7/7 Opinions

Von Luck · 6 Oct 2006 at 15:53

Teki187 said:
Why not question it? Why take everything at face value? Why accept everything your told is true?

Because otherwise you start looking like a paranoid loon on internet forums?

Teki187 · 6 Oct 2006 at 15:53

iCraig said:
So what are you saying happened then? Maybe the delayed eyewitness isn't 100% positive she identified the terrorist. Yet it's irrelevant because we know a terrorist on there blew up the bus, eye witnesses saw the bus explode, forensic evidence off the bus. Dead bodies etc etc etc

Don't misquote the information. Originally the BBC report was incorrect, they highlighted the wrong train. This mistake was omitted later.

Not directly no. But the government have to be careful on how much information they disclose on how they conduct investigations, especially forensic and technological investigations. If the police exposed everything into the public domain on exactly what they're doing and how they're doing it, they would be giving potential terrorists a lot of information, and even a way to adapt to it. What the terrorists don't know, they can't fight.

Number three: Likewise such information could compromise ongoing inquiries or expose intelligence sources.

But for the sake of arguement, let's say the police decided to release the irrelevant and academic CCTV footage. What would that do? How would that change anything? Are you expecting to see Tony Blair on CCTV giving them instructions or something?

What am i expecting to see, well to be honest im not sure, something to back either opinions up.

Teki187 · 6 Oct 2006 at 15:54

Von Luck said:
Because otherwise you start looking like a paranoid loon on internet forums?

Anyone who doesnt conform to the social boundries is classed as a loon/crazy/outsider.

Teki187 · 6 Oct 2006 at 15:56

iCraig said:
Yes. Do you suggest they can't? What image of the terrorists do you have?

Some asian looking blokes in a dusty cave jotting down anti-west sketches on the back of fag packets?

No, my image is of planted terror leaders funded by the us goverment doing as there told.

iCraig · 6 Oct 2006 at 15:56

Teki187 said:
Anyone who doesnt conform to the social boundries is classed as a loon/crazy/outsider.

So we make our choice and believe that 7/7 was orchestrated by terrorists and automatically we are the ones conforming to social boundaries?

What do you mean social boundaries? Are you trying to sound profound, like, we're not the ones fighting the system, we're not raging against the machine?

Teki187 · 6 Oct 2006 at 15:58

iCraig said:
So we make our choice and believe that 7/7 was orchestrated by terrorists and automatically we are the ones conforming to social boundaries?

What do you mean social boundaries? Are you trying to sound profound, like, we're not the ones fighting the system, we're not raging against the machine?

People follow the path before them, others create there own path.

People who follow social boundaries are following the path laid out for them, people who arnt following, create there own.

Von Luck · 6 Oct 2006 at 15:59

Teki187 said:
Anyone who doesnt conform to the social boundries is classed as a loon/crazy/outsider.

Ooh you rebel you! Why do I have a worrying feeling that you own a leather trenchcoat?

Teki187 · 6 Oct 2006 at 15:59

Von Luck said:
Ooh you rebel you! Why do I have a worrying feeling that you own a leather trenchcoat?

Heh your safe, i down own one.

iCraig · 6 Oct 2006 at 16:00

Teki187 said:
No, my image is of planted terror leaders funded by the us goverment doing as there told.

So you don't believe that the figure heads of Al Queda exist? They're fabricated by the government? Interesting. For what purpose are they created by the government, and furthermore what evidence do you have that shows that these terrorist master minds are planted?

iCraig · 6 Oct 2006 at 16:05

Teki187 said:
People follow the path before them, others create there own path.

People who follow social boundaries are following the path laid out for them, people who arnt following, create there own.

You're trying to be existential here and it doesn't work because just because you choose to take a different belief to others doesn't make you more enlightened or anything.

Everybody drives on the left in this country, I'm going to drive on the right. I'm not a maniac, I'm just making my own path in life and not following boundaries.

The_TailGunner · 6 Oct 2006 at 16:06

Teki187 said:
READY TO STRIKE THE ROOT!

[

i love striking the root

Teki187 · 6 Oct 2006 at 16:08

iCraig said:
So you don't believe that the figure heads of Al Queda exist? They're fabricated by the government? Interesting. For what purpose are they created by the government, and furthermore what evidence do you have that shows that these terrorist master minds are planted?

No i believe bin laden exists, but i believe that he is paid for by the US.

There created by the government to create terror networks and problems within the country to destablise the governments in power allowing for regime change. Good example is of Bush Sr funding terrorism acts to remove the russians from Kazakhstan.

