From under the linoleum
Old newspapers show Mussolini's imperialism looked a lot like today's

I sat on the floor and picked through the tragedy of the country we now call Ethiopia laid out on the yellowing pages. It was eerily reminiscent of the current Iraq adventure.

A tale for our times
The December 1934 assassination of Sergei Kirov

Seventy years on, the killing of Sergei Kirov casts an eerie light on the events of 11 September 2001, the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, the “war on Terror” and the state-sponsored hysteria surrounding the shadowy figures of Osama bin Ladin and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

Ninety-three years of bombing the Arabs
It was the Italians, hell-bent on acquiring an African empire, who got the ball rolling. In 1911 the Libyan Arab tribes opposed an Italian invasion. Their civilians were the first people in the world to be bombed from the air.

Dispossessed all over again
After spending nearly two months in the West Bank the pull towards my village was growing stronger, especially after being detained twice and threatened with deportation … an Australian Palestinian returns to her ancestral home.

The tragic inevitability of a forlorn hope
Australia slides further into the Iraq quagmire
Cabinet documents recently released under the 50-year rule show that, in 1954, Liberal (conservative) Prime Minister, Robert Menzies, and key figures in his Cabinet were extremely gloomy about the prospects for success in an American war against nationalists in Indochina. But eventually they went to the Vietnam War anyway.

Bombing King David
One man’s freedom fighter is another’s terrorist

Some historians date the beginning of modern terrorism from the 1946 bombing by Zionist terrorists of the British military HQ in Jerusalem.

Don’t loiter near the exit
Military debacle and economic decline haunt the Bush regime

When I was just a young possum in the school cadet corps there was a hoary old war story that we all knew. It was almost certainly apocryphal, but it ruefully expressed a nasty historic truth about the US role in the demise of the British Empire.


We've been online since 1997.
Check out the archives or …

powered by FreeFind

Locations of visitors to this page


© Nick Possum/
Brushtail Graphics

The last Big Mac
Did Hasib Hussain suddenly fear that Allah might be a vegan?

29 August 2005

On his way to bomb the No. 30 bus at London’s Tavistock Square – and thereafter to meet Allah in Paradise – Hasib Hussain stopped off at the Scottish family restaurant to buy a Big Mac. This fascinating new revelation about the 7/7 bombings comes from yet another of those anonymous sources deep inside the police investigation, by way of The Independent (Thursday 25 August), a newspaper I once held in some regard.

Somehow Hasib’s mundane act of gustatory desperation doesn’t seem to square with the picture of a fanatical Islamic terrorist on a mission to send as many infidels as possible to their doom. If he’d hung out for half an hour the 18-year-old alleged jihadi could have asked the houris for a whole feast (and much else besides), but apparently he couldn’t resist the lure of the Quarter Pounder. It is as though, in his last hour on this mortal, corrupt, coil, he suddenly wondered with horror whether Paradise might be strictly vegetarian. Nuts. If you believe buying a Big Mac was the act of a man certain he was soon going to A Better Place, I have a Russian watch to sell you.

The Independent’s intrepid scribblers, Jason Bennetto and Kim Sengupta, didn’t see it that way. To them the little scoop was somehow more proof of the always off-the-record “official” position that the bombing was the work of an unaffiliated, spontaneously-forming, self-acting jihadi cell. They also insisted that Hussain’s choice of the bus had nothing to do with problems on the tube because he could have reached his supposed destination by other rail options and they denied previous definitive assertions that mobile phones had been used to detonate the bombs with a “disclosure” (that journalistic whore-word): the bombers pressed a button to detonate the bombs. Oh yeah, really. That line has been on and off like a whore’s knickers since about 8/7 – but always off the record.

But wait, there was more. The Independent was also able to tell us that Hussain made “a number” of phone calls “at least one to one of his fellow bombers” and that “he may also have spoken to the other two bombers”. Come on guys, if they’re talking about phone records – the only certain way of knowing – either he called or he didn’t.

The day before The Independent prostituted itself to the police leakers, the London Evening Standard’s very own anonymous source inside the investigation had come on with a line completely different to The Independent’s man (Wednesday 24 August): Hussain had planned to detonate his bomb on a train but was forced by the closure of the Northern Line to take out the bus instead.

As the Standard tells it, Hussain phoned his accomplices with “increasing panic”, failed to get a reply, and then made his “snap” decision to bomb the bus. Oh really? How did the police arrive at this psychological insight? It’s easy to establish, from phone company records, from and to, which number a call has been made, and exactly when, but this PI has never seen a panic rating on a phone company printout. And note that while The Independent’s source implies that Hussain may actually have spoken to his fellow bombers, the Standard scribblers think he didn’t get a reply because they were already dead. Well which was it? We know that the three train bombs exploded at 8.50 am. Were Hussain’s calls before or after 8.50? And the printout tells you the exact time of his calls. Simple.

The only way the cops could tell that Hussain’s calls were panicky is if he left a message on the recipient’s answering service. Is that what they’re saying? I’d love to see a transcript. Or is the nameless source saying that police had been recording the alleged bombers’ conversations on 7/7? Now that would put a whole ’nother face on what was really going on that day! And if they had been recording his conversations, the crime would have been solved within hours. Indeed, it might have been prevented.

The only possible alternative is that somebody close by was watching and listening to Hussain make the calls. But how could the watcher be sure Hussain was panicking if he couldn’t get an answer?

Where does the British media find the “journalists” who write this crap? People who’ll accept whatever lame garbage their “trusted” anonymous source tells them and whatever dumb spin he puts on it; people who never ask the most basic and obvious questions?

Let’s face it honestly: the overwhelmingly more likely scenario is that if Hasib Hussain did phone his friends he did so because he had heard from people streaming out of the tube that there had been explosions, or big trouble of some sort. He phoned them because he was worried. If he really was a suicide bomber, and not a dupe, why would he need to check up on them? He would have known that his confreres had accomplished their mission and gone to meet Allah. The fact that he rang them is, in fact, more proof that the bombers were innocent dupes who were asked to deliver packages, knowing nothing of their real nature and purpose, or believed they were merely actors in a security training exercise.

Until this investigation is taken out of the hands of the secretive, dissembling, politically-motivated cops who are currently running it and dragged into the light of day by a full-scale public inquiry, the truth will never be known.


Who duped the London bombers?
18 July 2005
Citing police and MI5 sources, The, a mainstream British internet publication, has now admitted the probability that the four London bombers were in some way duped by a master bomber . This theory has been widely reported internationally (for example by the Sydney Morning Herald, 18 July 2005).
In the Mirror’s scenario the master bomber cynically tricked his team into thinking that when they pressed the button, they were setting off a timing device that would give them sufficient time to leave the target area. Instead, they pressed the buttons, detonated the bombs and killed themselves as well as their victims. ...
There are considerable problems with the version of the dupes scenario publicized by the Mirror. READ THE FULL ARTICLE >>>

Taking down the wrong man at Stockwell tube
Was the “armed team” ordered to kill Hussain Osman because he knew too much?

20 August 2005
Either the highly-trained firearms team was actually composed of psychopaths so eager to actually kill somebody that they collectively threw away any opportunity to exercise judgement on whether Osman/de Menezes presented a danger to the public or we must conclude that they were under orders to kill the subject regardless.
And the only logical reason for killing Osman is that whoever arranged the killing knew that whatever Osman might have said under interrogation would lead to the conclusion that the “failed” 21/7 bombings and possibly the 7/7 bombings were false flag operations. READ THE FULL ARTICLE >>>

A fast-moving investigation
1 August 2005
It’s been fascinating to watch , from afar, the development of the London bombings investigation.
There are really two investigations: the official police probe and, in a parallel universe, the media investigation – which is the important one. Check the actual news releases on the London Metropolitan Police website, and you’ll find precious little: On 7 July three bombs exploded on London trains and one on a bus; something to do with four young Islamic chaps, apparently; many dead; the suspects seem to have died in the explosions; public asked to help ... That’s Scotland Yard for you: all British reserve; guarded and imprecise; cards played close to the chest. READ THE FULL ARTICLE>>>