Barrie Zwicker on Guy Fawkes in today's Globe and Mail

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Barrie Zwicker on Guy Fawkes in today's Globe and Mail

Postby Rigorous Intuition » Sat Nov 05, 2005 1:43 pm

<!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Zwicker draws a nice, not so subtle historical allegory <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/Page/document/v4/sub/MarketingPage?user_URL=http://www.theglobeandmail.com%2Fservlet%2FArticleNews%2FTPStory%2FLAC%2F20051105%2FCOFAWKES05%2FTPComment%2F%3Fquery%3DBarrie%2BZwicker&ord=1131205340946&brand=theglobeandmail&force_login=true" target="top">here</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> to 9/11 in Canada's paper of record:</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Was Guy Fawkes just a victim of an earlier WMD scheme?</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> <br><br>BARRIE ZWICKER<br><br>5 November 2005<br>The Globe and Mail<br><br><!--EZCODE FONT START--><span style="font-size:small;"><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Remember, remember, the 5th of November, <br>with gunpowder, treason and plot. <br>I see no reason why gunpowder treason <br>should ever be forgot.</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> - English folk rhyme</span><!--EZCODE FONT END--> <br><br>Today is the 400th anniversary of “Gunpowder Treason.” Because Nov. 5 is my birthday, I've always been more aware of Guy Fawkes Day than most. Probably the first rhyme I ever learned is the one above. But for the first 68 years of my life I had entirely the wrong idea about the plot: what happened, who was really behind it, and its impact on history to this day. <br><br>On the Throne of England in 1605 sits James I, a Protestant, who ordered the translation of the Christian Bible that bears his name. As midnight approaches on Nov. 4, the eve of the traditional opening of Parliament, armed agents of the King raid a basement room of the Houses of Parliament. They discover 36 barrels of gunpowder and a tunnel leading to the room. They apprehend Guy Fawkes, 36, a known agitator for the rights of English Roman Catholics. In Fawkes's possession are a watch, slow matches and touchpaper. Had he succeeded, so the palace version goes, the next day James and his queen, and the members of the House of Lords and the House of Commons would be no more. The Palace of Westminster complex, including historic Westminster Abbey, would be smoking rubble. <br><br>The English public is stunned. It's the equivalent of uncovering our day's 9/11. “A cataclysm,” Adam Nicolson describes it in God's Secretaries: The Making of the King James Bible. Upon his arrest, Fawkes admits his purpose was to destroy king and Parliament. <br><br>By Nov. 8, on the rack, he names 12 co-conspirators. All of those not killed where they are tracked down are found guilty of treason in a trial lasting less than a day. They and Fawkes are hanged, drawn and quartered. <br><br>The following Sunday, Nov. 10, the King James version of the plot is broadcast from the pulpits of the Church of England. William Barlow, Bishop of Rochester, thunders that “the enemy from below is satanic in its wickedness.” The King, their hoped-for victim, “is an unqualifiedly good man . . . virtually a Christ-figure,” writes Mr. Nicolson. All pulpits echo the palace version. The palace version becomes historical truth for humankind. Until 1959, it was against the law in Britain not to celebrate Guy Fawkes Day. <br><br>But Mr. Nicolson and others now cast serious doubt on that version. Many anomalies concerning the events have surfaced. The Royal Chancellor had an efficient network of spies seeded among Roman Catholic dissidents. The authorship of the letter by which the King learned of the plot is murky. The gunpowder was of an inferior nature, unlikely to have achieved much result. Some of the handwriting on Fawkes's confession differed from the rest. There was no tunnel. <br><br>Ignored until recently is a book by Jesuit historian John Gerard (1564-1606), What Was the Gunpowder Plot: The Traditional Story Tested by Original Evidence, finally published in 1897. Gerard writes: “When we examine into the details supplied to us as to the progress of the affair, we find that much of what the conspirators are said to have done is well-nigh incredible, while it is utterly impossible that if they really acted in the manner described, the public authorities should not have had full knowledge . . . .” <br><br>The evidence points to a false-flag operation. U.S. author Webster G. Tarpley writes that James “was considering a policy of accommodation with the Spanish Empire, the leading Catholic power, and some measures of toleration for Catholics in England.” But an influential London group known as the war party wanted to push James into a confrontation with the Spanish Empire, “from which they hoped among other things to extract great personal profit.” The war party considered it politically vital to keep persecuting Roman Catholics. Chief among the war party was the Royal Chancellor, Lord Robert Cecil, who set out, writes Mr. Tarpley, “to sway James to adopt his policy, by means of terrorism.” It amounts to this: Either Cecil and the war party made it happen, or let it happen. And if they let it happen, they made it happen. <br><br>The fallout from the plot is uncontestable. “The English became fixated on homeland security,” Mr. Nicolson writes. “An inclusive, irenic idea of mutual benefit (between Spain and England, which had recently signed a peace treaty and between which trade was growing) was replaced by a defensive/aggressive complex in which all Catholics, of all shades, never mind their degree of enthusiasm for the planned attack, were, at least for a time, identified as the enemy. . . . The state had invaded and taken over the English conscience.” <br><br>War with Spain ensues. England's course is set for a century of wars against the Spanish and Portuguese empires, out of which the British Empire emerges. In 1917, the British add Iraq to their empire after the defeat of the Ottomans. Neo-colonial turmoil in Iraq continues to this day. The official story of “gunpowder treason” set much in motion. <br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Barrie Zwicker is author of the forthcoming Towers of Deception: Exploding the Media Coverup of 9/11 Truth.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> <br><br> <p></p><i></i>
Rigorous Intuition
 
Posts: 1744
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 3:36 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Barrie Zwicker on Guy Fawkes in today's Globe and Mail

Postby manxkat » Sat Nov 05, 2005 4:02 pm

Fascinating. Thanks for this Jeff. I'm an admirer of Barrie Zwicker after seeing his DVD documentary on 9/11. Amazing to see the difference between Canadian newspapers and American ones, especially in the post-9/11 era. That's true of the CBC and BBC as well in their willingness to allow other points of view rather than ridiculing them.<br> <p></p><i></i>
manxkat
 
Posts: 235
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 9:20 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Barrie Zwicker on Guy Fawkes in today's Globe and Mail

Postby manxkat » Sat Nov 05, 2005 4:09 pm

In related news, looks like that site in the UK which claimed a mini-nuke would go off today at 4 PM (presumably London time) hasn't happened and it's now 6 or 7 PM there. Why am I not surprised?!<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.financialoutrage.org.uk/5th_november.htm">www.financialoutrage.org....vember.htm</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br> <p></p><i></i>
manxkat
 
Posts: 235
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 9:20 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

this is in the Globe???

Postby trachys » Sun Nov 06, 2005 6:20 am

Thorsell would never have let a piece like this slip past him. could the Globe become canada's Guardian?<br><br>alas, it's not likely. <p></p><i></i>
trachys
 
Posts: 78
Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2005 11:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

I think we owe the Jesuit historian proper due

Postby FourthBase » Sun Nov 06, 2005 5:42 pm

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>“When we examine into the details supplied to us as to the progress of the affair, we find that much of what the conspirators are said to have done is well-nigh incredible, while it is utterly impossible that if they really acted in the manner described, the public authorities should not have had full knowledge . . . .”<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>I think John Gerard might be history's first conspiracy theorist.<br>The above might as well have been written on this board <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>yesterday</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->.<br><br>He wrote that in 1605, but the words are 100% applicable to 2005.<br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>400 years</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> years later...<br>Nothing new under the sun. <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
FourthBase
 
Posts: 7057
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 4:41 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

gunpowder

Postby smiths » Sun Nov 06, 2005 11:37 pm

"The gunpowder was of an inferior nature, unlikely to have achieved much result."<br>obviously this could be part of the official story but i recall reading years ago that the gunpowder was crap because it sat for too long and seperated into its constituent parts,<br>because, the parliament was postponed for a month or so because of the plague, had the parliament opened on time the powder would have been fine and dandy,<br><br>also are we really to believe a jesuit version of the story?<br><br>regardless of these matters, what it gave the kids of england is undoubtedly the most exciting night of the year,<br>you go to your local newsagent, lie about your age, and then purchase a cache of explosives and rockets,<br>spending the night running around massive bonfires, <br>bunging the ends of plastic tubes and launching rockets into the sky or in the general direction of your mates who are launching rockets at you,<br>yes there were a few injuries, but a hell of a lot of fun was had<br><br> <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
smiths
 
Posts: 2205
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 4:18 am
Location: perth, western australia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: gunpowder

Postby * » Mon Nov 07, 2005 3:29 am

<br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>"also are we really to believe a jesuit version of the story?"</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br> back in the day, the Jesuits were the equivalent of NSA/CIA/M16.<br>Not that Anglicans would believe anything they might say..<br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>
*
 
Posts: 315
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2005 9:48 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

zwicker

Postby yablonsky » Tue Nov 08, 2005 12:51 am

fwiw, it appears barrie zwicker is referring to this forum (initial interest in guy fawkes day truth) as brought to his attention by webster tarpley (see very very tail end):<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.911busters.com/SanFran04/video/IQ1_05_WEBSTER_TARPLEY_57.5_.html">www.911busters.com/SanFra...57.5_.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>the who thing is very absorbing for anybody who hasn't stumbled across it:<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.911busters.com/SanFran04/index.html">www.911busters.com/SanFran04/index.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>there's even some richard heinberg..<br><br> <p></p><i></i>
yablonsky
 

Zwicker's Tape

Postby FourthBase » Tue Nov 08, 2005 11:19 am

Zwicker's 9/11 tape should be a Christmas present for everyone you know who's in denial. <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
FourthBase
 
Posts: 7057
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 4:41 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Return to 9/11

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests