dialog re: recent postings


Richard Moore

From: "William Engdahl"
To: <•••@••.•••>
Subject: RE: some short subjects...
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 22:09:45 +0200


I can only say I find it extremely enjoyable to read your
lucid summaries or interpretations of what I wrote.
I am in the fledgling stages of building a website if you want
to link it anywhere. The URL is 


Hi William,

I'm honored that you find my summaries acceptable. 
Your material is very important.
I've added your URL to my signature, which shows up
at the bottom of most postings.


From: "Meria Heller" <•••@••.•••>
To: <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: Analysis: London bombings & coverup
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 08:58:11 -0700

well written. I sent it out.

"THE MERIA HELLER SHOW "- Now in it's  6th Year  On The Net- #1 on Net!

From: •••@••.•••
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 13:48:15 EDT
Subject: Re: Analysis: London bombings & coverup
To: •••@••.•••

richard, i have a column in today about this<including terror exercises, 
giuiliani, fake suicide bombers etc) and here's a  letter i got.
                Interesting article but you either forgot to mention or did
            not know that Tom Ridge, former Homeland Security secretary
            was in London the day before the bombing and flew home the
            morning of the explosion.  He was on the "No Spin Zone" the
            next day talking about his, amazing, timing regarding the
                Open the windows and turn on the fans...

Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 22:42:31 +0200 (W. Europe Standard Time)
From: "Earl" <•••@••.•••>
To: <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: Analysis: London bombings & coverup

Hi Richard,
I agree with you here; I also posted it at my blog (which I moved):  

Good essay and documented, also.
It seems to me this false flag operation stuff is starting to
wear thin.......thanks to internet.

Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 16:19:02 -0700 (GMT-07:00)
From: Howard Ward
To: •••@••.•••
Subject: Re: Analysis: London bombings & coverup

Hello Richard - I'm curious, who do you feel is behind the UK
bombings? Do you think Tony Blair is in on the planning?

Here's my personal problem with these suggestions that the
governments are planning and executing attacks which they know
will lead to mass death:

What I did in the over a decade that I've participated in
dialogue groups is "know myself", which to my understanding
was about understanding human behavior.

I mention that because it's clear to me now that all human
action is basically "doing what makes sense to the person in
conjunction with how how they are perceiving the situation in

Another way to say that is: They intend to do "good". The
reason why alot of behavior doesn't seem to fit the catagory
of "good" is because the person is somewhat confused in their
thinking and understanding. It's also clear to me that
ideologies can often override intelligent responses, like
people believing the "Ends justify the Means".

But here's the problem: Mass killing is so extreme, I feel it
would be difficult for most any human to justify. A few people
maybe, but not many. So, I have difficulty believing that alot
of people could be knowledgeable of such horrific actions
without speaking out.

So why is no one coming forward to 'out' these people?

I understand that groups like 'The Council on Foreign
Relations' and its British counterpart are actually the
wealthy-elites who are really running things, but even those
groups have many business members who wouldn't tolerate such

If indeed some government group is doing this, I would doubt
that even Blair knows about it.

Who do you think is doing it, and how many people do you feel
actually would be 'in on it'?


Hi Howard,

Perhaps the best answer to  your general line of questioning
was given by Herr Hitler:

        The great masses of the people in the very bottom of their
        heart tend to be corrupted rather than consciously and
        purposely evil...therefore, in view of the primitive
        simplicity of their minds, they more easily fall a victim to a
        big lie than to a little one, since they themselves lie in
        little things, but would be ashamed of lies that were too big.
        -- Adolph Hitler, as quoted by William Blum in Rogue State, A
        Guide to the World's Only Superpower, p. 11.

The basic psychology of top elites is very pseudo-Darwinian:
they believe that someone must always be top dog, and if it's
not you it will be someone else, and then you'll be a slave.
"Us or them" is more than a propaganda phrase. In terms of the
Enneagram, these folks, functionally if not psychologically, are 8s.

"Mass killing"? Are you talking about the puny London
bombings, with less than a hundred casualties. The people who
planned that operation are the same kind  of people who
arranged the Iraq war, where over 100,000 civilians have been
killed - not to mention World Wars I and II, where they also
sacrificed millions of lives of 'their own' soldiers. They are
the same kind of people who put HIroshima and Nagasaki off
limits to wartime bombing so that they would be available for
testing the first atomic bombs. Kissinger, who speaks for such
people, has declared population reduction as the most
important U.S. security issue.

"Coming forward" to whom? Do you imagine someone showing up at
the doors of The Guardian with a secret memo, and some editor
eager to publish, "Blair did it!" ?  There is plenty of
evidence of all kinds, but it will not be presented in a
meaningful way in the mass media. The media is one of the
primary means of social control & disinformation.

The Council on Foreign Relations is a multi-level
organization. Many of the top-level members are involved in
top elite circles. But the CFR itself, in terms of its broad
membership, is primarily a propaganda channel, as exemplified
by their Foreign Affairs journal, aimed at middle-level
members of the Establishment, in large type with simple

            > Who do you think is doing it, and how many people do you
            feel actually would be 'in on it'?

Well, first of all, there is whatever clique is at the top
levels of planning. People at the level of the Rockefellers,
Kissinger, Sharon, top elites in Wall Street and The City,
guys who are on the Boards of several multinationals. Security
at that level is not an issue, as these people see themselves,
basically from birth, as different from you and me. They are
the anointed ones, the preservers of Western Civilization.
"You never spend your capital; you never tell secrets in front
of the servants; you never talk seriously to the peasants."
This is what they learn at bedtime, rather than, "Jesus loves
me this I know, because the Bible tells me so."

