7/7 Home Office 'narrative' leaked: Iraq led to July 7

[detective-boy]

Decent caring young men, two with young children and pregnant wives, decide that they are going to kill themselves and innocent people?

Doesn't 'sound as good as any' to me, in fact it is so weak I don't know how you all buy into it.

Jesus fucking Christ ... "He's a nice lad, he'd never do nothing like that ..."

No murderer has ever had a wife and kids? No suicide has ever left a spouse and family behind? No thief has ever had a second life? ....

 

[editor]

No murderer has ever had a wife and kids? No suicide has ever left a spouse and family behind? No thief has ever had a second life? ....

His belief that people who do bad things must have previously gone around being nasty to everyone is touchingly naive. Or just plain stupid.

Hey prole! Why not do some research before posting up such idiotic tosh?!

 

[laptop]

Er, Prole, just how well did you know these nice lads?

 

[Prole]

Editor: Please stop the bullying and hectoring and rudeness, I'll answer what I choose to.

I've stated many a time that I don't know what happened that day, just that the story as it stands doesn't add up. O.K.

I don't need anyone's permission to think differently, to disagree, and to question the orthodox view. If you don't like it, tough.

 

[laptop]

I don't need anyone's permission to think differently

You are him and I claim my five pieces of silver.

If, however, you choose to express delusional garbage on a discussion board, you must expect people to, er, discuss it.

 

[Jazzz]

Well yes it has been edited, but it is still him speaking quite lucidly and cogently about his aims and motivation. He doesn't appear drugged or coerced into making the statement.

But, ah, with respect Jazzz, this is a problem I have with the sceptics - any evidence that emerges, and which doesn't fit the sceptical version of events, is deemed to be faked - eg. the Khan video, the Luton station CCTV image. However, other evidence used in favour of their arguments (eg. witnesses report explosion below the carriages) is taken as gospel...

ok, but now the Home Office seems to agree with the comments I made on that thread, as I pasted earlier - you may have missed it;

"A videotape of Mohammed Siddique Khan released after the attacks also featured footage of Osama bin Laden's deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri. The Home Office believes the tape was edited after the suicide attacks and dismisses it as evidence of al-Qaeda's involvement in the attack."

Observer., 9th April

A problem I have is that people don't question the evidence that the media reports with little questioning - when I made comments that the tape seemed pasted together very crudely, I was ridiculed - conspiraloonery, particularly by editor and pk (our self-proclaimed video expert).

In fact, the whole notion that Al-Qaeda really had anything to do with this attack seems to not be entertained at all by the narrative. Now months ago, you would be ridiculed for saying that on these boards. Indeed I don't believe this seems to have sunk in to anyone. These attacks were NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY ESTABLISHED TERROR ORGANISATION, and that's official!

Let's repeat that.

Al-Qaeda? No.
Officially.

This is why you have to keep questioning.

 

[editor]

A problem I have is that people don't question the evidence that the media reports with little questioning - when I made comments that the tape seemed pasted together very crudely, I was ridiculed - conspiraloonery, particularly by editor and pk (our self-proclaimed video expert). .

Exactly where have I stated that Al-Qaeda were definitely responsible for the 7/7 attacks?

And you've been wrong on so many things for so long, to hear you go on now like you're some sort of seer is laughable in the extreme.

 

[sparticus]

Great.

So your alternative theory, supported by credible, solid evidence, is what exactly?

Oh, and answer my questions please. Thanks!

I'll give you an alternative theory, supported by historical precedent (British Intelligence have been proven to have infiltrated and cooperated with Irish terrorists). The theory runs that the bombers and/or their associates were known to rogue officers in MI6 who saw a terrorist outrage in the middle of the G8 summit as serving a wider agenda since it would create (a) a convenient diversion from demonstrations against global poverty and capitalism and (b) another opportunity to beat the drums of war, next stop Iran. These rogue officers could have either helped facilitate the attacks or knew they were planned and failed to alert the authorities.

Any evidence for this theory? A little

There are a whole range of possibilities and it doesn't have to boil down to officialoon vs conspiraloon, the Leeds 4 guilt vs Leeds 4 innocent

By holding a fully comprehensive public inquiry into all aspects of 7/7 including the events themselves we will all be better placed to know what happened.

Call me a cynic, but like Micheal Meacher, I no longer trust the word of the intelligence services or this government and can only conclude that they refuse a public inquiry into the biggest terrorist outrage in this country because they have something to hide

So Editor do you support the statement on the July 7 petition: Yes or No?

 

[Jazzz]

Exactly where have I stated that Al-Qaeda were definitely responsible for the 7/7 attacks?

And you've been wrong on so many things for so long, to hear you go on now like you're some sort of seer is laughable in the extreme.

Well, for one I remember starting a thread suggesting that the Al-Qaeda claim of responsibility - posted on a website with a server in Houston - was a load of tosh, which it was. You binned it! Conspiraloonery!

On the thread I refer to, I said the tape was clearly edited. For this you ridiculed me, you described me as 'a complete joke'. Yet, the Home Office now agrees with me on that count.

You demand that your opponents come up with exact theories as to what is going on, yet when it comes to your own you always say you have never committed to anything. And seeing as you guys pick up on any minor slip I may make you'll have to forgive me when I point out that I got it right, sorry.

 

[laptop]

Did jazzz not claim that the Khan tape had been edited to fit up Khan?

That's a very different thing from saying that an Al-Q figure has been inserted into a genuine last will and testament by Khan.

jazzz's is a claim that continues to deserve only derision, as I'm sure anyone who's ever used Avid would be willing to explain if they had the patience.

 

[pk]

Does anyone think there's any point entertaining the conspiraloons here any longer?

No point whatsoever, but they'll still be here posting the same shit the same time next week, month, year...

 

[editor]

I'll give you an alternative theory, supported by historical precedent

...and it's yet another utterly irrelevant sideshow which doesn't even come remotely close to providing what I asked for: a credible alternative theory backed up by solid evidence.

 

[laptop]

a credible alternative theory backed up by solid evidence.

"But they could'a, couldn't they?"

Do you have no sense of... er... what was it you need a sense of to appreciate that stuff?

 

[jæd]

Does anyone think there's any point entertaining the conspiraloons here any longer?

Nope...! Inna bin...!

 

[jæd]

Decent caring young men, two with young children and pregnant wives, decide that they are going to kill themselves and innocent people?

Doesn't 'sound as good as any' to me, in fact it is so weak I don't know how you all buy into it.

They sound as barking as you do....!

 

[jæd]

"But they could'a, couldn't they?"

Do you have no sense of... er... what was it you need a sense of to appreciate that stuff?

Stupidity, being as thick as pig shit and more some...?

 

[Kid_Eternity]

Does anyone think there's any point entertaining the conspiraloons here any longer?

No, not here or on any other thread. Bin the fucking lot of them I say!

 

[jæd]

'What do you believe these men hoped to achieve by these acts?'

Can you answer that?

Giving a platform for loon-spud fuckwitts like you...?

 

[detective-boy]

Editor: Please stop the bullying and hectoring and rudeness ...

Can you prove the editor is guilty of bullying and hectoring please. I've known him for ages. He's a decent, caring young man with friends and family and a fantastic reputation running a very popular bulletin board. Why would he put all that at risk by bullying and hectoring. It makes no sense to me. I've no idea why you buy into the idea it must be him ...

 

[Azrael23]

"Can you prove the editor is guilty of bullying and hectoring please."


* sides split....


Can you give me credible evidence that the sun came up this morning?! LMAO

 

[editor]

Well, for one I remember starting a thread suggesting that the Al-Qaeda claim of responsibility - posted on a website with a server in Houston - was a load of tosh, which it was. You binned it! Conspiraloonery!

So you can't back up your claims, once again?

It's pathetic, it really is.

 

[TAE]

Well, for one I remember starting a thread suggesting that the Al-Qaeda claim of responsibility - posted on a website with a server in Houston - was a load of tosh, which it was. You binned it! Conspiraloonery!

On the thread I refer to, I said the tape was clearly edited. For this you ridiculed me, you described me as 'a complete joke'. Yet, the Home Office now agrees with me on that count.

You demand that your opponents come up with exact theories as to what is going on, yet when it comes to your own you always say you have never committed to anything. And seeing as you guys pick up on any minor slip I may make you'll have to forgive me when I point out that I got it right, sorry.

When you say 'binned', you mean the thread no longer exists and so you can't link to it?

 

[Azrael23]

Why not just be fair? Why aren`t you interested in the open minded appraisal of the situation?

I`m sick of having to fight the wannabe gatekeepers who don`t even know what they`re defending.

Jazzz is right on the Al-Q video story.

9/11 was an inside job.... Jazzz is right there... I`m glad you realise its a conspiracy theory, well done for you...the official line is also a conspiracy theory because they`re saying "we think we know who did it"....Whose conspiracy theory has the most evidence? It certainly ain`t the official one....shouldn`t you be expecting your rulers to lie by now, I mean we`ve only had nearly 3000 years of rulers lying to and manipulating, often slaughtering their own people.... You think anythings changed?

Your agreement is not required. What is required is our right to discuss our views without harassment. As it is we`re harassed by editor constantly. Why?

If I hear one more bullshit line about "credible proof" i`ll scream, nobody posts as many sources as people like me and jazzz...NOBODY....least of all our most vocal critics. Critics I might add whose knowledge of the system of power is lacking to say the least.....half of you still think socialism is gonna save us all.....why the hell should we take your criticism so seriously!?

 

[Donna Ferentes]

If I hear one more bullshit line about "credible proof" i`ll scream, nobody posts as many sources as people like me and jazzz...NOBODY

Yes, but none of them are any good, are they?

 

[editor]

9/11 was an inside job....

No matter how many times you keep trotting this out, I'm afraid I'm going to need solid, credible proof before I begin to take you even slightly seriously.

And despite asking for this evidence countless times, all I get back in response is vague, selectively recalled details from invariably dodgy websites, irrelevant snippets of pointless information and a selection of half arsed quasi-facts that don't prove anything in themselves - apart from revealing your near-religious devotion to finding a conspiracy, of course.

And if you don't like people like me having the audacity to ask for proof for your wild claims, I suggest you post on some of the laughable conspiraloon sites where people are rarely bothered with trifles like evidence, credible witnesses, proper research etc.

 

[detective-boy]

If I hear one more bullshit line about "credible proof" i`ll scream, nobody posts as many sources as people like me and jazzz...

cred-i-ble adj. 1. Capable of being believed; believable; plausible. 2. Worthy of confidence; reliable [Middle English, from Latin credibilis, from credere, to believe, entrust]

 

[detective-boy]

"Can you prove the editor is guilty of bullying and hectoring please."


* sides split....


Can you give me credible evidence that the sun came up this morning?! LMAO

So I assume you strongly disagree with Prole's line of reasoning then ...

 

[Azrael23]

I don`t need to argue with you, 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB.

Wake up to the obvious.

Yeah 18 men with boxcutters had NORAD stand down...now thats a mighty fallacious conspiracy theory there....do you have any evidence for it?

You refuse to comment on most of my sources, you simply play semantics.

Your not interested in the truth, you simply want to play WWF verbal wrestling and you should know better. Your posts are always sweeping generalisations and barely disguised scorn. Hardly credible evidence in favour of your CHOICE in supporting the official conspiracy theory.

 

[Azrael23]

cred-i-ble adj. 1. Capable of being believed; believable; plausible. 2. Worthy of confidence; reliable [Middle English, from Latin credibilis, from credere, to believe, entrust]

Don`t condescend to me.

A few years in the garments of brief authority doesn`t make you anymore special than the rest of us. I`d tell my uncle the same if he was as patronising as you. Thankfully he isn`t.

 

[Blagsta]

I don`t need to argue with you, 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB.

Wake up to the obvious.

Yeah 18 men with boxcutters had NORAD stand down...now thats a mighty fallacious conspiracy theory there....do you have any evidence for it?

You refuse to comment on most of my sources, you simply play semantics.

Your not interested in the truth, you simply want to play WWF verbal wrestling and you should know better. Your posts are always sweeping generalisations and barely disguised scorn. Hardly credible evidence in favour of your CHOICE in supporting the official conspiracy theory.

NORAD didn't stand down.