This blog is more me thinking aloud.
I am writing this blog for the public. For the people wanting to rise up and make a stand against the UK Government. For the people who plan to attend one of the many anti-austerity marches this year.
I am also writing this for the Police Officers who are tasked with Policing these marches. Police Officers who can relate to many of those marching having spent the last 5 years seeing their own pay, working conditions, pensions and living conditions being hacked away by the Tories. Police Officers who have nothing more than their strong sense of duty preventing them opening the cordon and letting the crowd through the gates of Downing Street. Officers who are doing their duty but some of whom I know for a fact want to be part of the march but would face certain dismissal and possible criminal charges if they did so.
Both sides are against the austerity being inflicted upon the nation. Both sides are suffering various levels of pain at the hands of this tyrannical government. Both sides (with perhaps a few exceptions) did not want the Tories back in power. Both side have a common enemy but will, over the course of the year, end up going head to head in battle on the streets of London and dare I say other major cities.
The protesters will march. The Police will march and contain.
The protesters will increase their numbers and try and break containment. The Police will increase their cordons.
The protesters will begin to venture off track. The Police will begin to kettle.
The protesters will begin pushing and shoving. The Police will begin pushing and shoving too.
Things will get thrown, batons will get drawn. Police will get hit, protesters will get hit.
The Police will use the media to claim the protesters were thugs and violent. The protesters will use social media to claim the Police were thugs and violent.
Protesters will be caught on camera breaking the law and face justice. Police will be caught on camera breaking the law and they too will face justice.
Both sides will take casualties. Public property will get damaged. Innocents will get caught in the fracas and they too will get injured by either side.
And whilst all of this goes on and the public pick a side and begin condemning the other, the common enemy, the people responsible for this uprising, the people who hide behind the Police Officers’ strong sense of duty whilst simultaneously attacking both warring factions will sit in their fortresses laughing at the chaos in the streets below but vehemently condemn in front of the camera.
The Government will condemn the protesters and deny they were responsible in any way for the public dissent. The Government will criticise the Police for their slow response time, their lack of resources, their lack of equipment and the actions they took. They set the two sides against each other then sit back and attack them both again and again….and we let it happen time and time again.
These protest which we are seeing and will continue to see in increasing numbers and strength are directed toward the same Government, the same enemy that the Police have faced for the last 5 years but have been prevented by law from doing anything about it or to protest in any way.
The difficulty is that the Police are sworn to protect ALL person and ALL property without showing any favour to either side. You may argue that by stopping the protesters reaching their targets and by using force against the protesters that they are showing favour towards the enemy. However, I assure you that if the Tories were to suddenly man up and come outside of their fortresses and try to get at the protesters, if they decided to stop hiding behind their fences and the duty of the Police and try to fight back, the Police would 100% absolutely stop them too. They would use force where necessary and would make arrests for any crimes they committed. That is because although I am sure the vast majority would love to see David Cameron or George Osborne get given a slap or a bit of a beating, they MUST act without fear or favour and protect each person (even their own enemy) from danger…That is the nature of Police work and that is what they are duty bound to do. To do any different, to step aside and us gain access to Downing St, Westminster Palace, Tory HQ or any other Government building would guarantee they got the sack and faced criminal charges for neglect of duty and misconduct. They would absolutely face greater convictions than any single protester.
So why not box clever and rather than play the games of our enemy, rather than go to war with each other, rather than protesting against austerity, cuts and the Tory tyranny but then attacking physically and verbally other victims of this regime, co-operate and protest in an alternative manner?
What does/has attacking Police with barriers, cones, bricks, rocks, sticks and smoke bombs achieved for the cause?
What has punching, kicking, elbowing, headbutting, baton striking or spraying protesters achieved for the Police?
Both sets of actions have simply brought both parties into disrepute and seen them facing public criticism and legal action. Counter productive and does nothing to alter the course we are heading. Nor does it have any impact upon the common enemy, David Cameron and the Tory party.
The Police are absolutely NOT going to engage in violent protest. But imagine the impact it would have on WORLD media and the Government if the Police stood amongst or side by side with rather then surrounding or kettling the protesters.
If the protests remained friendly and non-violent with nothing being thrown, nothing being burned, nothing being damaged and no reason or excuse given for the Police to draw their batons or begin cordoning or kettling then the exact same message could be expressed without the enemy and it’s media being able to criticise anybody at all.
It isn’t only the protesters who would need to make a change in their actions and attitudes. The Police would need to recognise that these men and women are marching and protesting against something they too have been victim of for half a decade. They would need to be a little more tolerant and understanding and recognise that these people represent them and their grievances too. That these people are doing what the Police have been wanting to do for 5yrs but have been prevented from doing so by law. To remain calm and use alternative methods of policing the marches and dare I say, question orders given to the contrary.
A simple gesture such as standing together facing the Government Buildings rather than the crowd would show a participation, a protest without actually “protesting”. A sign of defiance against the Government and solidarity with the community NOT the enemy.
The Police Officers policing these events would need to stand together as one in their actions. They can’t sack or discipline everybody after all.
John Lennon said
“When it gets down to having to use violence the you are playing the system’s game. The establishment will irritate you; pull your beard, flick your face to make you fight [they will use the presence of the Police to do this that is what you all need to recognise] Because once they’ve got you violent, then they know how to handle you. The only thing they don’t know how to handle is non-violence and humour”
These protests would have so much more impact if the public recognise the restraints placed upon the Police and the fact that THEY CAN NOT ALLOW THE LAW TO BE BROKEN NO MATTER HOW MUCH THEY MAY DESPISE THE GOVERNMENT. The Police also need to recognise that the public partaking in these protests only want the same as you. Fairness, Equality and the Tory scum out of power. BOTH sides need to accept that those responsible for the austerity are the ones fuelling the violence and the moment either side resort to aggression the Government has won again.
The Public is the Police and the Police is the Public. Uniting as one would have unquestionable impact.
I think it is time we took a closer look at a term some of you may not have even heard before despite the fact they occur with an ever increasing frequency.
This report will no doubt attract unwanted attention, criticism, insult and maybe worse. It is however, I believe, an important subject to look at in this day and age when all the general public want from our Governments is honesty and fairness.
Many people throughout history have sought to highlight matters such as this one and unfortunately ended up being killed in “freak attacks” or “accidents”.
The subject I am talking about is FALSE FLAG OPERATIONS (FFO).
A FFO is a military and political operation, usually a terrorist attack or similar, which is perpetrated by the Government on their own soil or establishments abroad and subsequently made to look as though they have been committed by a foreign Government or extremist organisation.
Some well known alleged FFOs include;-
Charlie Hebdo attack
When I say “well known” I do not mean that it is well known that these were FFOs, I simply mean that people all around the world are well aware that these attacks took place.
Many have alleged over the years that the western Governments were heavily involved in the 9/11 attacks, some even suggest that they were completely planned and orchestrated by the US Government or a joint operation by US and other Governments such as UK and/or Israel.
At this point you may already be switching off and thinking this is another “conspiracy theory” but please read on. I will be looking at each of the above incidents in a little more detail and pointing out some of the theories circulating about them but the idea behind this report is to look more at the FACTS and the aspects of each incident which make them less conspiracy THEORY and more of a plausible possibility.
For this who have no idea what a FFO is you may mistakingly think that they themsleves are conspiracy theories. However, they are unfortunately very real.
We are going to look at one below which was presented to President John F Kennedy in the 1960’s by the Department of Defence. Quite frighteningly this FFO was signed off on by all except the President which is the only reason it did not go ahead. When we look at it you will see why so many people believe that the incidents listed above could well have been FFOs.
Op Northwoods was put together by the US Department of Defence (DoD) in the 60’s to address a problem faced by the then Government.