Once an operation is approved in principle at the highest
levels, there are Intelligence operatives, separated by
compartmentalized security procedures, who have decided to
devote their careers to the clandestine, and who have been
tested in previous operations as regards their reliability and
discretion. Only a minimum number of individuals at the
operative level need to be "in the know," and for such an
operation the most reliable would be chosen, most likely with
wives and children. How sad if the family vehicle were to meet
with an unfortunate road accident on the way to school. Such
eventualities never even need be mentioned. In that way,
Intelligence security is no different than Mafia security.

So with that background, let's look at the London bombings in
detail, as regards number of people "in the know". I'm not
claiming here to know the exact truth, but rather to give one
plausible scenario. . .

No one in the security exercise, for example, had any "need to
know." There would be one infiltrator, posing as a recruiter
for civilian participants, who would pick out the Muslim fall
guys. There would be someone who was in a position to
substitute real bombs for dummy exercise bombs.  There would
be a control team, who we might imagine in a black van, who
monitor everything going on, and who control the detonators.
There would be a few operatives who take out strategic CTV
cameras in advance, and take care of similar details. All of
this is stuff you can see in the standard spy film genre, and
is nothing more than elementary project planning.

Apart from that, there need to be people in a position to
"stop the presses" so to speak, to somehow shut down
communications, if something goes terribly wrong. Just as a
last resort. . . "We interrupt this broadcast to bring you a
special civil defense message Please do not leave your house
or attempt to use your phones..."

Finally, there's the PR crew, headed by Blair, who must learn
their lines for when their cue comes.


Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 11:20:35 -0500
Subject: Re: U.S. forces behind deadly children bomb: Iraqi experts
From: Maureen & Frank <•••@••.•••>
To: <•••@••.•••>

Hello Richard,

I don't challenge the veracity of these and other "conspiracy
theories", and I don't begrudge you for posting these things,
but somehow these "false flag" theories undermine the reality
that Muslims and Arabs are really angry at the attacks by the
West.  Portraying these attacks as cold blooded manipulation
by Western interests seems to me to be a somewhat racist
perspective, as it downplays the real and appropriate anger of
the victims.

Exploring these theories may serve a purpose (to understand
the depth of depravity of colonial interests), but their
depravity is already well known. Any honest reading of history
will show that the exploiting class will do just about
anything.  I just think it is offensive to "use" these
theories to press your point, while the truth is that the
oppressed are fighting back.

The Al Jazeera article is a propaganda piece intended to
villify the Americans.  What it says may be true, or may not. 
The Sunnis are trying to provoke a civil war.  There are lots
of powers pushing in different directions in the vaccuum left
by the invasion.  Let's not lose perspective.

Frank Van den Bosch


Hi Frank,

I appreciate and respect your comments, particularly because
I've heard similar sentiments from many other people. There
must therefore be a sense in which I am the one who is
"wrong", rather than all of you being "wrong".  Nonetheless, I
have a very difficult time (admittedly, my limitation) making
sense of what you're saying.

You seem to want to put all of "these attacks" into one
category: either we're doing them all or they're doing them
all. Why? I think we all understand that when a humvee gets
blown up by a roadside bomb, that is an expression of the
"appropriate anger of the victims". The problem, from a
Western propaganda point of view, is that ordinary citizens
understand this as well. It tends to encourage people to want
to "bring our boys home, out of harm's way". So our leaders
create a few incidents of their own, aimed at Iraqi civilians,
because that encourages the public to want to "stay the
course" and "bring democracy to the Muslims." I think it is
very important to know who is responsible for different
incidents, to the extent we are able to find out. Certainly
it matters who was responsible for 9/11, for example.

Why do you use the term "conspiracy theory" to describe
anything that differs from mainstream propaganda? Why do you
refer to the Al Jazeera report as "propaganda", without
challenging its veracity? Do you think the subject was not
newsworthy? What makes you so sure the Sunnis are trying to
provoke a civil war, because Fox says so? The more solid
evidence is that the U.S. strategy is to stir up a civil war,
so that Iraqi's will fight each other instead of the
occupiers. After that the plan is to divide Iraq into
separate, more easily managed, provinces.

I believe there are deeper feelings, a "deeper truth", behind
your words that may be difficult to express in a public email
forum. If we were in a face-to-face gathering, with time to
dig deeper, I think we would understand one another better. My
apologies for the combative tone, which I find hard to avoid
in this kind of communication.



If you find this material useful, you might want to check out our website
(http://cyberjournal.org) or try out our low-traffic, moderated email 
list by sending a message to:

You are encouraged to forward any material from the lists or the website,
provided it is for non-commercial use and you include the source and
this disclaimer.

Richard Moore (rkm)
Wexford, Ireland
blog: http://harmonization.blogspot.com/

"Escaping The Matrix - 
Global Transformation: 
    "...the Patriot Act followed 9-11 as smoothly as the
      suspension of the Weimar constitution followed the
      Reichstag fire."  
      - Srdja Trifkovic

    There is not a problem with the system.
    The system is the problem.

    Faith in ourselves - not gods, ideologies, leaders, or programs.
cj list archives:

newslog list archives:
Informative links: