Very well, a polite question to Prole.
On this thread you have been suggesting that the four men accused by the government of perpetrating the July 7th attacks as suicide bombers were innocent of the attacks.
Can you indicate how you square your views with the recently released video of one of them ranting about the imminent atrocity and glorifying in his imminent actions?
Prole said:I have always maintained that the principle of innocent until proven guilty (more imortant methinks in the absence of due process) is what is at stake here.
The videos? Well, I reckon that if 2 young lads from Beeston Leeds are able to track down the al'Q high command and make so-called confession videos with the likes of al-Zarqawi, in an operation run (presumably from a cave with internet access) by an American 'convert to Islam' Adam Pearlman/Gadahan (whose grandfather was on the board of directors of the ADL), why the f*** has it taken nearly 5 years for the combined intelligence & security forces of the 'coalition of the Kiliing' NOT to find them.
Ask the important questions methinks.
Well, it seemed to me that if you're questioning the guilt of the four alleged perpetrators, your reaction to a taped confession-in-advance by one of them might be an important question to ask you about. Why are you calling it a "so-called confession" video?
But anyway, you've simply not started to answer the question, so I'll ask again. Do you regard the contents of the tape that was broadcast recently as being problematic at all for your theory that the four men are innocent?
And there is no such thing as the "Al Qaeda high command" .... have you read Jason Burke's excellent and superbly-researched "Al Qaeda" which explains the etymology of the phrase and the myth that "Al Qaeda" is some sort of shadowy Bond-type organisation?