To find out why this terrorist attack happened, and who was behind it, we should ask: "who benefits from this?"
The timing and place of this attack help answering this question:
It is obvious, that the G8 summit took place at the same time in Great Britain. After all newspapers on Thursday 7th July were dominated by London winning the Olympic bid, it would have to be expected that the paper's headlines from next day would write about the international pressure at the G8 summit to deal with global warming and debt relief for Africa. The media in Britain and Tony Blair are quite in favour to support these tasks. Only the United States of America with George W Bush are resisting any commitment and in opposition. They were expected to face severe criticism from the rest of the world and the media. Due to the bombing, all media focused solely on London. No G8 was mentioned on any front page.
Thanks to these attacks, George Bush was saved from criticism. Al-Qaeda or who ever was behind the attacks, did indirectly support the American politics.
We remember: The last time George W Bush visited Britain, we had a similar situation: The world's biggest anti war demonstration in London was bound to get a wide media coverage the next day. Just when the American President and Tony Blair were due to give a press conference, the British Embassy in Istanbul was blown up. Next days papers were full with reports of the atrocities - and the criticism of the war as well as reports of the peace demonstrations in London and elsewhere were hardly mentioned. Who ever was behind the attacks, did indirectly support the American politics.
Coincidence? I do not believe in coincidences. The American politics have always followed the principle "profit before people".
The way the media work, they are indirectly advertising terrorism and violence with their extensive coverage of terrorist attacks - they are doing an indirect public relations job for terrorism.
Let us remember: chances to get killed in Britain by a terrorist attack are smaller than winning in the national lottery. It is far more likely to die in a car accident.
Let us stay calm and not panic and get on with live. The more we re-act to terrorism, the more we pave the way of terrorism, fear and confrontation. The opposite of fear is love - that's what we need to spread.
Mahatma Gandhi said:
"I am willing to die for the independence of India, but there is no cause for which I am willing to kill."
Cambridge, Saturday 9th July 2005
PS - written 18th July 2005 -
some thoughts, after it turned out that the suicide bombers called themselves Muslims:
Assuming, that some Muslims have already been 3/4 brainwashed, it would not need much to encourage them for the final step.
Assuming, that certain forces, who benefit from arms trade and who have an interest to get the American military machine going, would benefit from all terrorist attacks, which actually give them a reason for the existence of military and war (without a military enemy, the US would have to question their enormous expenditure in the military sector) - unless "international terrorism" keeps threatening the world and thus justifies hard-liner politics calling for war and more weapons...
Would it be far fetched to also assume the possibility of some secret service organisations like the CIA or Mossad to use and manipulate these "useful idiots" for their purposes by promising them certain times and places where their attacks would be convenient for political purposes?
It might even be that someone wants to "teach Britain a lesson" ("if you criticise the US, you'll have to pay for it")?
"Let others do the dirty jobs" - and the white collar gang pulling the threads behind the curtain of media attention can lean back and feel safe?
Anyway - nobody would believe this.
And neither "The Guardian" nor "The Independent" did print the above article, sent as a letter to the editor on 9th July.
If you think, this scenario sounds unrealistic, I invite you to read through the World Peace Pages after Sept. 11, 2001. Sorry - it's all about power and money - the dirty side of big politics....
[only after writing the above, I checked www.rense.com/ - and discovered similar thoughts + more evidence....]
You are welcome to circulate the above article - please include a link to this web page, which I might edit and update.
PPS from June 2006:
The truth movement about 9/11 and 7/7 in Britain is growing and has brought up some facts and questions contradicting the official "narrative" of 7/7 2005 (from www.london77truth.com):
More links at The political situation in the UK after September 11 on the World Peace Pages after Sept. 11, 2001
A purely fictional dialogue between G.W Bush and his adviser during June 2005posted 11 June 2006 - I ask the reader to decide what and whom to believe - and I'd be grateful if anyone can proof my "story" wrong - Ralph.
adviser: well - we pretty much have the press under control here in the US - but unfortunally we can't do very much about the press in Europe yet.
George W Bush: What! We are the richest and most influential country on this planet! All those environmentalists and anti war campaigners will weaken our profits and our economy and ultimately our country. In the past we managed to control nearly everything on this planet we wanted!
adviser: well - as you know, there are always ways - but unless something really big happens I'm afraid, you, Mr. President, and the US will have a pretty negative coverage in the media.
George W Bush: "there are always ways" - that's what I mean! What have we got the CIA for? They got away with 9/11 - so can you make sure I don't get down in the polls after that G8 meeting in Scotland?
adviser (cunningly): well - if some muslim bombers would produce a blood bath in England just before the G8 summit ends, that would certainly remove all criticism from the front pages - and you could justify our war on terror, instead of fighting 'global warming'. You also would get up the polls a few points.
George W Bush: That sounds more like it! Al Qaeda, Bin Laden, Muslims! Fight terrorism - forget global warming! Great! And something in England - that'll convince them to join our fight against terror.
adviser: OK, Mr. President - we'll arrange something to happen.
George W Bush: Yes - what is good for the US, is also good for the rest of the world.
Cambridge, 11 June 2006, Ralph Nimmann - thankful for the freedom of speech we still have in Britain
- View My Stats