I refuse to feature any official reporting of the testimony from the amazing foil, counter foil, tripups, disturbed ground, office search cut short, new evidence miraculously appears, new black North Face bag, new nine memory sticks, more maliceaforethought aplenty, Robert Ludlum-lives MI6 code-breaker Gareth Williams's dog-n-pony inquest, it's just getting silly now (as Monty Python used to enjoy saying).
So, let's look elsewhere for some sort of dis-closure ... False Flag Terrorism, Mainstream Media Manipulation, State of Emergency, The Erosion of Civil Liberties, Israeli Embassy London Car-bombing 1994, World Trade Centre 9/11 Bombing 2001, London 7/7 Bombing 2005, Police State, War on Terror, Patriot Act and many other topics are dealt with by ex-MI5 whistleblower, author, Annie Machon.
FACE TO FACE with Annie Machon.
Machon makes it sound like MI6's IOPS (Information Operations Planning System) FOG OF WAR remit is (being used as) the perfect way to feed stories to the media, legally.
So, with ALL OF THAT in mind, all that game-playing, all that espionage, manipulation, propaganda, sleight of hand, intentional wool-over-eyes pulling, I'll ask again, "How much of what we take to be 'normal' accidents, suicides, murders, robberies, burglaries, extortion and corruption is less to do with 'organised crime' and more to do with pieces being removed and added to The Global Chess Board as part of the Corporate War Game for profit, asset and complete global control of You The People?"
And worse still, why aren't YOU, the people, (via your Free Press representatives) asking this more often?
BONUS MATERIALS: here's a word from David Shayler, the person Annie Machon left MI5 with, talking about 9/11 and how he sees it as an "opportunistic event that capitalised on intel that a plot to attack the USA was under way" (something that both Sibel Edmonds and Susan Lindauer claim they saw an embryonic form of).
Shayler's theory for the 9/11 event goes something along the lines of 'the Arabs could never pull it off and those who did THE INSIDE JOB (as he puts it) were in a better position to ensure the 'catalysing moment' of 'this new Pearl Harbour' would go off without any hitches and financial revenues and oil industry control were 'for the taking''. Strong, bold claims, indeed.