In the aftermath of the release of footage of BBC and CNN news reports on the afternoon of September 11th 2001, Head of BBC World News has publicly responded to the apparently prophetic reports and offers a less than convincing explanation.

©grail.co.uk

The Sunday Times, Sunday 31st March 1996

There has been a gathering storm of potentially explosive controversy between Christians and Jews that we have been observing with some interest. It may not be apparent to some that this issue has the potential to ignite global conflict, but if all factors are taken into consideration, including the fact that this very event was predicted years ago by Douglas Reed in his book Controversy of Zion, the arrangement of playing pieces on the board should give us some clue about what is in store.

Obviously, of course, it is only some Jews and some Christians, but the ramifications of the situation - especially considering the background and details - are startling. We hope that you will peruse this mini-series including some comments and understand that this is just another salvo in a long-term project and the when the storm finally breaks, things could get very ugly.

Let's begin our review with the basic claims.

Last Saturday February 24th saw tens of thousands from all over the UK come together in a march organised jointly by Stop the War Coalition, Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament and the British Muslim Initiative.

The number of attendees - 50-60,000 - was reduced to "hundreds" (spread across two cities) in the mainstream media. So here, for your viewing pleasure, are the few hundred who braved a "rainy" London to protest (see if you can spot the umbrellas).

©UK Indymedia

The BBC reports that Israeli newspapers have printed photos of Defence Minister Amir Peretz trying to watch military manoeuvres through binoculars with the lens caps still on.

©BBC

According to the photographer, Mr Peretz looked through the capped binoculars three times, nodding as Gen Ashkenazi explained what was in view.

He is not the first politician to demonstrate so graphically how out of touch with reality they really are. For example, George Bush was caught in the exact same gaffe:

©AP

George Bush at the Korean DMZ in 2002. Another photo later in the sequence showed the lens caps removed, so someone apparently figured it out.

Now, don't go sending me the Snopes "debunking" links. Snopes didn't debunk this photo. They admit that they don't know whether the photo is real or manipulated.

©AFP

Guards escort a prisoner in the ubiquitous orange suit at Guantanamo Bay.

After six years in power, the Bush gang have been able to put their pathocratic cronies into positions on the Supreme Court, as well into many seats in the Appeals Court system. In so doing, they have been able to subvert even the weak protection of rights for the poor and dispossessed in the United States, as well as being able to successfully create a parallel 'legal' system for individuals the US wishes to make disappear from the world.

©AP

Greater Buffalo (NY) residents are currently being treated to billboard ads like the one above, thanks to the fact that Bush's Department of Homeland Security seems to have decided to outsource its "war on terror" programming to humorously-named 'humanitarian' organisations like the American Red Cross.

Over the three or four days that Signs of the Times was down due to anomalous technical difficulties, the Pentagon's Central Repository of Advanced Propaganda (C.R.A.P.) thought they would avail themselves of the opportunity to sneak out a little 'war on terror' programming, undoubtedly in the fervent hope that it would pass unnoticed. Well, guess what? It didn't, and it would certainly be remiss of us to let this one slide.

Interview conducted February 12th 2007 with author and historian Laura Knight-Jadczyk.

We can only conclude that there must be some kind of agreement between world nations that, even when it is patently obvious, one nation will never expose the activities of anothers' intelligence agency. What other reason can there be for the fact that Iran and Syria were the only two countries to even hint at Israel as being behind the murder of Rafik Hariri on Valentine's day 2005?

Indeed, one of the strongest indications of an Israeli involvement in the murder of Hariri is the fact that not ONE mainstream news source is even mentioning the possibility of Israeli involvement, when it is painfully clear that Israel has the most to gain from his death. But then again, we have become accustomed to the severe lack of intestinal fortitude or any real journalistic integrity on the part of the mainstream media. And also to the fact that much of the Western press is dominated by Israeli sympathisers and/or "Zionists".

To his credit, French President Chirac, perhaps going as far as protocol permitted, held off from immediately implicating any particular group in the murder of his close friend and called for "an immediate international investigation to uncover the real culprits". Coming as it did at the same time as the US government's attempts to force the blame on Syria, Chirac's comment perhaps provides the strongest evidence that Syria was NOT involved. Of course, we don't need the subtle innuendo of any government leader to realise that, while Syria may have stood to gain from the untimely demise of Hariri, it had much more to lose.

The incessant, inane babbling never stops. Today I see a link, but I don't care to read it. It's the same story as yesterday. Everyone is talking about the 'troop increase'. It's all over the news as if it's being honestly debated, but most don't realize the fact of the matter: the number of troops was already increased a month ago. On 'Crapital Hill' they talk as if it is still being debated and nothing has yet happened, but the reality is that the troops are already there, on the ground.

You've been duped again. Shame on you.