Here's some more rough responses to the film. Up to 33:30, now, and should stop for today before I break something. I think going through 20mins/day was too optimistic
Has anyone got access to a transcript?
Lots more problems listed below, but here's my favourite factual error:
32:45 – claims de Menezes bought a Metro paper in the station – the Metro is free (and the film shows a picture of the Metro masthead, with ‘FREE’ written very clearly on it). Someone included that image, with 'free' on it on a bright red background, and didn't wonder whether de Menezes really had bought his free paper. Did $100k not cover editing the film?
23:35 bombers bought 2-way tickets (not typical MO) – maybe trying not to arouse suspicion? Or just a random decision.
23:45 finds it unusual that one bomber argued with a ticket clerk re. price. Terrorists do some odd things – for example, Mohammed Salameh was arrested re. 1993 WTC bombings when he tried to get back the deposit on the hired van used in the attack (
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2800297.stm) and are not necessarily the most rational people.
24: eyewitnesses believed that the bombers didn’t seem to know they were carrying bombs in their bags. Eyewitness testimony can be inaccurate but, given the bombers did not have wires trailing out of their bags or a timer making a loud ticking sound, how can you tell from looking at someone if you know they are carrying a bomb?
Apparently this testimony was one of many “huge developments in the case”. Why?
24:12: their (sole?) source that the alleged 7/7 ‘mastermind’ Haroon Rashid Aswat was a UK intelligence asset is Fox News’ Dayside. Clearly, Fox is a totally reliable source, and anything stated even once on it must be accurate. That must be why Jones does not appear to have looked into this story in more detail.
By the way, Jones does know that ‘intelligence assets’ are often informers who are involved in criminal activity?
It’s worth looking in Aswat more closely – whether he was a mastermind of the bombings (and how close his links to MI6 were) is not clear. All the articles I can find about him seem to be on CT sites…
24:30: the ‘expert’ John Loftus claimed that initial bombing raids in Operation Enduring Freedom killed Saddam, and revealed the alleged address of an alleged terrorist on Fox News (the alleged terrorist had moved, so the then owner suffered a lot of harassment). He doesn’t bend the facts at all, then.
Loftus claims that Aswat was “clearly” under MI6 contol. Shame the Loftus doesn’t explain why this is so clear.
26:37 – Loftus claims that the only reason someone on a terrorist watchlist could get away with flying into/out of London is if working with British intelligence. Given history of agencies not talking to each other, watchlists not being enforced etc (as with 9/11), or that Aswat might have been left for the Pakistanis to ‘deal with’, can you think of any other reasons why this could happen…?
27: despite all the eyewitness reports of 7/7, Shayler focuses on the one anomalous report that suggests the bomb was under a train (metal pointing up). Aside from the possibility this could just be bits of the seat or floor blown in an odd way, isn’t it also possible that the guy was mistaken – traumatised witnesses to sometimes misremember details. Or does Shayler believe one witness over all the others, and the rescue workers, and investigators, who helped on the scene (clearly, MI6 has installed lots of agents as London Underground staff, as Paramedics, etc.)
27:30: Shayler complains that this isn’t being followed up. That could be due to a huge conspiracy, or could be cause the wreckage did not suggest a bomb under the train.
No-one’s investigating my claim that aliens did 7/7. Therefore, I have Prooved that aliens are to blame.
28: For Meacher the bombings are “a very convenient way of ensuring there is fear, of ensuring that there is control, of ensuring that those who are in the know – and of course we cannot tell you because it is all secret – are in a position of extreme power.” Insert appropriate expletives here.
28:45ish – they have a long interview with a random woman about her understanding of what happened to de Menezes, and media coverage. The police’s statements and the media coverage about this were misleading, but Terrorstorm doesn’t make clear how. Would a minute or so of textual analysis have been too hard?
30:05 – claims that a special army unit had killed de Menezes? They don’t say what they mean, but if Terrorstorm is referring to the Special Reconnaisance Regiment then these troops had some role in the operation, but did not shoot de Menezes. It was police who shot him (
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,1542080,00.html)
Also claims de Menezes was shot more than ten times in the head. Actually, he was shot seven times in the head and once in the shoulder (
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4713753.stm). 11 shots were fired in total (
http://www.guardian.co.uk/menezes/story/0,,1691537,00.html).
31:15 – a couple of interviews saying that shooting an innocent man is bad. Shame they couldn’t find time for more detailed analysis, though.
32:45 – claims Menezes paid for his ticket with a Metro OysterCard – but these are issued by Transport for London (nothing to do with Metro) and, instead of using them to pay for tickets, you use this card instead of paper tickets.
33 – passengers say they saw police shoot de Menezes over 10 times in the head. They did see cops shoot (at) him over ten times, but only 7 of these ended up in his head.
33:10 – Menezes looked “like a scared rabbit”. If a load of armed police came after me, that’d make me pretty nervous, too…
33:20 – now also claims that, as well as killing de Menezes, a “special military hit team” stopped him while he was heading for the station. Evidence would be nice. If he had been stopped before he got on the train, he might still be alive.
33:25 – Terrorstorm claims it’s well know that if someone has a bomb you don’t shoot at them or get close to them. Well known to who? The International Association of Chiefs of Police recommends that suicide bombers can be confronted on occasion, and that those shooting them should aim not to hit the bomb (
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/03/AR2005080301867.html)
33:30 – instead, Menezes allegedly had to be ‘eliminated’ as he’d learned too much.