Kennedy and his administration were becoming increasingly concerned about Fidel Castro and also his relationship to Russia. Kennedy was under increasing pressure from his Government to take action against Castro and Cuba, however they lacked the support from the American public to invade and go to war and also the rest of the world. Op Northwoods was the DoD’s answer to that problem.
(you can view the entire now declassified document here but I will be looking at the vital sections below)
It is described in it’s first paragraph as a description of “pretexts which could justify US military intervention in Cuba”. In otherwords, idea that would make the rest of the world and US public support a US invasion.
Throughout the document are recommendations that the document is kept away from certain aspects of US Government, military and the rest of the world, including the UN. This is because the suggestions put forward, if carried out and discovered to be a FFO, would no doubt trigger another world war and destroy the US.
The first page outlines the document contents and reasons for it and shows that it was signed off by the US Joint Chief of Staff.
Section 5 of the Operation states
“The suggested courses of action…are based on the premise that US military intervention will result from a period of hightened US-Cuba tensions which place the United States in the position of suffering justifiable grievances. World opinion and the United Nations forum should be favourably affected by developing the international image of the Cuban government being rash and irresponsible and as an alarming and unpredictable threat to the peace of the Western Hemisphere”
What we are hearing here is a plan for the US Government, through a series of events and incidents which we shall examine shortly, planning to falsify and concoct an image and opinion which misrepresents the Cuban government and it’s leader. They basically plan on “spreading rumours” and making the rest of the world believe Cuba is a huge threat not only to the US but to the rest of the UN too. Sound familiar yet?
Section 6 goes on to explain how it would need be rushed and a short time scale would be forced upon the rest of the world to agree by telling them that AT THE MOMENT there is no threat from Russia as there is no pact between Cuba and Russia BUT if they hold back that threat could become real.
The conclusion in Section 7 states that the plan is a suitable response to the problem of gaining and increasing public support for war with Cuba and should be carried forward to the planning stage.
It is also recommended that the overseeing of the operation, both overt and covert actions, should stay with the Joint Chief of Staffs.
The report then goes on to discuss how the Operation should be put together. It states;-
“…Such a plan would enable a logical build up of incidents to be combined with a number of other seemingly unrelated events to camoflage the ultimate objective and create the neccersary impression of rashness and irresponsibility on a large scale directed at other countries as well as the United States”
It talks of choosing plans from the attached list of suggestions which we will look at later and again emphasises the importance of making the rest of the world believe Cuba is a threat to national security of the entire western hemisphere.
So let us now look at the list of proposed actions the US Government put together to take to the President which if he had signed off on would have resulted in the US proceeding to lie to the world in order to invade another country and start a war all for their own means.
Suggestion number 1 starts by saying;-
“Since it would seem desirable to use legitimate provocation as the basis for US military intervention in Cuba, a cover a deception plan…could be executed as an initial effort to provoke Cuban response. Harassment plus deceptive actions to convince the Cubans of imminent invasion would be emphasized.”
So in a nutshell, because a “legitimate provocation” would be preferred, the US would try and orchestrate a provocation by harassing and provoking Cuba themselves until Cuba reacted.
However, knowing that suggestion 1 would most likely not work they move in quickly to the following suggestion.
“A series of well coordinated incidents will be planned to take place in and around Guantanamo to give the genuine appearance of being done by hostile Cuban forces”
The DoD then lists their proposed “well coordinated incidents” as
1) Start rumours (many). Use clandestine radio
2) Land friendly Cubans [those either on the CIA payroll or trained as guerilla fighters by the CIA] in uniform over the fence to stage attack on base.
3) Capture Cuban (friendly) saboteurs inside the base.
4) Start a riot near the base main gate (friendly Cubans)
5) Blow up ammunition on the base. Start fires.
6) Burn aircraft on airbase (sabotage)
7) Lob mortar shells from outside of base into base. Some damage to installations.
8) Capture assault teams approaching from the sea or direction of Guantanamo Bay.
