Mind The Gap

Keeping an eye on the media coverage of July 7th, and taking the media to task over their inaccuracies, mis-leading statements and distortions. Post all your complaints and responses here! If you spot inaccuracies in the media coverage, here's the place to tell us about it.

Mind The Gap

Joined: 19 Jan 2006, 21:24

21 Sep 2006, 19:18 #1

Today I received my copy of the DVD produced by Official Confusion entitled "Mind The Gap" and subtitled "7/7: Call for an independent enquiry".

I watched it straight through (about 40 minutes), taking a few notes. At the end, my immediate reaction was a feeling of confusion. Thinking about this, I wondered if this was inevitable given that there are so many unanswered questions. Since I was puzzled, and I'm already familiar with the content (the only thing that was new to me was that Hasib Hussein was engaged to be married), I wondered what those not so familiar with the subject would make of it, and whether this would limit the usefulness of the DVD. (It was sold to me for "Home Use Only", but perhaps Official Confusion are open to negotiation on that point?).

On a second viewing it became clearer to me why I felt confused.

The first 8 minutes sets the historical context, beginning with 9/11 and covering the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq (including Blair's lies about WMD, Abu Ghraib, white phosphorus in Fallujah, PNAC) and the involvement of western intelligence agencies in operation Gladio, the IRA and Al-Qaeda. I think this introduction is a good idea and well done. A minor quibble is the statement that 9/11 was "irrefutably" an inside job. I think that puts it a bit too strongly (but not by much). There is no mention of Israel or Zionism, by the way, but attention is drawn to the profits made by British companies out of the wars, and to the way governments have used the "war on terror" to pass repressive legislation.

The next 21 minutes cover the ground which will be familiar to the readers of this forum: reports of power surges, conflicting times for the explosions, unsatisfactory official narrative, warning to Netanyahu, Peter Power and the Visor exercises, train times from Luton, reports of explosions coming from under the floors of trains, confusion over the type of explosive used, the lack of CCTV footage, the lack of witnesses to the four suspects, the suspects not matching the likely profile of suicide bombers. Given the time constraints, it is again well done in my opinion. Minor quibbles: first, the significance of the Visor exercises would have been more obvious if an explicit comparison with events on 9/11 had been made. There is a still of a web site where this is mentioned in the small print, but I didn't notice it on the first viewing. Second, the statement about the lack of witnesses of the four suspects should perhaps have given some detail about why Danny Biddle's statements are inconclusive. Notable omissions: Richmal Oates Whitehead, the dummy run (except for a still of a newspaper article).

Up to this point, the viewer is definitely being led down the path that there is considerable doubt that the four suspects were wittingly involved. The next 7 minutes take a different direction, though this is not explicitly announced (and I think this is why I was a bit confused the first time). We go through the leaks to the press that they may, after all, have been working for the security services (MS Khan in particular), and the speculation from former officials Charles Shoebridge, John Loftus and Crispin Black. Notable omission: the Tartan Taliban.

The final 4 minutes describe briefly 21/7 and 22/7, and how the events of those dates make no sense at all but had the effect of making 7/7 old news. The way 7/7 distracted from the failures of the G8 summit is commented upon. Finally the important point that the government has used 7/7 as an opportunity to pass repressive legislation is made once again.

I get the impression that the 7 minute section was spliced in as an afterthought, and that the whole thing would have been more coherent if that section had been omitted.

I don't have broadband yet, and I rarely watch TV news, so I was seeing most of the footage for the first time. I thought the most striking clip was Ian Blair's "four miserable bombers" clearly labelled 8/7/05. Why did we have to wait until May 2006 for the Official Narrative when the script was written so long before? Ian Blair and Jack Straw on the "hallmarks of Al-Qaeda" were also telling, and the Peter Power news interviews struck me as being carefully scripted.

I think as a result of watching I am more inclined to the view that the four suspects were involved unwittingly, if at all, and that most, if not all, of the stuff being leaked to newspapers and broadcast by the ex-officials like Power, Shoebridge, Loftus and Black is disinformation (Loftus was on Fox News. In the phrase of the Fox News presenter, "Hello?").

I suppose that raises the question of how I feel about the DVD being presented by another ex-official, David Shayler. His role is firmly that of narrator, there is no claiming that it is all his research or anything like that; he plays a much less prominent part in it than the presenter usually does in TV documentaries (eg Channel 4 Dispatches). He does a good job as narrator, speaking more slowly and calmly than on the one occasion I have met him in real life.
Innocent until proven guilty
Reply
Like

Joined: 07 Aug 2006, 21:19

21 Sep 2006, 23:15 #2

I think you make many solid observations of an otherwise excellent film there, particularly the Loftus FOX angle! CTs which we are labelled, are often cited as taking what they want only, from available information and disregarding what doesnt fit. FOX in general seems a spin machine, yet we have some faith in this claim. The Mossad Art students following the Able Danger identified hijackers, also has a FOX cover story that is used in the same way. Are there more sources backing up either of these? Aswat in particular, as I was dismayed in the summer to see BBC coverage of 2 Belmarsh detainees fighting US extradition. The first stole the story, with Aswat the 2nd rarely mentioned, or only in connection with the Oregon camp and no longer for the mastermind of 7/7 'evil' role, that tried him by media in 2005. It smacks of the Dancing Israelis, covered over by a swoop of Arabs to be silently released within later.
Reply
Like

Joined: 07 Dec 2005, 15:21

22 Sep 2006, 08:29 #3

I think the revelation about Aswat was first made on Fox news by John Loftus, but there were other sources to back it up. Some of the original articles have expired, but here's a discussion thread which also has links.

http://www.team8plus.org/e107_plugins/f ... c.php?1254

I would guess that reason the Fox footage was used was because it's the only video footage of the information - showing a news clipping in a film doesn't really have the same kind of impact.

The film maker is aware of a couple of errors in the film - one of these is that John Loftus was subtitled 'Former Attorney General' rather than 'Former Attorney' and.....I can't remember the other off the top of my head!
"We are not democrats for, among other reasons, democracy sooner or later leads to war and dictatorship. Just as we are not supporters of dictatorships, among other things, because dictatorship arouses a desire for democracy, provokes a return to democracy, and thus tends to perpetuate a vicious circle in which human society oscillates between open and brutal tyranny and a lying freedom." - Errico Malatesta, Democracy and Anarchy 1924
Reply
Like

Joined: 19 Jun 2006, 13:58

22 Sep 2006, 08:46 #4

Kier @ Sep 22 2006, 09:29 AM wrote:I think the revelation about Aswat was first made on Fox news by John Loftus, but there were other sources to back it up. Some of the original articles have expired, but here's a discussion thread which also has links.

http://www.team8plus.org/e107_plugins/f ... c.php?1254

I would guess that reason the Fox footage was used was because it's the only video footage of the information - showing a news clipping in a film doesn't really have the same kind of impact.

The film maker is aware of a couple of errors in the film - one of these is that John Loftus was subtitled 'Former Attorney General' rather than 'Former Attorney' and.....I can't remember the other off the top of my head!
There's two things that happen as you get older: first you loose your memory, and then... damn, I can't remember! :rolleyes:
All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them - Galileo Galilei
Reply
Like

Joined: 07 Aug 2006, 21:19

22 Sep 2006, 21:01 #5

Thanks for the link Kier, its nice to have more sources on that issue. I like the way the police determined on the 7/7 morning the bombers made all those calls, which now I guess in the narrative is dismissed, giving the purely from 'anyones' neighbourhood angle and allowing Aswat to slip into obscurity. The film is still very strong imo and all these films always have a little something off but it is a huge minefield to cover, so its hardly suprising.
Reply
Like

Joined: 04 Dec 2005, 17:55

10 Dec 2006, 13:33 #6

The Sunday Sun - the North's Own Sunday SInce 1919
The Sunday Sun
Ex-spy calls for bombing inquiry
Dec 10 2006
By Robert Weatherall, The Sunday Sun

Former spy David Shayler has cast doubt on who was responsible for the London bombings and called for a public inquiry.

The Middlesbrough-born ex-MI5 man has claimed the official version of the attacks on three underground trains and a double decker bus in the capital on July 7 last year is riddled with inaccuracies.

He has produced a 40 minute documentary in which he questions a number of issues ranging from the September 11, 2001, attack on the US, and the 7/7 attacks in London.

Shayler acknowledges that many people listening to his claims will believe he has gone mad but argues that an objective examination of the facts surrounding most terrorist atrocities in the last six years will leave people with the same conclusion he has reached . . . that the truth has yet to be uncovered.

The former analyst then goes on to claim the London bombings were orchestrated by "people who want to control society".

He said: "I'm saying the evidence to show that these three men from Leeds and the one from Aylesbury were responsible is simply not there."

Shayler, who spent time in self-imposed exile in France before returning to the UK where he was found guilty of breaching the Official Secrets Acts, claims CCTV footage of the four men entering Luton train station before embarking on their journey to London has been faked.

He said: "If you look at the picture taken at 7.21am outside Luton allegedly of the four you really can't identify them from that picture and I have been to check it out myself at Luton and I believe that picture is fake . . . that they weren't there that day." Shayler also claims there are other discrepancies in the official report.

He said: "For example the train they are supposed to have got according to the official Home Office narrative the 7.40am from Luton, that day was cancelled. So clearly the official story starts to fall down basically." On the reason for the 7/7 bombings he added: "At that point a lot of people, in Parliament even, were asking questions about the ID scheme for example. That has now gone through Parliament, that has now become law. They have also as a result of 7/7 passed even more draconian terror laws.


"I have done a lot of research into it, and also witnessed this sort of thing in the services is that the people who are in charge of the oil industry and the arms industry realise they haven't taken the people with them on their foreign adventures and they are getting to the point where they realise people will revolt against them so they are looking at ways of controlling society."
Follow the numbers.
Reply
Like

Joined: 09 Aug 2007, 13:56

09 Aug 2007, 14:13 #7

Might I take this opportunity to point out that the latest issue (8) of Notes From the Borderland magazine has a critical review of Mind the Gap--visit www.borderland.co.uk to see how to obtain it. You might not like the content, but (for the record) all of us at Notes From the Borderland agree there needs to be a proper public inquiry into 7/7/
Reply
Like