butchersapron
Bring back hanging
I think my arguments on here indicate what i feel on that. I'm just going out now. Back later.
Democratic? No public enquiry on the 7/7 bombings.
- Thread starter mod
- Start date
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
You *really* do not read the threads that you join in on/trash do you?
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
You really think this thread was ever going to be worth reading?butchersapron said:
pk said:
Personally I lack your certainty
I think western secret services COULD have been involved, which I guess is the same as saying 7/7 could have been a 'black op'. As you say states are capable of pretty much anything as they have frequently demonstrated
Hence the need for an inquiry
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
The same lack of logic then means that you'd have to have a public inquiry into every terrorist device ever planted in the UK. That would take a while, cost an utter fortune and waste money all to pander to utterly unjustified paranoia that would never be satisfied.
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
None, that's not what he's saying, he wants the public enquiry to prove that it was/wasn't. Which is admirable if you think wasting a couple of million on utter bollocks is a good idea.editor said:
There's no precedent of aliens of working with terrorists whilst there is plenty of precedent of western secret services of working with terrorists or carrying out false flag terrorist outrages. And yes in terrorist outrages of this magnitude, I would automatically require a public inquiry unless a very good reason can be given why not.
Do I take it that you don't support a public inquiry ed? You are happy to take the government's word without that evidence being open to any type of interrogation or public examination?
Care to offer an opinion on Michael Meacher's concerns?
Do I take it that you don't support a public inquiry ed? You are happy to take the government's word without that evidence being open to any type of interrogation or public examination?
Care to offer an opinion on Michael Meacher's concerns?
editor
hiraethified
Sorry to burst your conspiraloon bubble here, but afaik there's no precedent of a modern UK government mass murdering its own citizens in London as part of a black ops operation either.sparticus said:
I have no opinion about Michael Meacher either way so there's not much point asking me. No doubt because you think he has some concerns that vaguely line up with some of your beliefs you now believe him to be the most important person on the planet, when in fact he's just a fairly inconsquential politician.
sparticus said:
FFS, they're aliens. If they can get here across millions of light-years of space, they can conceal their affilations...
sparticus said:
By the same logic: there is also precedent for governments abolishing and disbanding their armed forces; therefore any armed forces you may come across are impostors.
http://www.sundayherald.com/25646#
"The army asked me to make bombs for the IRA, told me I had the Prime Minister's blessing ... then tried to kill me"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Northern_Ireland/Story/0,2763,936963,00.html
Terrorism sponsored by Britain
As Lord Stevens concluded, in the past UK has colluded with terrorists then sought to cover their crimes up. This is not conspiracy theory its conspiracy fact. It's been proven in court
"The army asked me to make bombs for the IRA, told me I had the Prime Minister's blessing ... then tried to kill me"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Northern_Ireland/Story/0,2763,936963,00.html
Terrorism sponsored by Britain
As Lord Stevens concluded, in the past UK has colluded with terrorists then sought to cover their crimes up. This is not conspiracy theory its conspiracy fact. It's been proven in court
The way you are wittering on anyone would think that it had all been put in a fucking box and forgotten about.sparticus said:
There is an ongoing (massive) criminal investigation.
There are coroner's inquests to be heard.
There are likely to be some criminal trials of secondary offenders.
There will be trials of the 21 July suspects which may, or may not, be linked to some or all of 7 July events.
And there will be the "official narrative", whatever that turns out to be.
Once all that has been done will be the time to assess what is and what isn't proven / known / suspected. Then, if there are still inconsistencies or things which merit further inquiry, a public inquiry could be properly called for.
Why are you all jumping up and down now?
Bernie Gunther
Fundamentalist Druid
Where false flag terrorism has provably occurred, it's happened for comprehensible reasons. For example, the Italian cases butchersapron mentioned occurred, as far as we can determine from the stuff that came out when they were on trial, because neo-fascist elements in the Italian security services and military wanted to create a breakdown in law and order, as a rationale for a neo-fascist military coup.
Are you suggesting that this is also the case here? If not, then what's the supposed motivation?
Are you suggesting that this is also the case here? If not, then what's the supposed motivation?
pk
drink flounce rinse repeat
butchersapron said:
Have I ever told you you're a cunt, BTW?
Remind me to do so next time.
Nobody likes a smartarse, especially one who knows more about this shit than the conspiranoids.
And especially one who lets Fela Fan off.
You ruined my night. Hope you're happy.
Cunt.
I guess if it was black ops - "you'd have known"...
pk
drink flounce rinse repeat
Jazzz said:Great point ed. As opposed of course, to the precedent of mass murder in the UK by homegrown suicide bombers?
David Copeland was close.
Was he part of the "black ops" too?
Jazzz - what evidence do you think you have that 7/7 was committed by anyone but the well documented students of those mad mullahs of Manningham?
A wasted day trip to Birmingham doesn't quite qualify as evidence, especially as your last accountable proof is written in Urdu 5000 miles away, thus far untranslated...
Have you seen laptop's tagline?pk said:
Of course, one wonders why he has used small deltas rather than capitals, since he isn't seeking to differentiate. In fact why not just use v for velocity instead? But more to the point, what a ridiculous tagline. I think he is trying to imply 'gravitas' by putting the formula for 'gravity' in there.
Similar threads
- Locked