9) Capture malitia group which storms the base
10) Sabotage ship in harbour. Start large fires – napthalene
11) Sink ship near harbour entrance. conduct funerals for mock victims (may be lieu of 10)
MOCK VICTIMS – this is something that will crop up again and we will look at closer later!
The DoD advise that in response to these incidents which would be conducted by the US and made to look like Cuba were responsible, the US military would then launch offensive operations against Cuba!
The 3rd suggestion was referred to as a “remember the Maine” operation. The Maine was a US battleship which funnily enough in the late 1890’s was sunk off of the coast of Havana following a huge explosion on board which tore a hole in the hull. There was, believe it or not, no evidence to suggest an attack but the incident was blamed on the Spanish and the US public, angry and upset at the death of 260 soldiers, demanded a declaration of war.
The following is an extract from the website ushistory.org;-
“REMEMBER THE MAINE, TO HELL WITH SPAIN!” was the cry. On April 11, 1898, McKinley asked the Congress for permission to use force in Cuba. To send a message to the rest of the world that the United States was interested in Cuban independence instead of American colonization, Congress passed the TELLER AMENDMENT, which promised that America would not annex the precious islands. After that conscience-clearing measure, American leaders threw caution to the wind and declared open warfare on the Spanish throne.”
Could this have been an early FFO?
So what would a “Remember the Maine” operation look like? Well the first suggestion by the DoD was…
“a) We could blow up a US ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba”
part B of suggestion 3 is to blow up a drone vessel anywhere in Cuban waters, potentially close to Havana so that it was seen a would be a spectacle. When Cuban planes flew over to see what was happening footage would be used to emphasise that Cuba attacked the vessel. The US would then stage a rescue mission to “evacuate remaining members of a non-existent crew”
Again, MOCK VICTIMS being “rescued” from a faked attack!
“We could develop a communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, other Florida cities and even in Washington.The terror campaign could be pointed at Cuban refugees seeking haven in the United States. We could sink a boatload of Cubans enroute to Florida (real or simulated). We could foster attempts on lives of Cubans refugees in the United States, even to the extent of wounding in instances to be highly publicised….”
Here we see the US Government actually suggesting killing or wounding Cuban refugees in fabricated “terrorist attacks” in US cities! It continues…
“…exploding a few plastic bombs in carefully chosen spots, the arrest of Cuban agents and the release of prepared documents substantiating Cuban involvement also would be helpful in projecting the idea of an irresponsible government”
The US Government planned to paint the Cuban Government as “irresponsible” by acting irresponsible themselves.
Suggestion 5 was to cause tension between Cuba and other Caribbean nations by staging attacks on sugar cane fields and ensuring Soviet incendiaries were found along with the discovery of “Cuban” messages and weapons shipments on that nation’s beaches etc.
Suggestion 6 involved disguising a US plane as a Cuban plane and conducting attacks on US drone vessels and other US instillations.
Suggestion 7 was to stage hijackings of US “civil air and surface crafts” and make it appear to be backed by Cuba.
Suggestion number 8 is one that sets alarm bells ringing especially when you hold Lockerbie and 9/11 in mind.
“It is possible to create an incident which will demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked and shot down a chartered civil airliner enroute from the United States to Jamaica, Guatemala, Panama or Venezuela. The destination would be chosen only to cause the flight plan route to cross Cuba. The passengers would be a group of “College students” [CIA officers] off on a holiday or any grouping of persons with a common interest to support chartering a non-scheduled flight.
[This is where the plan gets crafty and alarm bells begin to ring]
a) An air craft at Eglin AFB would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered aircraft belonging to a CIA propriety organisation in the Miami area. At a designated time the duplicate would be substituted for the actual civil aircraft and would be loaded with the selected passengers, all loaded under carefully selected aliases. The actual registered air craft would be converted to a drone.
b) Take off times of the drone air craft and the actual air craft will be scheduled to allow a rendezvous south of Florida. From the rendezvous point the passenger [CIA] carrying air craft will descend to minimum altitude and go directly into and auxilary field at Eglin AFB where arrangement will have been made to evacuate the passengers and return the aircraft to it’s original status. The drone aircraft meanwhile will continue to fly the filed flight plan. When over Cuba the plane will begin transmitting on the international distress frequency a “MAY DAY” message stating he is under attack from a Cuban MIG aircraft. The transmission will be disrupted by destruction of the air craft which will be triggered by radio signal. This will allow ICAO radio stations in the Western Hemisphere to tell the US what has happened to the aircraft instead of the US trying to “sell” the incident.
Can you believe what you have just read? Read it again. An elaborate plan to stage the shooting down of a passenger aircraft which would then be broadcast to the entire world. Names and faces of the “passengers” would be released. Mock funerals as discussed above would take place and the world would condemn Cuba for an act actually conducted by the US government!
It has long been suggested that the planes involved in Lockerby and in the 9/11 attacks were simply drones and that the passengers and families of passengers were in fact US military and government personnel. This allegation is always understandably met with outrage and disgust but can we blame the “conspiracy theorists” for believing this when that is EXACTLY what the US government planned in 1962?
Suggestion 9 was a plan to have a CIA pilot posing as an Air Force pilot engaged on a training exercise with other legitimate fighters. He would be briefed to fly at the back of the formation, some distance behind the rest where he would then let out a distress call to say he had been attacked by Cuban MIG planes. He would then descend to low altitude and fly to Eglin AFB where the plane would be re-numbered and the CIA agent would return to his normal duty. The pilot would never be found and would be reported as shot down by Cubans. At the same time a submarine would be used to release plane parts including parachute which would then be recovered from the sea and the coast of Cuba. Presumably another mock funeral would take place.
So now we have seen just how devious, deceitful and manipulative the US Government can be and it was only due to the honesty (the US government called it “softness”) of President John F Kennedy that Operation Northwoods did not go ahead at that time.
It raises the legitimate question though of whether a Northwoods style plan was taken to Bush as a way of increasing public support for the Iraq invasion. It was no big secret that Bush wanted to go into Iraq and take down Sadam and we now know that the story of WMD was a load of rubbish. We know Iraq played no part in 9/11 but were lead to believe Sadam and Osama were both up to no good and posed a “potential risk to the western hemisphere”.
In actual fact is well known and documented that it was the Bush family who were close friends of the Bin Laden family. The presidents father was entertaining Osama’s brother the morning of the attacks!
Did Blair use a FFO on 7/7 due to the increasing demands from the pubic and others in Parliament to stop being America’s lap-dog and to withdraw our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan?
Did Cameron authorise a FFO in Paris to create support and understanding from Parliament, the EU and the public for his plans to increase surveillance and snooping laws in the UK? The same morning of the attacks in Paris the head of Mi5 was quoted in the media as saying they can not protect us from all terrorist attacks and that terrorists are using complicated communication methods such as Whatsapp, iMessage and Snapchat… by complicated he meant encrypted.
David Cameron jumped straight on the bandwagon with plans to push his already quashed plans for his “snoopers charter” and a promise to ban all encrypted communications because he states he does not think the public should be able to communicate in a way which the government can not listen in. He made sure he highlighted the fact that the Charlie Hebdo attacks MAY have been avoided if the Government had the ability and freedom to listen in to all communications.
The attacks in Paris were almost instantly examined and numerous discrepancies were discovered paving the way for more “conspiracy theories” and allegations it was a FFO. (see my previous blog the Charlie Hebdo attack for details of the discrepancies and theories)
Northwoods suggests using MOCK VICTIMS in their attacks. Using serving covert agents as pilots and civilians aswel as the “terrorists” themselves. One of the theories surrounding the Paris attack was that the attackers were agents and that the Police Officer shot was actually a serving agent from MOSAD. Hard to believe I know, until you look at Northwoods and see that it is not as outrageous as you may think.
Many aspects of Northwoods can be seen in these incidents and because we KNOW that Northwoods was a legitimate US government plan and that the DoD was more than willing to sacrifice US lives and fabricate evidence and cover up their actions people can not be blamed or criticised for believing that 9/11, 7/7, Lockerbie, Pearl HArbour and the Charlie Hebdo attacks were the works of Western Governments.
President John F Kennedy had the decency and integrity which no other leader prior or since had. He turned down Northwoods and was deemed “weak”. He made a speech about secrecy and lies at a Government level and higher and insisted that his administration would NOT tolerate such activity and behaviour and called upon the US media to help him advise and inform the American public whilst vowing to expose the sinister secrecy at the highest levels of power…. several days later JFK was shot and killed.
But that is another “Conspiracy Theory” altogether.
*In writing this blog I am not endorsing any theory about any incident which has taken place. I happen to hold my own opinions on each incident. I simply believe that more people should be aware of the existence of Operation Northwoods and the extent to which the US Government HISTORICALLY planned to take matters simply to fabricate public support for war. Read the document in full at the link I have supplied. Look deeper into attacks which have happened both historically and recently and make you own minds up. But don’t dismiss those who think outside the box and consider all possibilities rather than simply excepting what the media, controlled by the Government, tell us.
If anything happens to me any time soon after writing this then it’s no conspiracy theory, DIG DEEPER! 😉
A Channel 4 documentary aired on Sunday evening shed a fascinating light on the tragic circumstances surrounding the sinking of the Titanic and the death of 1503 people on that fateful night.
“Titanic – The New Evidence” follows Senan Malony, author of a number of books on the Titanic, as he examined evidence that seems to have been brushed aside for many years which proves that the sinking and the tragic loss of life could have been avoided had the ship’s owners at White Star not been more concerned about financial loss than they were about the lives of all on board.
A raging inferno lasting weeks in the boiler room weakened the hull and the bulkhead which led to the ship sinking after coming into contact with the iceberg. That fire was discovered BEFORE the ship set sale.
The enquiry began after the discovery of a photo album discovered at an auction house. The album contained photographs taken by the ships chief electrical engineer charting the building process and launch of the vessel. On two photographs a distinct mark on the ship’s hull measuring around 30ft long can been seen and this sparked the enquiry.
Official records from the time show that the day the ship prepared to leave Belfast for Southampton a fire was discovered in a 3 storey high coal bunker in boiler room 6. Dr Guillermo Rein of the Imperial College of London an expert on coal fuelled fires stated the the fire would most likely have been burning for weeks before being discovered. Records show that the bunker had been filled 3 weeks prior to the fire’s discovery and so could well have been burning for that length of time. Fire fighters on board the ship reported that even after 4 days of 11 men fighting the fire it was simply out of control. The ship was launched to set sail for Southampton whilst it was still on fire.
Official reports and accounts from the men on board the ship reveal startling information. They state that White Star top brass told them to “keep your mouths shut” about the fire. Fire fighters and engine room workers report seeing the bulk head, the main safety feature which prevents water flooding the ship in the event of a breach in the hull, glowing red and warping. The black mark on the hull in the image lies directly in front of where boiler room 6 is situated. It seems the heat weakened the steel structure of the hull. One of the survivors, John Dilly, who worked as a stoker on board the ship told a reporter in New York “From the day we sailed, the Titanic was on fire”. Dilly stated that there was “hundreds of tons of coal stored in there… we made no headway against it”. Four days later and the fire was getting worse.
The fire fighters fought the fire on the journey from Belfast to Southampton and were warned by bosses not to utter a word. It seems they were pressured into keeping the fire a secret to avoid people refusing to travel or the journey being delayed. However once the ship was at Southampton only 8 of a crew of over 160 decided to get back aboard Titanic and continue the journey to New York. All but 8 people had to be quickly replaced.
On the 10th April 1912 the Titanic set sail with it passengers from Southampton. Many on board the upper decks were millionaires and members of British aristocracy. The investigation suggests that the owners of the vessel had already suffered delays in the Titanic’s maiden voyage and were fearful of losing money and reputation if they delayed any further to extinguish the fire and repair any damage. They would also have expected passengers to refuse to board had they known about the inferno in the boiler room and so White Star permitted the journey to go ahead regardless. Further reports suggest that substandard steel was used in the construction of the hull when building the Titanic to save money which may also have contributed to the fate of the passengers.
The fire was mentioned in the official inquiry conducted in 1912 by Lord Mersey but wasn’t deemed significant with Lord Mersey dismissing the evidence a number of times and trying to refocus the inquiry towards the excessive speed and iceberg theory we have all been lead to believe.
One fire fighter, Charles Hendrickson, who boarded the Titanic at Southampton to replace one of those who abandoned ship, give evidence to the inquiry and stressed the importance of the fire. He admitted that they didn’t actually start removing coal from the bunker until the day it left Southampton. The only way to deal with the fire was to shovel the already burning coal from the bunker into the engine furnaces. Until this point the fire had simply been burning away causing devastating damage to the ship. It took them a further 3 days to get the fire out. Once the fire was out Hendrickson also claimed that he discovered the metal of the bulkhead was “red hot” and he was instructed to cover the “dented” and “warped” bulkhead with a black oil to make it appear ordinary. Despite these facts Lord Mersey kept trying to move the inquiry along to what he called “the real, serious issues of the inquiry” and he instructed that the fire had nothing to do with it.
The documentary then reveals even more dramatic evidence of a SECOND fire in the neighbouring coal bunker caused by the red hot metal. The fire fighters then had to begin emptying the coal from a second bunker and throw it into the furnace. Malony’s investigation suggests that this could be the reason behind why Captain Smith ploughed on at full speed into the ice field ignoring all warnings. With the UK suffering a minor’s strike and the ship carrying just enough to get them to New York, was Captain Smith worried about running out of coal if he slowed down through the ice field and then loaded up the furnaces again once safely through? If he ran out of coal and became stranded at sea due to insufficient coal reserves what damage would that to do to both the ship company and his own career and reputation? Again, it seems risks were taken to avoid financial loss and damage to reputation.
The evidence uncovered by Malony is indisputable. The Titanic sank due to the fire. Another witness quoted in the programme was Lead Fire Fighter Fred Barrett. He was in boiler room 6 at the time the Titanic struck the ice. He reported afterwards that he had seen the fire damaged bulkhead give way and the sea water came flooding into the ship. That would never have happened had the bulkhead and the hull not been subjected to such intense heat for such a prolonged period of time. Experts using scientific evidence and computer generated reconstructions suggest that had the bulkhead of boiler room 6 held tight the Titanic could have stayed afloat long enough for the rescue ship to reach them. The loss of 1503 lives could have been prevented if the owners of the ship had not valued money more than life.
Titanic – The New Evidence can be seen again on channel 4seven on Thursday at 12:40am or Sunday at 7:00pm
News is pouring out of the USA about the diabolical decision by the Governors of Columbia, South Carolina to criminalise homelessness and to force those unfortunate enough to be homeless into PoW style camps.
The city’s “Emergency Homeless Response Report” Claims that the vast numbers of homeless people living in the area is having a negative impact upon businesses and that business owners are increasingly becoming frustrated. Heaven forbid!
“we are now experiencing an environment where
our staff members and our guests no longer feel
safe even within the confines of our building. This
nexus of perception and reality makes it virtually
impossible for us, or anybody, to create a
sustainable business model…. I urge you to move
quickly to garner results”
– Fred Martin, President, Mast General Store
Ignorant comments such as this are the reason Governors began looking into the “problem”. However, as always, rather than tackle the problem(s) causing homelessness they would much rather look at ways to pop those pesky homeless people somewhere out of sight and out of mind. Just why people such as Fred Martin and his staff feel UNSAFE because there is a person or persons outside his premises unfortunate enough not to have a roof over their head is perplexing. Being homeless does not make you dangerous! It isn’t contagious! So what is he afraid of? If people are afraid that maybe a homeless person may resort to something already criminalised in order to eat or drink then that is something that can be dealt with without the need to criminalise and encamp the homeless so surely that can’t be it? They can’t tar all homeless people with the same brush and assume that they will commit a crime at some point surely?
“I am very concerned that Columbia’s downtown
has become a magnet for homeless people…[the
environment is] not only making our employees,
tenants and residents feel uncomfortable, but also
hindering our ability to attract new residents and
businesses to downtown…I would like to see both
City Council and the people of the Midlands put
all differences aside and do what is best for the
greater good of the community. ”
– Ben D. Arnold, President, Arnold Family Companies
We then have Mr Arnold, his residents, tenants and his employees who “feel uncomfortable”… Awww bless them. Perhaps they should consider how uncomfortable it is to live on the streets and be looked down upon as vermin by they own kind!
“A prosperous, vibrant city needs a prosperous,
vibrant downtown area that is perceived as having an
environment that is safe for all; families, women and
children…The problems are increasing and becoming
more volatile…A serious incident could occur at any
time with tragic repercussions.”
– Rev. Fr. Michael Platanis, Protopresbyter, Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Church
A very vague generalisation from the charitable Rev Platanis there. What “Serious incident” is her referring too?
These are all quotes used within the report on which the Governors of Columbia based their decision to criminalise homeslessness.
So Columbia found themselves facing what the consider two major problems to be addressed;-
1. The need for a long term, sustainable response
to an ongoing problem so that the City of
Columbia never finds itself in this predicament
2. An acute emergency in the heart of the city
that is having a highly detrimental impact upon
the commerce community, downtown
neighborhoods and the perception of safety and
quality of life in the capital city
So the solution they came up with was to stick everybody in a camp. Not tackle the negative and incorrect perception of safety and quality of life amongst the residents and business owners or to build a support system to help the homeless get back on their feet, find employment and provide a roof over their heads. No. The best solution of course is to stick them in a camp, refuse to allow them to leave and stick an armed guard on the road leading to it (a prison then) at a cost of $1.7million when the budget you have is only $500,000.
The report refers to the homeless prisoners as “clients” and will not allow them to walk to the facility but instead will provide vans to round them up and transport them into the facility. They will provide a dedicated number for the public to call when they identify “a person in need” [of imprisoning] and a patrol of officers around the perimeter and guards on roads leading to it. All charity groups who currently feed the homeless with soup kitchens etc will now be banned from doing so unless it is taking place within the grounds of the new facility. Yet this is a kind and charitable method of “aid” for “the needy”. And if you were thinking it is NOT like a prison, they are also going to use this facility to house ex-prisoners too!
So what if a homeless person refuses to go, as is his right??? They will be arrested!
The Governors (of Columbia and now their own prison) state this is only a short term solution and describe the issue using words such as “plagued”. So what happens at the end of the “short term”? Nobody knows yet. I would bet that it is extended not only in Columbia but across states and the rest of the USA.
Tampa Bay in Florida have already given Police the power to arrest those found sleeping in the streets. This act has been protested due to the punishment for both the homesless person and the taxpayer as it cost on average $50 a night to lock them up with one county incurring a cost of over $6million in one year!
Homelessness is not a crime. It is not a lifestyle choice. These unfortunate men and women did not wake up one morning and think “Screw this, I don’t want a house and a job, I am off to live in an alleyway next to the Seven Eleven”. We see Soldiers living on the street, Police Officers, graduate and other people who have had at one point or another, successful careers, a family, a home and some pride but for whatever reason they are now forced to live rough on the streets. This is NOT something which should be punished and criminalised.
All this report and the action taken by Columbia shows is that their society, their community spirit, their humanness is broken beyond repair. So long as they can get on with their happy lives and those who need help are out of sight and out of mind then life can go on and they won’t have to consider their own consciences.