The proof is infact in said documentries on the internet.

chimaera · 6 Oct 2006 at 16:16

Teki187 said:
No i believe bin laden exists, but i believe that he is paid for by the US.

There created by the government to create terror networks and problems within the country to destablise the governments in power allowing for regime change. Good example is of Bush Sr funding terrorism acts to remove the russians from Kazakhstan.

The proof is infact in said documentries on the internet.

The taliban was used against the russians just like the northern confederation was used against the taliban, they were a tool to save US soldiers from actually going in and doing their own dirty work.

Morally wrong maybe, but you can't say the US government funds terrorism just because they funded the taliban back when they both wanted rid of the russians, as the saying goes "is the enemy of my enemy my friend?", obviously not in this case.

So can you explain why we have a terror network in the UK, is Blair trying to get regime change? :eek:

omg thats the sinister plot! he's trying to become general blair the dictator.

Sometimes its just nutcases with extreme beliefs who look on the internet and find how to make big bombs out of fertiliser and over the counter chemicals...

Teki187 · 6 Oct 2006 at 16:22

chimaera said:
The taliban was used against the russians just like the northern confederation was used against the taliban, they were a tool to save US soldiers from actually going in and doing their own dirty work.

Morally wrong maybe, but you can't say the US government funds terrorism just because they funded the taliban back when they both wanted rid of the russians, as the saying goes "is the enemy of my enemy my friend?", obviously not in this case.

So can you explain why we have a terror network in the UK, is Blair trying to get regime change? omg thats the sinister plot! he's trying to become general blair the dictator.

Sometimes its just nutcases with extreme beliefs who look on the internet and find how to make big bombs out of fertiliser and over the counter chemicals...

Who says we have a terror network in england? BBC? ITN? Or Tony Blair, have you SEEN these so called terror networks? Or do you believe everything you read in the media?

iCraig · 6 Oct 2006 at 16:26

Teki187 said:
Who says we have a terror network in england? BBC? ITN? Or Tony Blair, have you SEEN these so called terror networks? Or do you believe everything you read in the media?

Christ almighty. You can apply it to everything then. That logic doesn't work.

Have you ever seen the Taj Mahal apart from photographs and books? It might not exist.

Have you ever seen a blue whale, apart from photographs and books? It might not exist.

chimaera · 6 Oct 2006 at 16:26

Teki187 said:
Who says we have a terror network in england? BBC? ITN? Or Tony Blair, have you SEEN these so called terror networks? Or do you believe everything you read in the media?

How about all the people who went out dressed as terrorists during the protests a few months ago.

How about the evidence presented at the Old Bailey regarding the brothers who bought half a ton of industrial grade fertiliser which can easily be converted to make bombs.

How about the video's left behind by the 7/7 bombers proclaiming themselves as martyrs to the cause.

How about the immans at finsbury park mosque who stated in the evening standard not long ago that their mosque had been taken over by extremist fanatics.

Obviously i've never seen them, if i had they wouldn't be a very good terror network

Lets be honest, the evidence for there being numerous terror networks is strong, the evidence showing that they are a figment of Blairs/BBC's imagination is non existent.

Teki187 · 6 Oct 2006 at 16:27

iCraig said:
Christ almighty. You can apply it to everything then. That logic doesn't work.

Have you ever seen the Taj Mahal apart from photographs and books? It might not exist.

Have you ever seen a blue whale, apart from photographs and books? It might not exist.

But you cant login to google earth and look at a terror network can you?

ElRazur · 6 Oct 2006 at 16:28

lol, i love this thread.

One star from me...and please dont vote it down!

chimaera · 6 Oct 2006 at 16:30

Teki187 said:
But you cant login to google earth and look at a terror network can you?

I could be in the captain kurk fan club for all you know, you can't see it from google earth, but can you say the fan club doesn't exist?

Your arguements are increasingly irrational.

iCraig · 6 Oct 2006 at 16:32

Teki187 said:
But you cant login to google earth and look at a terror network can you?

Oh my god. A terror network isn't something like that though is it? It's groups of organisations, extremists and figureheads. How are you going to see them?

I applied that example to a building, you obviously can't adapt my logic to understand that just because you can't physically see something with your eyes, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Travel to Iraq and Afganistan. You'll meet a part of the network, the extremist fighters. Wait, let me guess. We're not really at war either, the troops are being led into a big charade where they are fighting imaginery targets.