wheaton, MD Oct03 7:41 am James L. Buchanan auto dealership, White Flint, MD Oct03 8:12 am Prem Kumar Walekar gas station in Rockville, MD Oct03, 8:37 am Sarah Ramos post office. Silver Spring, MD Oct03, 9:58 am Lori Ann Lewis-Rivera gas station, Kensington, MD Oct03 9:15 pm Pascal Charlot street, Washington, DC Oct04 2:30 pm “woman” (wounded) parking lot, Fredericksburg, VA Oct07, 8:09 am “boy” (wounded) school, Bowie, MD Oct09, 8:15 pm Dean Harold Meyers gas station, Manassas, VA Oct11 9:30 am Kenneth H. Bridges gas station, Fredericksburg, VA Oct14 9:15 pm Linda Franklin Home Depot, Falls Church, VA Oct. 22 Conrad Johnson taxi In at least three of the shootings, a white van was seen in the area. One witness had an encounter with a white van that tried to get past him in heavy traffic, the driver frantically waving him off. He described a short, slightly built man who appeared to be “middle eastern.” Matthew Dowdy, a witness to the murder of Linda Franklin, said he saw the shooter, a man with an “olive-skinned complexion,” get out of a white van, take careful aim and shoot Ms Franklin. He was later arrested for giving “false information.” Dowdy was said by police to have a criminal record. It is not known whether his testimony was discredited on this basis alone or if there was any other indication of how Police could know that Dowdy’s statement was false, much less that he had “knowingly” given a false statement. We are hard-pressed to imagine any reason that police could have for claiming that Dowdy had filed a false report. At the early stages of an investigation, no serious report is rejected out of hand. The only explanation we can think of is that FBI personnel liaising with the police pushed Chief Moose to make the arrest to prevent Dowdy’s testimony from being used by the defence in the trials of Muhammad and Malvo that would come later. Around Oct 20, an auto rental employee at Dulles airport found a .223 calibre shell casing in a white rental van. An anonymous source “close to the investigation” described the casing as having the wrong calibre. A spent casing of the same calibre was also found outside the school in the October 7 shooting. On October 22, police arrested a man in a white van. They had been on the lookout for a white van that fitted the behavior pattern of other white vans spotted near their respective crime scenes. The police converged on the van, shotguns drawn. The man surrendered peaceably. Little further information was made available about this suspect except that he turned out to be an “illegal immigrant.” He was apparently released. This story was effectively buried in the media by the discovery of a note left near a recent shooting on the same day. Police refused to divulge the contents of the note except to address the sniper publicly in a dramatic news conference, telling him that they agreed to his proposal for contact. What about the man in the white van? The person who left the note was, by implication, not the man in the white van. As a police spokesperson put it, “That is the only person Chief Moose wants to talk to.” It turned out that Chief Moose really wanted to talk to someone driving a blue Chevrolet Caprice, thanks to the note, which not only claimed responsibility for the shootings, but mentioned a liquor store holdup on October 21. (This would be a reasonable move for someone who wanted to be caught.) Police naturally looked up the vehicle description from that incident, finding it to be a blue Chevrolet Caprice. Officers found such a vehicle at a rest stop in Frederick County 50 miles northwest of Washington in the early morning hours of October 24. The car proved to contain two males of Jamaican descent named John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo. The trunk of the vehicle had a sniper rifle, a bipod and two large holes in the lid through which a rifle could be aimed. The shooter had evidently hidden in the trunk of the car to do his shooting. Muhammad, who was claimed to be a Muslim, was in fact a member of the Nation of Islam, an organization with no roots in the Middle East. Malvo, a 17-year old youth, had no particular religious affiliation. Initial reports about Muhammad indicated that he’d been a “marksman” during a stint in the army at Fort Lewis. His own sergeant, however, described Muhammad as a “screwball” and a “very poor soldier.” Perhaps when it became apparent that Muhammad was an unlikely shooter, authorities changed their minds and charged Malvo with the acts, instead. At the trial Muhammad initially represented himself: ” I had nothing to do with these crimes. They know this, and that’s why they are trying to impose everything at one time . . .” The opening statement was long and rambling and Muhammad was clearly out of his depth. He evidently did not trust his defense lawyers. He tried too hard to impress people with what he thought was technical language. He appeared to be hinting that he knew it was a frame up. At one point he said he knew what did happen and what didn’t happen, attempting to sound ominous, perhaps. There is ample reason to suspect that the convictions of Muhammad and Malvo were frameups. The white van figures too prominently in many of the early reports and the extreme form of rejection of Dowdy’s account of the shooting of Linda Franklin remains a major stumbling block to giving this case a straightforward interpretation. We can only assume that the mateial evidence in the blue Caprice was planted in the trunk. The rifle could then easily be the same rifle used in the shootings. The purpose of the attacks was certainly to keep the terror profile high domestically, as well as abroad. The timing of the attacks may also have enhanced the passage of a bill to authorize the use of armed force against Iraq. The bill was introduced October 2 and passed October 10. While the bill was before the House, an average of one person a day was killed by the sniper. CNN, 2002WFT, 2002Time, 2003 The Bali Nightclub Bombing On October 12, 2003, at 11:05 pm local time, an extremely powerful explosive device destroyed the Sari nightclub in Bali, Indonesia, killing 187 people and injuring more than 300 others. The device was planted in a monsoon drain approximately five feet under the road nearby. It excavated a crater to this depth and the force of the blast set some 27 buildings in the neighbourhood on fire, the blast itself destroying the nightclub. No known conventional explosive is powerful enough to have the destructive effect of this one, yet still fit inside a localized section of drain. However micronuclear devices are small enough to fit most public drains and can be “fished” into place from the nearest maintenance port. Australian physicians were puzzled at “flash burns” on victims. Other victims vanished “without a trace.” Media claimed that a fuel-air explosive packed into a van was the source of the blast. It is absolutely impossible for a passive explosive of whatever nature to dig a five-foot crater. Moreover, a fuel-air explosive could not account for the damage. Micronuclear devices, called SADMs (special atomic demolition munition) not only have yields within the range of conventional explosives, they leave almost no gamma radiation at all after the initial blast, owing to the purity of their plutonium 239 cores. They will easily fit in a suitcase. Victims of the blast were dying weeks later for no apparent reason – unless it was from inhaling deadly plutonium released into the local atmosphere. This metal (radioactive or not) is a slow-acting but lethal poison, once in the human lung. Initially, one Abu Bakar Bashir was blamed for the blast. Bashir not only denied any responsibility, but blamed America and Israel for the blast, instead. Then, under pressure from the west, the Indonesian government found an auto mechanic named Amrozi, who, after being tortured with 220 volt electrodes, “confessed” to the crime. He also “confessed” to links with Al Qaeda, etc. etc. Indonesian parliamentary speaker Amien Rais stated publicly that he doubted that Amrozi was responsible for the blasts. All soil and debris was removed from the area and dumped far out at sea. Even before the cleanup, no trace (even a fingertip) was ever been found of some 30 people who are known to have been in the immediate area of the blast. Anyone too near the center of the initial wave of intense (approximately 400,000 degree celsius)heat would have been instantly vaporized. No less than half a dozen explosive mixtures have been proposed in the media to explain the blast. But if Amrozi is responsible, why not just ask him? Would he say “micronuke?” We doubt it. The primary purpose of the attack was to convince Australians of the need to join Bush’s “War on Terror.” A secondary purpose was to keep the pressure on Muslims worldwide. Vialls, 2002 The Madrid train bombing On the morning of March 11 2004, Spanish commuters were waiting for trains at Madrid’s Alcala de Henares station when synchronized explosions blew up ten cars on four different trains. killing more than 200 Spaniards. Several of the cars had portions of their roofs blown off by the explosions. Although early speculation concerned a Basque separatist group, the blame was finally (and predictably) placed on Al Qaeda after a London Arabic-language newspaper received a letter from the ” Brigade of Abu Hafs al-Masri” claiming responsibility for the attack. To clinch the identification, media were informed about a white van parked near the station. It turned out to have detonators and (just so we wouldn’t miss the connection) Islamic religious tracts inside. Tapes from the security cameras, which should have caught the perpetrators on video, were never made public. What would one look for on such a tape? Considering the damage done, each blast would have required about 40 lbs of high yield explosive, in the estimation of one expert. Ten bearded men carrying 40-lb back packs should be easy to pick out on the security video. Unfortunately for the media, the blasts could not have originated inside the cars. Blast holes in the floors bent upwards and not down., Shrapnel from the floors of the cars was found embedded in the ceilings. Although the media claimed that the bombers had boarded trains that were “passing through” the Acala de Henares station, in fact all four trains originated from the nearby rail yards, starting their day’s run from that location. The explosives could easily have been planted there during the night, attached to undercarriage support structures. The purpose of the attack was to enrage the Spanish public who, up to that time, were more than 90 percent against the presence of Spanish troops in Iraq. Vialls, 2004 The Beslan School Affair Beslan School, located in North Ossetia, Russia, was taken over by “terrorists” at 9:00 am on the morning of September 1 2004. A few shots exchanged with local police brought in Russian special forces who surrounded the school compound. The “terrorists” confiscated all cell phones from their hostages and held them in the school gymnasium. All communication was carried out between the hostages and authorities over a single land line. There was no other way in which anyone outside the school could communicate with anyone inside the school. Two days later at 1:00 pm, the terrorists asked for paramedics to enter the school to retrieve the bodies of hostages that had been killed two days earlier. As soon as the paramedics went in to retrieve the bodies, explosions were heard coming from the gymnasium. At 1:05 BBC reporters (outside the school) were telling the world that the “terrorists” had just “detonated bombs located in the school basketball hoops, killing several emergency service workers [the paramedics].”This was strange, because it was not until 50 minutes later, when special forces actually stormed the building, that local authorities knew anything about the source of the explosions. As they ran toward the building, no less than 19 of the soldiers were shot in the back, picked off by snipers (located in a building far from the school). Working with what can only be described as professional military efficiency, the snipers’ deadly accurate shooting opened a gap in the school perimeter that allowed most of the terrorists to escape. The remainder were killed or captured in the ensuing battle. Five days later, a video of suspicious origin was delivered to Moscow television via London. The video, of professional quality, allegedly shot by the “terrorists,” showed the torture, abuse, and murder of school children, footage deliberately calculated to show Muslims as bestial in nature. In fact, as every Muslim knows, such treatment would guarantee a one-way ticket to Hell. The western media, of course, do not know that. There is some question whether the Russian secret service was involved in the Beslan School Affair. It seems likely that the attacks caught the Russians as much by surprise as it did the Chechen leadership. Following, as it did, the takeover of Yukos Oil by the Russsian government, the Beslan affair may have been a warning shot fired at Putin, as if to say, “We can do this in your back yard, too.” In the opinion of some analysts, Yukos Oil was a prime asset of the group behind the continuing terror operation. This could be true without in any way undermining the continuing rationale behind the attacks, to include the Chechen people as a source of “terrorism” and, thereby, to re-affirm the central role of Islam in them. Vialls, 2004 The London Bombings A rational alternate scenario for the London bombings has been constructed by Paul Joseph Watson and Alex Jones. The evidence strongly supports it.