Democratic? No public enquiry on the 7/7 bombings.
- Thread starter mod
- Start date
To answer this shite directly would be to start dredging up detail and things from personal correspondence, which is precisely what Jazzz is fishing for.
Once more: I asked ST a very specific direct question about her claimed experience - something totally unrelated to her claims about Stockwell and very much related to my knowledge, contacts and experience - and ten minutes later she flounced.
I will add that I invested some time in investigating other claims of hers - in the world, not in the paranoid world of nit-picking over texts. The result is that it is possible but very, very unlikely that those claims were based on truth with the usual load of mistakes.
Once more: I asked ST a very specific direct question about her claimed experience - something totally unrelated to her claims about Stockwell and very much related to my knowledge, contacts and experience - and ten minutes later she flounced.
I will add that I invested some time in investigating other claims of hers - in the world, not in the paranoid world of nit-picking over texts. The result is that it is possible but very, very unlikely that those claims were based on truth with the usual load of mistakes.
editor
hiraethified
Don't worry. I have no intention of making public any of the private correspondence relating to this matter for Jazzz's benefit.laptop said:
But I'd like him to explain why he has chosen to go against ST's wishes and bandy her real name all over this forum, despite me telling him that she expressly did not want her real name associated with the threads here. So why make it public, Jazzz?
Oh, and for the fifth time:
Jazzz - Please explain why a proper inquiry would "reveal 7/7 to be the black op that it was"
Exactly what would be "revealed" please, and how?
Jazzz said:
Still fishing, I see. Bad luck.
Jazzz said:
"Admit"? It was a direct rebuttal of your claim about what I was supposed to have done to ST. And this response from you makes it a refutation.
Now.
For the sake of your "theory" you have inflicted psychological abuse on BK.
I'll join with editor for a moment, while you're still here: what the fuck is it, that it's worth that?
Yet it is perfectly ok for you to maintain <real name removed: editor> may have been lying without producing any good evidence at all, let alone hard. Goodnight editor.editor said:Be sure to have an answer to my questions in the morning, please!
After all, you made the claims, so it seems entirely reasonable to ask you to substantiate them fully.
Nighty night!
editor
hiraethified
I'm less than fucking enamoured with you as I've just had to waste ten minutes of my time removing ST's name from a pile of your posts.Jazzz said:
I've no idea why you have chosen to keep repeating her name here.
Apart from potential legal issues, I have repeatedly told you that she specifically requested that her name be removed, so why the fuck are you ignoring her wishes and continuing to compromise her privacy?
If you post up her real name again you will be banned. The FAQ is very clear on this.
Oh, and don't forget to answer my questions when you return!
And - unlike the vast majority of your recent posts here - my questions are completely, 100%, guaranteed on topic!
shoddysolutions
back by dope demand
editor said:
Wrong.
It's "I could be wrong ... I could be rrrrrright"
(And numerous other mentions by conspiraloons)Prole said:
Exactly which bit of "There is no official fucking narrative yet" do you lot have trouble understanding???
Or have you already seen one ... Oh my God ... it's a conspiracy ... the government narrative has already been decided upon and released! The whole putting it together bit is a fucking charade! It must be true! Prole and the others have seen it!!! They said so repeatedly on a site I go to on the internet ... they don't "buy into it" in comments dated December 2005!... Months before it's even been released to the rest of us ... Oh my God ...
Fuckwits.
Oh. And by the way. WHO exactly is going to pay for the "independent forensic examination" the government are apparently so keen to prevent (clue: it'll cost you in the region of £50-£100k as a conservative estimate)
bristol_citizen
Well-Known Member
They can fund it by charging punters £5 a pop to listen to Shayler and Machon spout drivel in drafty church halls across the country.detective-boy said:
I calculate at two meetings a week the "truth movement" with its current following could possibly raise the funds by, ooh... 2015?
Oh, so 4 young British men driving to Luton, leaving explosives in 2 cars parked with pay and display tickets for one week, getting on a train which didn't run or arrived at Kings X too late, 3 to board underground trains to explode 3 bombs simultaneously whilst one other suicide bomber went to both McShites and Boots before exploding a bomb on the top deck of a number 30 bus .... isn't the official narrative?
BBC London Bombs
What is then?
editor
hiraethified
Might take a little longer if we go on sparticus's success rate at putting on conspiraloon meetings.bristol_citizen said:
His free UK central London 'premiere' of some fruitloop DVD or another attracted less punters than bar staff, with his second viewing being an even bigger flop, pulling in just one customer!
A similar viewing in Brixton Arts Co-Op attacted a similarly microscopic gathering.
Aye, it must be lonely job being a (DVD buying) 'truth seeker' alright.
"I would strongly recommend the BBC website, which not only gives the broad information you seek, but also gives written and pictorial accounts of the events of that morning and the days that followed." according to Detective Inspector Neil Smith Anti-Terrorist branch at New Scotland Yard.editor said:
Is that official enough?
I have already posted on here how the train from Luton arrived too late for these young men to board the underground that morning.
Perhaps that copper had already received god-knows-how-many enquiries and simply pointed you to a generally respected source of information which contained a generally accepted version of the events?
Besides are you saying that:
a) those four were not in luton when the police thought they were.
b) those four were not on the tube trains which exploded.
c) ???
Besides are you saying that:
a) those four were not in luton when the police thought they were.
b) those four were not on the tube trains which exploded.
c) ???
mmm maybe perhaps who knows, although if you check what he did write he answered all my points in great detail. The part I posted was the part where he evaded answering 'what time did the train leave Luton that morning'.TAE said:
I can only examine the facts, as I say, only the truth stands up to rigorous investigation. Isn't that how we make up our own minds?
According to many on Urban75 this makes me a conspiraloon a fuckwit a truth seeker and worse.
Similar threads
- Locked
