Lock the lot up - Mahzeer Mahmoud and all his lying goons in the Met.
Monday October 4th 2005
What a Bomber !
This is what Lord Patel (no relation) said about the Mazheer Mahmoud exclusive about Imran Patel who "claimed" to be the 5th Bomber on 7/7.
"Mazher Mahmood the sleazy reporter for Rupe’s rag, News of the World, is famous notorious as the “Fake Sheikh” who outed Prince Edward’s wife as a royalty tout, and “exposed” the plot to kidnap the Beckam sprogs (the court case collapsed when MM’s agent provacateur antics were exposed) and got bit part actor John Alford from “London’s Burning” banged up for small time drug dealing.
He’s at it again.
This week he lines up “fanatic” Imran Patel (no relation) who he has fingered to the Police and who was picked up by 20 anti-terrorist officers at 8.45pm on Saturday on his way to his mosque and taken to Leeds police station (NOT Paddington Green where they tale the real suspects) for questioning. (“You are going to be doing some overtime this weekend my boy!” "..Yes Sarge”)
I am confident that this deluded, weak minded lad will be released without charge – unless it is for wasting police time – which the intrepid sleuth MM most certainly is."
And so it proved to be ... "5th Bomber gets 4 months"
Unbelievably the PC Plods of the Met’s crack SO13 anti-terrorist squad were “diverted” from the London bombings inquiry for 6 days, "effectively working round the clock" to investigate his claims. Leeds Magistrates were told that this waste of time and effort cost the taxpayer 4,070 hours of police time costing £60,000.
As we said at the time …
Anway poor old Imran got 4 months chokey.
Now we find that the lying, sleazy scumbag Mahmoud has done it agian - ably helped by the dumb twats at the Met led by Assistant Commissioner Peter Clarke,
Abdurahman Kanyare, 53, Roque Fernandes, 44, and Dominic Martins, 45, had been on trial for almost three months accused of trying to buy hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of the substance that doesn't exist - from a cunt called Mazheer Mahmoud - who is the one who should be seeing the inside of a prison cell. Today they were found NOT GUILTY and discharged.
Why ? Well read "Chemical Delusions" a letter written to Peter Clarke, CVO QP LL on 16th March 2004.On the Investigating New Imperialism site. (This was about that other bollocks the threat of "Osmium teroxide" which nobody had ever heard of....
Especially take note of this section ...
Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001
2001 Chapter 24
Copy from Crown Copyright
114
Hoaxes involving noxious substances or things
(1) A person is guilty of an offence if he-
(a) places any substance or other thing in any place; or
(b) sends any substance or other thing from one place to another (by post, rail or any other means whatever);
with the intention of inducing in a person anywhere in the world a belief that it is likely to be (or contain) a noxious substance or other noxious thing and thereby endanger human life or create a serious risk to human health.
(2) A person is guilty of an offence if he communicates any information which he knows or believes to be false with the intention of inducing in a person anywhere in the world a belief that a noxious substance or other noxious thing is likely to be present (whether at the time the information is communicated or later) in any place and thereby endanger human life or create a serious risk to human health.
(3) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable-
(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum (or both); and
(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding seven years or a fine (or both).
115
Sections 113 and 114: supplementary
(1) For the purposes of sections 113 and 114 "substance" includes any biological agent and any other natural or artificial substance (whatever its form, origin or method of production).
(2) For a person to be guilty of an offence under section 113(3) or 114 it is not necessary for him to have any particular person in mind as the person in whom he intends to induce the belief in question.
Now if that cunt Mazheer Mahmoud is not guilty of an offence under this Act I am a tooth fairy.
"A person is guilty of an offence if he communicates any information which he knows or believes to be false with the intention of inducing in a person anywhere in the world a belief that a noxious substance or other noxious thing is likely to be present (whether at the time the information is communicated or later) in any place and thereby endanger human life or create a serious risk to human health."
Will the Met (Prop Sir Ian (Lying Bastard) Blair) arrest MM, charge him, bang him up ?
No.
But everybody involved in this scam should be - including all the dumb bastards that haunt the Terrorism section at Scotland Yard... starting with Peter Clarke. As John Reid, ultimately his boss may say, they ARE NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE.
Mind you they may be guilty under the HSE regulations for not having undertaken a proper Risk Assessment.
What a Bomber !
