Israeli 'consular officials' visit victims pm on 7/7

[TonyGosling]

Re the Natalie Bracht saga.
The David Abrahams link - wow! If there is a 7/7 link (and Bracht is
obviously saying things that some people find dangerous) then the fact
that the Donorgate scandal arose at all suggests that the perpetrators
of the 7/7 bombings have a few influential opponents in Brit ruling
circles.

Good - although one wonders whether this is the case any longer.

The figures (donation versus turnover) showed that the money passing
through Abrahams obviously came from somewhere else.

Did you notice Daniel Bethlehem's appointment as the head of the Foreign
Office's legal department? He used to play a similar role (adviser on
international law) for Israel. It was on his advice that the Israeli
government told the United Nations to f*ck off with regard to the
investigation of the Jenin massacre (carried out in the days following
9/11).

Interesting that the Times etc. pull out all the stops to find Bracht. A
number between 5 and 7 comes to mind.

I guess you know that the Israeli embassy stated a few hours after the
7/7 bombings that "Israeli consular officials visited the various
hospitals to which casualties from the attacks were taken".

Source:
http://london.mfa.gov.il/mfm/Data/79627.doc

That was at a time when the Brit authorities were saying no names were
yet known of anyone who had been killed. Gotta wonder whether the team
lost any combatant who wasn't supposed to be blown up.

I believe there was widescale mobilisation of the sayan network
(including sub-helpers) on 7/7.

To take a minor case: Maureen Lipman. With regard to Ken Livingstone and
the use of the Finegold incident, she asked, "Will no one rid us of this
troublesome beast?

<http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2006/apr/24/comment.features1 1>

That was after Hugh Muir said it wasn't "immediately clear" that
Livingstone was "dodging a hitman's bullet".

<http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2006/mar/31/localgovernment.greater lo
ndonauthority>

I mention this vicious commitment to helping Zionist interests in her
'Guardian' column as background to her account on 7/7 she drove into
central London to offer a lift north to people stranded in the centre of
town after the bombings. To help gather low-level intelligence on morale
and feelings, I strongly suspect. Celebrities like her aren't into
helping ordinary people.

A previous case of widescale mobilisation of the London sayanim was
during the hunt for Mordechai Zanunu. Hundreds (thousands?) of helpers
were given lists of local boarding houses etc. to phone, in the effort
to find him.

Could everyone have been asked to do their bit (at however low a level)
on 7/7 too?

There has been a major effort to spook-up a pseudo-oppositional
explanation of 7/7 - which some find it difficult to get their heads
round. Ditto 9/11. With 7/7, we have total nonsense about train times to
King's Cross, but little about what was going on at the tube stations
that were closed that morning. The manipulation pattern is clear. Have
you read the Wikipedia page on Muhammad al-Durrah? There are also some very professional webpages doing some very professional manipulation on this story.

Wikipedia and its worldwide network of people who enjoy telling other
people what shouldn't be published is going to be quite important in the
epoch. 'Neutral point of view' - my arse! Interesting too that the
'Economist' slots Google as similar to a bank, in that it fuels
(obviously debt-funded) expenditure generally. But I digress.