(For latest Gatwick hoax(?) incident see * at foot of page)
The story about the man who made a false bomb threat so he could board a Norwegian Airways flight from Gatwick to the United States, because he was running late, gained widespread publicity.
However, as is usual, although there are multiple reports, in multiple news outlets, these all follow a virtually identical script and none go beyond the same headline or approved story. This is unfortunate, because in this way the true significance of such can remain hidden from the general public.
Now the professional journalist who drafted the initial report on which presumably all the rest were based (or why would they all be virtually identical) may have covered all the salient facts and all we need to know. But it is also more than likely that he/she didn't and there is much more to the story, and perhaps the interesting bit, that hasn't been revealed.
Both positive and negative features start me wondering: things that are included, things that are left out, the general tone of the article. My approach is coloured by the fact that much of the official story about the terrorism to which the West has been subjected over the last twenty years, contains much that is false intended to misdirect blame to those other than the true instigators and perpetrators.
As I and others have revealed, secret agencies, particularly from Israel, have consistently shown to have been on scene, yet the significance of this has never been identified by mainstream media outlets. The only conclusion that can be drawn, is that the public has been intentionally misled for hidden and malign reasons, by those who control such things. It should make citizens sceptical and questioning of every alleged terrorist event, and even some that are not so claimed, into which the Gatwick incident must fall.
The fact that this is presented, not as terrorism but a 'hoax', is immediately suspicious, because it has the effect of down-grading it, as the relatively light sentence of ten months imprisonment confirms. Similarly it appears, it only gained significant attention after the Crown Court hearing. Clearly despite initially denying the charge, the prosecution accepted there was nothing more sinister than a desperate traveller attempting and achieving access to his flight, even though he was initially prevented from doing so.
What appears somewhat strange to me is that we are told virtually nothing about Mr Abdellak, other than he is a forty seven year old French citizen who is a librarian, living at Amhurst Park, Hackney, London. It is not stated that this is in the Stamford Hill area of London, a well known Jewish quarter, nor the fact that Mr Abdellak is himself Jewish apparently, as his first names, Jacob Meir might have suggested.
Then there is that photograph. It is not a typical police mug shot. It is ultra close and truncated top and bottom. The blank expression. The vacant enigmatic eyes. It suggests composure, control, resignation and maybe, secrets.
To suggest a Norwegian Airliner, about to set off to the United States was carrying a bomb is or was a pretty extreme prank that as an intelligent man, he must have known would have far-reaching consequences far beyond the need to get a flight. In the present climate, it was surely an act of terrorism, yet was not prosecuted as such, nor was his religious affiliation referred to.
Now I ask, would the incident have been treated in the same way had an Arab or Muslim person pulled the same trick? I think it unlikely. So the first question is was Mr Abdellak treated more considerately by both prosecutors and media by virtue of his nationality and/or religion? Was the absence of any reference to his religion a matter of intentional policy on the part of either? In any event is it or was it a relevant or significant factor?
To that I have to say, given the track record of Israeli agencies, Mossad being the most notable, of assassination and terrorism, often disguised as the work of others, it certainly could be, and deserves at least some enquiry to remove the possibility in this case. Yet it appears not one journalist or media outlet is prepared to go down this road with basic questions as to motivation or background.
There is no suggestion that Mr Abdellak (not it must be said an obviously Jewish surname) showed any remorse or contrition for the action he had taken. We are not told of the emotional impact on the passengers but it is not difficult to image how it could have been severe to the point of serious health consequences. Having first denied it, nor does he make any attempt to explain how merely missing his flight could justify it, or how as an intelligent well educated man (we assume) he could contemplate doing it.
Then there was the rather elementary mistake of using the same mobile phone and sim card to make the call after using it to book the flight. That certainly points to amateurism and an absence of covert agencies, unless it was done specifically to test systems and police proficiency.
We are not told why a French citizen is in Britain or how long he has been resident here. We are told virtually nothing of his personal circumstances or where he works. We are not told why a librarian finds it necessary to travel to America at least twice in a little over a week, or whether he had a habit of doing so. Nor importantly are we told whether he has any links to Israel or its institutions or agencies.
These things would not normally arise or be called for, but surely once aircraft bombs, even hoax ones, are involved, these background issues, and the necessity of ruling out any possibility of covert operations or organisations, becomes of first importance.
As to the police action, this also raises a question in my mind. Clearly they had access to the caller's number immediately. Presumably, nor, given the potential seriousness of the call, would it have taken them long to obtain the call history of that phone or indeed of its location when the call was made. This would have identified the registered user and that the initial call was made at Gatwick itself.
It therefore seems strange that given the fact that all passengers, including Mr Abdellak, had to pass through security checks a second time, why was he not identified at that stage, particularly as he had earlier been denied access and caused a major scene?
Alternatively why was he not arrested on his return flight on landing, although we are not told when this was? If for some reason they didn't do it then, why not an arrest at his home or place of work? Indeed if it was unclear at that stage whether he really was a terrorist, was a major operation not initiated? After all the failure to find a bomb did not prove the caller was not a real threat until he had been positively identified.
What was the reason for the very relaxed police response and why did they wait for him to attempt to board another flight to America eleven days later, before they effected an arrest?
These are all rather intriguing questions that may have logical and straightforward answers, but there are some other features of the case that attracted my attention. As usual they may be wholly coincidental and unrelated but I will mention them for what they are worth. They relate to dates and numbers.
It has been noted that eleven and its multiples appear to have significance for the planners and/or implementors of terrorist events.
- The terrorist murder of British soldier Lee Rigby took place in London on 22 May 2013.
- Three bombings at an airport and metro station in Brussels, Belgium, occurred on 22 March 2016, killing 32 people.
- A shooting rampage left nine people dead in Munich, Germany, on 22 July 2016.
- A car and knife attack near the British Houses of Parliament in Westminster killed four people on 22 March 2017.
- Manchester bombing: 22 May 2017
Although this is strange, it is not generally agreed that the relationship in reality is significant. You may wish to refer to https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/terrorist-attacks-22/ that lists some of the recent cases but comes down mainly against any significant relationship. Nevertheless I could not help noticing that not only did this incident take place on the 11th May, 2018, but he was arrested exactly eleven days later on the 22nd May, 2018, when he attempted a second flight with a different airline.
As we have noted the first flight was with Norwegian Airlines, subject to some recent financial 'turbulance' it must be said, but with a further twist we note that the notorious Breikvik mass shooting occurred on the 22nd July, 2011! How many coincidences are required before the implications of a pattern emerge?
One other numerical feature struck me also that may be considered even more far fetched. All reports give a very specific time for the hoax call. Given this vagueness of much of the rest of the reporting, this may appear somewhat strange. No 'about' or 'around'. The time is clearly fixed at 05:47, eight minutes before the plane was due to depart. Is it fanciful to see 9/11 in these figures (5+4=9; 4+7=11) or that the original flight time was 5:55?
Of course all this is speculation but doesn't a bomb threat to a transatlantic flight, in the present high-terrorist-risk environment demand it, particularly if reports fail to demonstrate any real enquiry. In this context I would suggest the following questions could at least have been posed, even if answers were unforthcoming:
- Is the bomb hoax incident as simple as it is reported to be?
- Who is Jacob Meir
- Why do none of the reports make any mention of his Jewish background or nationality?
- Why did it take so long to link him to the hoax, given the fact that the mobile phone could be traced to the location and he passed through security checks?
- Why was he allowed to get on the plane given the earlier circumstances?
- Why was he flying to Los Angeles and why did he need to fly again only eleven days later?
- Why would such an intelligent man make such an irrationally criminal act just to catch a flight?
- Why did the police appear to take such a relaxed view of what might have been linked to terrorism?
- Why did they choose to arrest him as he attempted to leave a second time eleven days later rather than before?
- Are the dates and times hidden hints or merely just more irrational coincidences?
The following report is copied from: https://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/stamford-hill-man-jailed-for-hoax-bomb-threat-in-bid-to-catch-plane/
Stamford Hill man jailed for hoax bomb threat in bid to catch plane
Jacob Meir Abdellak was running late for a flight from Gatwick to Los Angeles, so he decided to call the police to report a threat.
He was handed a 10-month sentence and ordered to pay a £140 victim surcharge when he appeared at Lewes Crown Court on Tuesday, Sussex Police said.