This is what Lord Patel (no relation) said about the Mazheer Mahmoud exclusive about Imran Patel who "claimed" to be the 5th Bomber on 7/7.
"Mazher Mahmood the sleazy reporter for Rupe’s rag, News of the World, is famous notorious as the “Fake Sheikh” who outed Prince Edward’s wife as a royalty tout, and “exposed” the plot to kidnap the Beckam sprogs (the court case collapsed when MM’s agent provacateur antics were exposed) and got bit part actor John Alford from “London’s Burning” banged up for small time drug dealing.
He’s at it again.
This week he lines up “fanatic” Imran Patel (no relation) who he has fingered to the Police and who was picked up by 20 anti-terrorist officers at 8.45pm on Saturday on his way to his mosque and taken to Leeds police station (NOT Paddington Green where they tale the real suspects) for questioning. (“You are going to be doing some overtime this weekend my boy!” "..Yes Sarge”)
I am confident that this deluded, weak minded lad will be released without charge – unless it is for wasting police time – which the intrepid sleuth MM most certainly is."
And so it proved to be ... "5th Bomber gets 4 months"
Unbelievably the PC Plods of the Met’s crack SO13 anti-terrorist squad were “diverted” from the London bombings inquiry for 6 days, "effectively working round the clock" to investigate his claims. Leeds Magistrates were told that this waste of time and effort cost the taxpayer 4,070 hours of police time costing £60,000.
As we said at the time …
Of course the Police … still scratching through tons of trains, bus debris, and squillions of CCTV images … have to take note of any information the public provide. Here’s some for them … Sir Ian Blair tells lies in public about the progress of their investigations. Arrest him for wasting the Public’s time … and money.
Anway poor old Imran got 4 months chokey.
Now we find that the lying, sleazy scumbag Mahmoud has done it agian - ably helped by the dumb twats at the Met led by Assistant Commissioner Peter Clarke,
Abdurahman Kanyare, 53, Roque Fernandes, 44, and Dominic Martins, 45, had been on trial for almost three months accused of trying to buy hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of the substance that doesn't exist - from a cunt called Mazheer Mahmoud - who is the one who should be seeing the inside of a prison cell. Today they were found NOT GUILTY and discharged.
Why ? Well read "Chemical Delusions" a letter written to Peter Clarke, CVO QP LL on 16th March 2004.On the Investigating New Imperialism site. (This was about that other bollocks the threat of "Osmium teroxide" which nobody had ever heard of....
Especially take note of this section ...
Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001
2001 Chapter 24
Copy from Crown Copyright
114
Hoaxes involving noxious substances or things
(1) A person is guilty of an offence if he-
(a) places any substance or other thing in any place; or
(b) sends any substance or other thing from one place to another (by post, rail or any other means whatever);
with the intention of inducing in a person anywhere in the world a belief that it is likely to be (or contain) a noxious substance or other noxious thing and thereby endanger human life or create a serious risk to human health.
(2) A person is guilty of an offence if he communicates any information which he knows or believes to be false with the intention of inducing in a person anywhere in the world a belief that a noxious substance or other noxious thing is likely to be present (whether at the time the information is communicated or later) in any place and thereby endanger human life or create a serious risk to human health.
(3) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable-
(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum (or both); and
(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding seven years or a fine (or both).
115
Sections 113 and 114: supplementary
(1) For the purposes of sections 113 and 114 "substance" includes any biological agent and any other natural or artificial substance (whatever its form, origin or method of production).
(2) For a person to be guilty of an offence under section 113(3) or 114 it is not necessary for him to have any particular person in mind as the person in whom he intends to induce the belief in question.
Now if that cunt Mazheer Mahmoud is not guilty of an offence under this Act I am a tooth fairy.
"A person is guilty of an offence if he communicates any information which he knows or believes to be false with the intention of inducing in a person anywhere in the world a belief that a noxious substance or other noxious thing is likely to be present (whether at the time the information is communicated or later) in any place and thereby endanger human life or create a serious risk to human health."
Will the Met (Prop Sir Ian (Lying Bastard) Blair) arrest MM, charge him, bang him up ?
No.
But everybody involved in this scam should be - including all the dumb bastards that haunt the Terrorism section at Scotland Yard... starting with Peter Clarke. As John Reid, ultimately his boss may say, they ARE NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE.
Mind you they may be guilty under the HSE regulations for not having undertaken a proper Risk Assessment.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home