Sid's Snake
New Member
zArk said:
So, they were all puppets
The 7/7 Report
- Thread starter TAE
- Start date
So, they were all puppets
Sid's Snake said:By the way what does Said say about suicide motivation?
I always like to hear Said
Cant recall anything Said said about suicide (if he did indeed mention it), but there is a volume of work upon cultural retaliation against dominance which develops specifically within and through that dominance.
The most commonly known resulting author today is probably Chomsky.
Sid's Snake said:So, they were all puppets
Nah, i wouldnt deny them agency or self-will but i would say that procedures are rarely broken without reprisal.
n.b i am not talking about the lads, but the villification and classification of them through religion [more specifically Islam] by the media, intelligence services and politicians. Its the inconsistancies in the logical framework that the media et al uses that i am attempting to draw out.
Sid's Snake
New Member
zArk said:
Oh, OK, Im with you
Im focusing on the lads themselves, so coming at it from another POV...
Blair seems incoherent to me. I read the media fairly thoroughly, a year ago, when I happened, and remember very very clearly what was said then compared to what is being said now...
Factual stuff, not interpretation.
Its just incredible how much of what was printed that month last year was just absolute bollocks. Journalists desperate, desperate for detail...
The Egyptian Chemist, the "2000 mourners" at Tanweers funeral ( there were 200 ) I will never take on the spot reporting seriously ever again.
Sid's Snake said:
I think the initial reports are more important in retrospect as diverse and multi angled approaches open out a variety avenues that are held up for contestation as the 'facts'.
Blair at the G8 blaming Islamic Extremists on the evening of the attack, the 7th ffs. (how did he know anything, he clearly didnt, but had to blame some group that the public would believe and think "oh, the .gov are in control") and the psuedo-al-qaeda group website claiming the attack -- what were they called "the peoples front of al-qaeda" or "the real al-qaeda", summit like that.
The press loved it. All mannar of reporters and presenters clambering over the story while the investigative journalists (not many left) sat around writing very little.
Sid's Snake
New Member
zArk said:
Er, well, not really - unless you can see a hidden agenda behind the sludge of factoids and pagefilling I can't.
There are facts in the case, as well as 'facts.'
This is why its important to take a look at the boys themselves now and again to escape the trap of getting bogged down in spin and ideology ( and theology. )
Sid's Snake said:
Truely. And with most 'facts', they are infused with meaning which impact upon other 'facts'. Muslim - young - english - familymen - extremism.
It is quite difficult to dodge ideology as the facts of any case are handpicked except for the glaringly obvious eg. explosions on underground and bus. The rest of the facts eg. one lad going for a macdonalds and one lad walking around Boots are seeped in ideology; comsumerism, undercover, false-identity, globalisation, normal behaviour.
Even investigating the lads background is difficult as it is partial and media reported facts.
It is important that the media have integrity and trust, which develops over time, yet since i began reading the press i have found no reason to trust or believe, in whole, the press.
Hidden agenda, cant see one, yet analysis of text and information is a bottomless tunnel that folds back into itself, so seeing an agenda in the press would be like seeing faces in clouds. I prefer to think of it like a program that allows plug ins from 'authenticated' sources, like Web 2.0. If the program has introduced to it a conflicting code, its one or the other; the entire network crumbles or the conflicting code is modified to fit.
Prole said:
Um... Prole dearest, have you read the faq about posting people's personal details...? Oh, and you might want to think again about posting the full headers. Dunno if its you that lives in Dorset, but in two quick'n'easy steps I have their full name and home address. And after a bit'o'fun talking to the email server, I also have their email address.
Its a good thing I'm not a lizard...!
editor
hiraethified
Seeing as the owner of that idiotic site with the talking mutt is both a proven liar (see his fraudulent claims about being a charity) and an obvious bullshitter (see his laughable claims about the supposed 'false flag' operation on 6/6), why do you attach any credibility to his claims?Prole said:
Can you just confirm that you recieved the information and that it verified the Chris Hudson Thameslink email and actual train times on July 7th that is contained on the Financial Outrage website.editor said:
Or is it a case of shoot the messenger if you don't like the message?
And please don't ask for stuff like email headers if it is wrong to then post them.
editor
hiraethified
So you find the bloke with the talking terrier at Financial Outrage to be an impeccable, highly credible source and have zero doubts about how he's presented his claims, yes?Prole said:
Seeing as it's a piece of piss to forge headers (or perhaps not give the full context of the email conversation), perhaps you might explain why you have no doubts at all on the matter, especially when it's coming from someone who is still fraudulently claiming to be a charity?
The email is from Chris Hudson @ Thameslink which states the actual times of the trains from Luton Thameslink on 7th July. The one I posted here independently verifies the content of the email on the Financial Outrage site. I happen to know the person that the original email was sent to as he is a member of the July 7th Truth Campaign.editor said:
On the other hand you can shoot the messenger it's a well tried and tested method when facts (yes facts for a change) challenge one's perception or in this case the official report into July 7th which is what this thread is about.
The fact that Chris Hudson's, the Communications Manager for Thameslink, email happens to be on a site that you can challenge does not make it any less credible. It has also been verified independently.
What is incredible is the way some here still refuse to accept that the official report is a crock and prefer instead to find ways of discrediting the information that challenges this crock.
If the evidence was released showing these 4 young men in London on the 7th July then the case for the official story will have been made and I can shut up but until then .....
http://www.financialoutrage.org.uk/thameslink_database1.htm
This is the original email that was verified by Chris Hudson of Thameslink and received by a member of July 7th Truth Campaign.
This is the original email that was verified by Chris Hudson of Thameslink and received by a member of July 7th Truth Campaign.
One CCTV image from Luton station would be easy to fake as well I presume? Especially if previous images from the 28/6 were available?jæd said:Ho-hum -- email headers are stunningly easily to fake...!
And before Ed jumps on me that I am not an expert in CCTV images I did write to the picture editors of the Evening Standard and the Independent and asked if they could explain the strange effect of bars through the face and body of the unrecognisable figure that we are told is Khan. And no, they never replied.
Sometimes it takes courage...
Seeing isn't believing. The print version carried the image across a two-page spread.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/story/0,,1806794,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/story/0,,1806794,00.html
Similar threads
- Locked
