Friendly fire … or false flag?

Breaking news across the State Propaganda Network [a.k.a mainstream media] …

The IPCC ‘may have misled’ media over Duggan shooting.

Let’s let that headline sink in for a moment. If the media has been misled, you know without a shadow of a doubt, the public has been misled. That’s a given.

Taken from journalism.co.uk;

 

The Independent Police Complaints Commission said today (12 August), that it “may have inadvertently given misleading information to journalists” regarding the death of Mark Duggan, who was shot by Metropolitan police officers last week.

Early reports of Duggan’s death suggested that police officers were fired upon, citing the discovery of a bullet lodged in the radio of one of the officers.

The bullet was later shown to have been fired by a police-issue gun however, and no further evidence has emerged to suggest that Duggan fired at officers.

Inadvertently given misleading information”??
Bullshit.

If it had been “inadvertent“, it would have been quickly corrected rather than left lingering in the public domain for so long and across multiple news agencies. For example, again from journalism.co.uk;

A report published by the Telegraph in the hours after the incident said: “A policeman’s life was saved by his radio last night after gunman Mark Duggan opened fire on him and the bullet hit the device.”

The report cites an IPCC spokesman as saying: ”We understand the officer was shot first before the male was shot.”

The Daily Mail reported that Duggan had “shot the officer from Scotland Yard’s elite firearms squad CO19 in the side of his chest with a handgun”, and the Sun similarly reported that Duggan was “downed by a marksman after firing first and hitting the officer”.

 

You don’t think the Metropolitan Police would have been aware of these mainstream publications and the information being presented to the public?

 

Inadvertently my ass.

 

Or, even if we run with that for a moment, let’s be king and assume that it was ‘inadvertent’, why did they not immediately correct it?

Because it was convenient.

Already under the spotlight following the News Of The World phone hacking, amongst countless other confidence-of-the-public destroying episodes, to hold Duggan out to dry as a cop-killer-wannabe was a convenient cloak to hide under.

Dead men tell no lies.

Thankfully, neither do forensics nor ballistic analysis.

The Met knew exactly the nature of the ticking time-bomb they were sitting on, as is evidenced by the following;

The IPCC issued a statement on 7 August – during the height of rioting in London – confirming reports that the bullet lodged in the officer’s radio was in fact police-issue. It later issued a further statement to explain the controversial timing of the announcement:

“We are aware that the information we issued this afternoon was sensitive and it was very difficult to balance the need to put factual information into the public domain to try to correct inaccurate speculation, with the desire not to inflame the situation further. 

That pretty much says it all; they knew the speculation [which they had fuelled] was incorrect, but still debated whether the facts needed to be released.

Whether the facts needed to be released??
Give me a break.

“With this in mind, we spent the day consulting community leaders, as well as taking on board the wishes of Mr Duggan’s family and ensuring the Met, and other relevant parties, knew what we were going to issue.

Truth by committee.

Obvious question is; how often is the information sanitised and ‘factual information’not put in to the public domain, for fear of ‘inflaming the situation’? Does this mean that the political environment and the preservation of public policy always comes before the Truth?

How much of what we are told and led to believe as true, is in fact, not based on factual information?  Naturally, 9/11 and 7/7 immediately spring to mind.

 

Friendly fire? … or false flag?
Probably neither; but it was a bloody convenient situation, exploited for maximum benefit.

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: