Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Aged 16-25? Share your experience of using the discussion boards and receive a £25 voucher! Take part via text-chat, video or phone. Click here to find out more and to take part.
Options

it was al qaeda wot dunnit....

2

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    And your acceptance of the claim that he is, by those whom basic investigative principle points to as the far more likely perpetrators, shows you have no trouble accepting dubious assertions so long as the come stamped with an "official" imprimatur.

    Government propaganda never had it so easy as it does today!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Patty Hearst anyone?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Even if we accept that the UK Government blows up its own citizens (something I remain unconvinced off) there is no evidence at all they did so in this instance. There is evidence that the teacher did.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    And again I ask, have you seen this evidence or merely the repeated reports by mainstream media of "official" claims to such evidence?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    No I haven't seen the 'official' evidence personally - but have you seen any to the contrary personally.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    One does not need evidence of innocence. If these claims are true then let the public see the full body of evidence for thorough scrutiny.

    I've seen more than enough vindication of everything I warned would come to pass back in 2002 fyi. Some concerted study in the art of political mythmaking, false flag incidents aimed at furthering US objectives (in the present context a more cooperative Anglo-American venture, but PNAC led at its core) and the covert activities equating to terrorism (and support thereof) in their own right by our own intelligence agencies going back decades would give the critical mind all the cognisance required to see through this contrivance.

    If these claimed perpetrators and "masterminds" (again a strange term for those caught so easily) were the fanatics they are claimed to be then those who knew them well would have recognised that bent in their natures. This is media-assisted myth creation at its finest.

    Obviously the fact that Blair dismissed the calls for a full Parliamentary enquiry on the matter as "hindering the investigation" just as the Bush admin has repeatedly stonewalled full public investigations into 911 and other wrongdoings during its tenure, just slips completely under your radar.

    What is that typical sheepish excuse used by supporters of increased Government surveillance measures? Oh yeah, "I you have nothing to hide...".

    Well, you want suspicion of guilt? Look no further than those using their power to stonewall transparent investigations into all aspects of the matter going back to the inaugural event itself, as called for repeatedly by millions of concerned and vigilant citizens. How convenient for them that they need only cry "national security" to hide their criminality.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    TBH you seem to be missing the point. You have certain preconceptions on which you base what happened and so its a little hypocritical to complain when people who don't share your views come to a different conclusion

    I've never heard the suicide bombers refered to as masterminds myself and while I've heard tabloid journalists refer to Osma Bin laden as a mastermind, perhaps they're right in that he hasn't been easily caught.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Mastermind

    Mastermind

    Mastermind Again

    Oops there's that Matermind(s) reference yet again

    And again

    Either you don't keep up with the spinmeisters' buzzwords (employed innumerable times since 911) or it's become so ingrained into your very thought processes, as successful public perception management is intended to do, that you don't even notice it.

    Such subconscious acceptance of the very terms the paradigm depends upon is the testament to successful propagandising. That is what is known as Manufactured consent. It might behoove you to read up on its methodology.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Such subconscious acceptance of the very terms the paradigm depends upon is the testament to successful propagandising. That is what is known as Manufactured consent. It might behoove you to read up on its methodology.

    Yes. By accepting the presuppositions of "the government" you lose all power to understand and fight them. It doesn't matter that something is true or not, only that it is plausible. in fact, by thinking of them as "the government" you lose all perspective. "Governments" do nothing, individual man and women do.

    To take my favourite example, who do you think came up with the idea of a "nation"?

    Attack the foundations of the paradigm and the whole thing falls over. Everyone knows that you can have a perfectly logical system that is nonsense if it's built on false assumptions.
    Even if we accept that the UK Government blows up its own citizens (something I remain unconvinced off) there is no evidence at all they did so in this instance. There is evidence that the teacher did.

    lol. They will imprison you, send you or your sons and daughters overseas to die in a slit trench - they rob you every year without fail and lie to you at all turns. They push their own staff to suicide and sell arms to any half baked loony with a dollar etc etc

    But they WON'T blow up their own citizens? :confused:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4689739.stm

    Picture of the 4 together just leaving Luton.

    Hardly sounds like they are four innocent patsies being framed by the wicked intelligence service does it.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    oh my, a picture of 4 people entering a train station, my thats conclusive evidence that they had bombs on them or were "together" now isnt it??

    The thought never occurs I suppose that the bombs were already on board the various trains and simply detonated remotely at the appointed time?

    You think those who stand to gain (and clearly are doing so) simply act willy nilly and dont have their contingencies planned to a "t" (right down to CCTV stills of handy patsies" do you?

    How ever do the sheeple ever suppose our interconnected global system and its institutions ever came about or reached its overarching state of present control, by accident or design and collusion?

    Oh yes I forgot, the average joe doesnt want to give a moment's thought to the big picture.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Its a possibility that they are innocent.

    However its unlikely as this is a picture taken in Luton. So these four men all had to travel to Kings X - change for seperate tubes and a bus. These tubes/bus not only had have to be the ones to explode, but these four men also had to have the bad luck of sitting next to the explosives. I'm not even going to try and work out the odds for that - but I supsect its a Roy Meadows type chance.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    All that youve said is follow-on assertion repeated without conclusive proof shown that they were related in any way to the bombs. Now considering that the line from Luton goes to Kings Cross, how many others travelling from Luton were on those trains as well and blown up? Are they guilty too or not because their images didnt fit the handy "keep the arabic boogeyman myth going" scenario?

    You continue to repeat the same groupthink assertions any of us can read ad infinitum in the press for ourselves NQA. When are you going to stop ignoring the explanations you have asked for, which have been given at length, and yet which each of your responses continue to evade once given.

    Truly this is demonstration of the uncritical thought processes characteristic of successful propagandising, and that which has been perfected over generations into the ingrained mythology that our own institutions are there to serve and protect us. They are not, my friend. They exist to reinforce an elite status quo under which we all live and are at times expended in one manner or another as the furtherance of elite aspirations warrants.

    Until you appreciate the hardline ideological agenda at work on a global scale, in our present geo-political context, you will simply continue to passively accept repeated assertion as "fact". Accepting such from those who have been exposed repeatedly as liars and who have unequivocally and repeatedly stonewalled calls for transparent public investigation of these interconnected events is sheer gullibility.

    You seem to have no suspicion of those who apparently have so much to hide, but none toward those they parade before your eyes as rabid fanatics. Nevermind that all those who knew them never saw any such character traits.

    The Mossad motto "By way of deception, thou shalt do war" certainly has found a willing mass mindset in which to thrive, that's for damn sure.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    All that youve said is follow-on assertion repeated without conclusive proof shown that they were related in any way to the bombs. Now considering that the line from Luton goes to Kings Cross, how many others travelling from Luton were on those trains as well and blown up? Are they guilty too or not because their images didnt fit the handy "keep the arabic boogeyman myth going" scenario?

    FFS 4 men photoed together, all killed in the bombs. its not just travelling from Luton - its that they were travelling together and were then all on different trains and the bus when the bomb went off. Thats one hell of a coincidence.

    The people who probably know them best, the family, are accepting they were suicide bombers though... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4688623.stm

    And whilst you accuse me of having an image at least mine seems supported by facts. Your theory of it being planned and carried out by Western Intelligence boogeyman lacks any supporting evidence whatsover.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Now how could intelligence services be shielded from the uncovering of any recriminating evidence linking them and their clearly escalated budget allocations (let alone wide-ranging new powers) to contrived events? Don't think too hard, the answer was in fact provided for you in my previous post.

    4 people "claimed" to be travelling together because they happened to enter the station in proximity to one another, I suppose you couldn't take stills at any moment in the morning commuter hours and find a collection of people all walking into the same entrance together.

    They took a train also occupied by numerous others who might or might not have been together, evidence of guilt yet? No! Plausible assertion for public consumption raised to the level of fact through mere repetition in the media (without any concrete evidence being shown to support that assertion)? Sure.

    That's why its repeated as fact whilst not being fact until "proven". Again, instead of continuing to deride a well known and well analysed methodology of media-assisted propagandising, simply because you wish to think this is my invention, I suggest you go inform yourself of the tactic of "Manufacturing Consent". The concept was advanced by Walter Lippman more than 80 years ago and furthered by Chomsky in the late 80's.

    To continue, you say the four men then went onto 4 trains that all were bombed. well so we are told. Perhaps two were on one train, perhaps they were all on the same train, who is alive to say with unimpeachable certainty?

    Suppose they did in fact go on the 4 trains, how many others of the multitudes at that hour boarded those same 4 trains? Does this one still of 4 men entering sufficiently prove anything that transpired thereafter? No.

    Again. Means, Motive, Opportunity and Who stood to benefit most. These basic fundamentals of identifying "most likely" suspects has somehow become a lost element in recent years as if simple rationale is beyond the capability of most of the public. I am no exception to any rule and I can manage to put this event into the broader context of the "WoT" which itself is built on an event that has to this day never been truly investigated nor the glaring discrepencies answered by those in power. At every turn the demand for transparent public investigation of all supposed "evidence" is met with a wall of excuses and "national security".

    If those like myself are merely "conspiracy theorists", let the exposed liars vindicate that assertion by releasing the evidence for public scrutiny. Until then, what you should be asking yourself is what are THEY hiding.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sadly its true wheres the evidence these are the guys, surely it dont matter as they are dead now

    apparantly they had brought return tickets and paid for parking or something.....


    i dont want to know their career and fact they went to pakistan, i know loads of eople like that who are perfecty decent people, i want to see evidence they done it
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'm afraid you'll never get 100% conclusive evidence. I see no reason to discount official versions just because they are official and on the balalne of probabilities it seems highly likely they did it.

    Its not in the UK's Government interests for these bombers to be of British Asian (or West-Indian in one case) extraction as this raises tensions and surely the last things the Government wants is the sheeple deciding to race riot.

    But to to be honest I'm finishing this discussion as no-one has presented any realistic argument that these men are innocent (not including half-baked theories from Clandestine)
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Like a true sheeple then, NQA, you demonstrate that the most basic logic escapes you and so you revert to claims of "half baked theories". Unfortunately for you the present geo-political agenda and its ideological architects are quite real and quite demonstrably advancing that agenda.

    The only thing "half baked" here is your preference for mainstream allegation over full transparent public investigation, simply because it comes with the "official" imprimatur. Of course, as with 911 those most likely complicit are the ones stonewalling calls for transparent public exposure and scrutiny of all the evidence.

    Running away crying "conspiracy theory" on highlights further the cognitive dissonance of complacent minds. It took planning and orchestration to carry out this heinous facet of the present geo-political paradigm, no less so if it were some alleged hyper-inflated shadowy entity called "Al Qaeda" as repeated allegations have so many believing without question.

    What then is the definition of "conspiracy"? Hmmmmmm...
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    i know how easy it is to choose four people to be at certain places at certain times and in a the right order ...i know cos i have had to do such things.
    the people who's strings your pulling are being paid hansomely so everyones happy and if i can organise that ...

    todays paper ...three men named pictured and the exact details of which man comitted what ...all done and dusted ...no trial ...no questions being asked. it's all over that quick!
    to many people are comfortable with stuff that would have been laughed at not so long ago ...and we keep on moving ever further forward without seriously questioning whats going on ...it's not good.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    i remember when flimsy evidence was used to throw irish people in jail ...only to let them out many years later with a few quid and a 'right piss off paddy'.
    how many times?
    i remember libya being attacked ...innocent people being blown to bits in their thousands cos america had proof beyond doubt that libya had just carried out the worst terrorist attack on american soil ever ...at the time ...turned out america attacked america by way of mcviegh.
    practice run or what?
    how were america punished for this illegal mass murder?
    forget that one ...evryone else did in no time at all.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bb, as I said many times before, the paradigm for the groupthink explanation is set and all actions will now be filtered through that to their unified conclusion. Such is the means by which manufactured consent is achieved by our Western Corporate Media in collusion with the increasingly powerful institutions benefitting most in budgetary and political terms.

    The PNAC cabal has succeeded in replacing their formerly cherished "Cold War" communist boogeyman with a threat far more easily maintained. All the more so for its lack of any potential declining nation state upon which to rely in order to rally repeated public support for their increasingly authoritarian internal and militant external policy prerogatives.

    Whilst the sheeple call it "conspiracy theory" the conspirators gloat and carry on with their unchallenged agenda. The powermongers' wet dream come true.

    Maybe if you wrote a bit more clearly and cut out all the pretentious verbose language, the "sheeple" ( :yeees: ) would understand what you're saying?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Perhaps if he provided any evidence to show that someone else was resposnsible then we might be interested.
    NQA wrote:
    One hell of a coincidence

    Indeed, yet if they were Govt employees then Clandestine would argue the opposite.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    it was libya what done it ...and the americans fabricated enough evidence to convince most european leaders it was libya wot dunnit.
    we now know libya didn't do it ...and nobody gives a toss about thousands of innocent deaths or the lies.
    what has anyone done about the lies? nothing.
    the PTB so love the reaction of the masses.

    it was al qaeda wot dunnit...without any attempt at any serious evidence ...it must have been them!
    no one would lie to us about these things ...
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The very point you continually, dare I presume willfully?, miss MoK, is that the evidence is precisely what they refuse to allow transparent access to by way of fully public enquiry. As I repeatedly state, those of us who see through this charade to those who have much more to gain - and indeed who are quite verifiably gaining (budgetarily and politically) by keeping a sufficient majority of the unquestioning public onside and duly reactionistic - only seek a full accounting without the patented excuse of "national security".

    The only security our leaders truly protect is their own and that of the corrupt cronies with whom they consort.

    Obviously though, even asking "what are they hiding?" when Mr. Blair publically disallows any Parliamentary calls for such a transparent scrutiny of the goings on behind closed doors (as has the Bush admin on numerous occasions re: 911 and links to other corporate related scandals) invites only your apathetic and uncritical dismissal.

    So you believe a group of oh so easily identified arabs, none of whom ever evinced any fanatical traits to those who knew them well, must be the perps because a scenario is handed to the media by "official" sources along with photos which show 4 youths entering a station with backpacks on. Wow, call the grand jury, no giant leaps of unquestionable assumption in that coverstory.

    Let's just believe the media and our oh so honest leaders and not try to shake people out of complacent acceptance of whatever they tell us. After all, the German public did in 1933 when "Communists" burned down the Reichstag and that didn't lead to any catastrophic eventualities now did it?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So you believe a group of oh so easily identified arabs, none of whom ever evinced any fanatical traits to those who knew them well,

    For someone to accuse any one else of ignorance seems a little cheeky as they weren't Arabs, but British of Pakistani and Jamacian origin.

    And as I explained before few terrorists go around with 'fanatic' emblazoned on their forehead. Parents being parents will also concentrate on saying good things about their children, even if they do committ mass murder. Its not unusual for those who knew serial killers to say how nice they were and all that prooves is that suicide bombers are not the two dimensional caricatures beloved in cheap thrillers.

    But I say again - do you have any evidence that shows these four men were not the suicide bombers.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    And I say to you that people are innocent until PROVEN guilty. Do you have evidence and has any real evidence been shown that they ARE the bombers? No.

    What's more, what happened to "timed, military grade explosives not suicide bombers" as so repeatedly corrected after original reports of "crude homemade devices and suicide bombers" were so widely trumpeted? Sounds like spin and spin and spin again. Yet you accept this process and its "official" assertions as fact with nary a thought of contrivance.

    So when are you going to address the refusal of Mr. Blair to allow for a full transparent public enquiry? Nothing to hide, eh?

    By all means, don't step up to the plate and add your voice any such demand. That might require a level of civic duty you are wholly unaccustomed to performing.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So, I take it you have no evidence. Given that with the main suspects dead innocence until proven guilty concept kind of goes out the window - English law doesn't allow prosecution of body parts.

    My comments have always been on the balance of probablities - which is not absolute certainty that they did it, though everything I've seen suggests they did.

    And despite the wonderful theories I'm not sure how it helps the PM (or GWB) to destablise race relations in the UK.

    To be honest Clandestine your so unquestioning of your own beliefs and so blindly willinging to follow any claim which agrees with your view, without looking at the veracity I suspect that they could have blown themselves up in front of you and you'd still believe they were innocent.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    NQA wrote:
    My comments have always been on the balance of probablities - which is not absolute certainty that they did it, though everything I've seen suggests they did.

    You've managed to assess the balance of probabilities without hearing all the evidence?

    So, what is it that you have seen that suggests they did it?

    :confused:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So, what is it that you have seen that suggests they did it?

    Read the thread.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    NQA wrote:
    Read the thread.

    Well. I've just read it for the third time - and I'm still asking the same question....

    Your strongest point is "co-incidence"

    So, what do you make of the exercise that Visor were holding at precisely the same stations, at the same time?

    :confused:
Sign In or Register to comment.