Published On: Sun, Jun 4th, 2017

London Terror optics: police frighten the innocent public

Alternative headlines could have been “UKIP spoils terror cherry on top: refuses to halt GE campaigning” or “Terrorists pick soft target; would have got a kicking on a Saturday night in the Midlands or the North”.

And obviously this sort of response looks inappropriate because it’s not the Government-prescribed politically correct way to react. One should “Run, Hide, Tell”† – which is the actual official Metropolitan Police advice to people who are faced with losers who think beer cans strapped to their belts would pass as suicide vests (see below) – then hold a mass candlelight vigil if you were lucky enough not to be picked off in the melee of fleeing prey, and then acquiesce when election campaigning is cancelled, and lastly, thoroughly approve when the election is postponed indefinitely altogether. That’s the way a slave behaves.

Well, the author thinks that the dead can be honoured in a much better way by more resolve and less fainting. The latter is the game the way that the Establishment wants it played – and that way all ends in catastrophe. The dead of “terror” that the British Government, by years of social engineering at home and regime change abroad, is ultimately responsible for, and any other people who become a victim of it, are better served by our stopping it from happening – our fighting back. It is clearly evident, up and down the whole Islamic terror phenomenon, that the British Government would rather have us surrender instead. We should know this just by taking a look at the imagery and the information that came off the streets of London city centre yesterday (to be discussed momentarily). And why would they want surrender? The answer: so that nothing is done; so that the body count can keep stacking up, so that people are ever more cowed. The desired end game is total police state security apparatus, and carte blanche for meddling in foreign countries without real legal authority to do so.

What is the impression that we have of the attack in London? Is it stabbing victims lying in pools of blood? Is it of a van ploughing through crowds of “revellers”? Is it of identikit terror to be blamed vaguely on ISIS? No, not really. We haven’t seen imagery to give us that notion. The overall impression is of storm troopers stomping all over the norms by which the public usually impart consent to be policed. The feeling we get from the night’s activity (as we go through these, please check out the corresponding footnote for the source) is of the police humiliating innocent people by making them put their hands on their heads as if they had been made to surrender by force of arms[1], storming into bars (one that appears to be in a cellar, and presumably safe from “crossfire” from assailants with knives), frightening folk and making them panic[2], demanding that they get off the streets for no other reason that police don’t want to be filmed[3]. It is of police letting off weapons indiscriminately so that they actually hit bystanders[4]. It is of police, dressed in military uniforms, throwing their weight around[5]. It doesn’t matter if these attacks in London last night were real, or a false flag – they presented an opportunity for exploitation. And, to press the point home, while the UK Government does nothing to effectively deal with the prospect of terror, such incidents will be used to condition people, one degree at a time, to behave in a reflexively submissive and incarcerated way: to yield unquestioningly to the authoritarian command at the end of a gun barrel. And this is what we fight back against.

Of overarching concern for all libertarian or classically liberal minded people who are fixing on having this fight back should be the way that police can apparently shoot dead criminal suspects on the street. If people are frightened that the authorities might kill us no questions asked, and be able to justify their actions with only their unchallenged accusations, then people are surely more susceptible to the conditioning just mentioned.

Admittedly, the killings by police, as they in appear in this particular story, start to become riddled with anomaly and a little bit of the preposterousness that is always a faithful sign of a false flag. That being said, let’s assume that three terror suspects were shot dead, as the corporate-media appears to be reporting this morning.

Witness, Gabriele Sciotto, told of how he saw three men being grounded by police firearms officers. He commented on what media started to gingerly tout as being a suicide vest.

Describing what appeared to be canisters strapped to the man’s chest, he said: “The first sight I thought it wasn’t anything real, it didn’t look real to me but I’m not like the person who could honestly say if they were real or not because I have no experience.

“They looked like just a toy to me.”

Indeed, these canisters shouldn’t really have fooled anyone with a pair of eyes – they immediately struck the author as being empty beer cans. Something else struck the author too: if there was one sure fire way of making certain these “terrorists” would get themselves shot (and apparently all three suspects were wearing these toy vests), it was to pretend to be a suicide bomber. Why did it not register that wearing these things would have reduced the span of the operation – i.e. they would have been dead sooner? And here is a question to consider. Why was it that these suspects were wearing what one could essentially call exercise, or drill props? What else about them was also pretend?

The reader might understand the gist of what the author is thinking of when he or she considers the following evidence. The first piece is a caption from a MailOnline story:

A man said to be one of the terrorists has been pictured after being shot by police outside the Borough Market pub. Witnesses said he was still alive

Strangely enough, the author can no longer find the article by using a search phrase comprising of the exact caption quote – meaning the Mail have probably altered it in the current version (and indeed they have – see here). Secondly, UK corporate-media previously reported the following about Gabriele Sciotto and how he described the state of the suspects after the shooting:

Speaking to The Guardian, the 25-year-old, said: “I could see one of them moving still. There was blood. I could see the police were scared.”

At the time of writing the above quote could only be found in Australian publications. And so it begins to appear like any mention of any of the suspects remaining alive after the incident has been scrubbed from the British internet. [Update: it’s still in the text of this article].

There is one last very noteworthy thing to cover, and that is the arrest of someone in the Vauxhall area. Now, police said that this had nothing to do with the terror attacks, but all the same they were extremely heavy handed – and they did NOT want anyone filming them making the arrest. The reader can see the foam-flecked, inferiority-complex driven raging disapproval of masked police with shields in the footage under footnote 3. Another perspective of the incident seems to be shown in another film (to be found here), and again, police are pretty frenzied in their not wanting people to see it.

What could possibly be so secret, and yet need so much yelling and screaming, and hissing and squealing from grown men? Well, take a look for yourself. The Sun published an image (above) of an arrested man, and from this accompanying text “It was first thought that he was scooped in Vauxhall” we are led to believe that this could be related to the arrest that police were under great pains to prevent anyone witnessing. He looks Caucasian.

† The American version of this is Run, Hide, Fight.


These images are quite self-explanatory.


Please view this film:


Image taken from:


Note, this story was also being reported in the MailOnline quite early on into the incident.

‘I think he’s dead’ Witness claims bystander ‘shot in head’ as cops fired at terrorists


Again, self-explanatory:

Update, 05/05/2017:

Revisiting some of the corporate-media coverage, and discovered the following scraps of material that are interesting enough to be logged as intelligence:

1) Gabriele Sciotto took the photograph of the suspects on the floor after they had supposedly been shot. He featured in an Independent article with this intriguing snippet:

There were three men. Policemen were trying to pull the attackers off the crowd. He managed to pull them off. Then I saw them being shot.

Is Sciotto saying that police had already halted the attack before the suspects were shot?

2) Something very odd in how the BBC tweeted the following, at 11:34pm – 3 Jun 2017:

Police searching for three suspects who may be armed after #LondonBridge incident, BBC understands

According to the official timeline, the three suspects had long since been dealt with at 11.34pm.

3) Today some images appeared via footage belonging to the Daily Express; the Sun described them with the caption:

The sick jihadis are seen strolling through Borough Market seconds before they launched a stabbing rampage

The odd thing about this footage is that there is no one else on the street in an area that was meant to have been swarming with people – see this, for example:

Staff at a packed pub have said they locked the doors as the gang tried to smash their way in. One man was stabbed five times.

Sun man James Cox was in London Bridge as the terror unfolded.

He revealed: “I was among the hundreds of punters drinking at London Bridge when the horrific events unfolded.

“An innocent night in a familiar part of London turned into a nightmare.

“A quiet pint turned into high drama when the door burst open and panicked revellers ran in saying they had been turned off a London Bridge bus and told by cops ‘to run’. [Isn’t this a very strange thing for the police to do?]

“Outside there were sirens, flashing lights, people running from the train station. A couple told us to ‘turn and run’.”

The reader can make what they like of the information that the Sun is headquartered in the area of the crime.

It's important to donate to FBEL - please see here to find out why
A PayPal account not required.