Guest chucky.egg Posted July 3, 2007 Report Share Posted July 3, 2007 You know you've stumbled into a bun fight when everyone is quoting each other. Did you know Princess Di is still alive and living in a bedsit in Clapham? /me runs away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dazzler22 Posted July 5, 2007 Report Share Posted July 5, 2007 I was sincerely hoping this would be an intelligent debate. Your best response appears to be name-calling, which is disappointing. I have tried to offer some alternative opinions as to the nature of the media circus surrounding the 'war on terror'. I sincerely hoped that this thread might at least encourage some people to think a little deeper about the media. yes, I do believe that EVERYTHING we hear is controlled propaganda. no, I do not believe for one second that the media is there to keep the govt in check - I do believe that is how it is SUPPOSED to be, but its not how it is. now, come on ... if you have read up on 9/11 & how it was definitely terrorists, then post me a link so I can read your sources. maybe you could change my mind! Hi there, I havent posted here very often, but on seeing a thread like this...... im an avid reader of ATS, I have been ever since 2001, I watched the attacks on 9/11 live on the bbc, I diddent believe it as i watched it and i dont believe it now, fast forward to this latest "attack" on the uk, a botched attempt that was "only just" stopped, well how convienient, just as Mr Brown takes office. What a perfect event to show that he has the "strength and power" to deal with a terrist threat.... what crap! if it looks too good to be true it is! all of these so called terrorists, where did they come from? well if you do the investigation 9 times out of 10 they where trained and funded by us or the united states, we caused this problem and we caused it so that the population could be controlled, I have tried never to "preach" this stuff as the government and mass media have traind the public to laugh at such allogations, unfortunatly they are all documented by the very people saying it is rubbish. read into this stuff, then pass the judgement, I researched so should all of you, oh and DrBlow, I think i agree with your earlier post, what happend to ATS lately, (well last 2 years!) its full of people toting the line of "we are all doomed" but then is it really the public saying this.... lol got to love ATS! thats the speech over, "dont have nightmares! :P" Cheers Dazzler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mcwarre Posted July 18, 2007 Report Share Posted July 18, 2007 I haven't read all the replies so apologies. I grew up south of Dr Blow. I also know what terrorism is (actual rather than the "homebrew" kits we have seen with the airport issues). I have also tried to do something about it (member of HM Forces). People talk of gas cannisters going off. Not nice but you want to see what semtex does. Life is about risks. Driving is a risk; so is flying. People are more scared of flying, yet, driving is more 'risky' - btw I am not "mouthing off" I do safety and risk assessment for a living. Life is not black and white; it is mainly grey and it is up to us, as individuals, to balance and accept this risk. People are too easily lead by media who are interested in selling papers/airtime to create problems where there are actually none. Use your common sense and brain. We are too quick to say that this is a government issue - it is your issue. We can create a world where there is no terror (kill them all) or risk (avoid it) but then we would be just as bad as the terrorists or those willing to live in a risk-free bubble. It's life. It's not easy. Get on with it. Then again there are so many benefits. Walk to the top of a mountain (risky but good exercise). Look at the view. Worth it???? Yes. Go on holiday on a cheap flight. Worth the risk? When was the last time someone was killed by a terrorist on a flight/at an airport??? The case for the defence rests M'Lord. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest drblow Posted July 18, 2007 Report Share Posted July 18, 2007 Wise words indeed fella! :) I was fairly disappointed with the lack of interest in this thread. I thought most people would have had an opinion either way, and I thought it was an emotive enough issue to coax more people to respond. I thought more people would have cared enough about the situation after the relentless media onslaught, or would have at least cared enough to come & tell me to shut up!? Maybe I'm just getting old ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Skeese Posted July 18, 2007 Report Share Posted July 18, 2007 Some people were just born blind in this world... Enough said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest drblow Posted July 20, 2007 Report Share Posted July 20, 2007 Take a look at this ... BBC news report Another doctor has been 'charged' in connection with the Glasgow airport attacks. The only reference I can see in the article to actual charges is that this giuy has been accused of 'conspiring' with others. It doesnt even say conspiring to 'commit terrorist acts' or 'to make an explosion' ... no mention of the actual charge at all. Now, considering this guy is in court today, shouldn't there realy be an actual charge against him? Like 'under article such and such ... charged with ...'? Shouldn't the media know what the charge is? Usually in the media we hear about a man in court today charged with 'xxx'. It would appear to me that the media is unaware of the actual charge against this man ... why is that? Surely if the Police had solid evidence of his involvement in a terrorist incident, then they would have released it to the media in order to convince people like me that it's true? The doctor arrested in Australia has been charged with ... wait for it ... 'supplying a mobile phone sim card' ... ??????????????????????? I ask you all - WTF??????? Are the Police going to make mass arrests in every mobile phone shop around the globe? Since when was supplying a sim card a crime? The only reference to mobile phones that I can find in this entire shameful episode is that allegedly in the London car devices, a mobile phone was supposed to be used as a detonation trigger (never heard of that one before ... whatever happened to good old remote controls!?) The reports about this guy supplying the sim card don't actually detail what it was for, or why on earth that should be considered to be part of some plot. I aske everyone who reads this to read the BBC report. Ask yourself if it presents a reasonable case. Imagine for a second that the guy in question is not Asian, but white. Is there any actual reasons given to believe that this guy has anything to do with anything? The article quickly moves on from the accusation of 'conspiring' to describe other arrests. It is just filling up the page with other nonsense, designed to tell you something, but ultimately nothing. Designed to give you zero information, but allow your paranoia to fill in the huge gaps. Designed to make the Glasgow incident appear to be the work of a 'network' without actually presenting any information or evidence of such. What do you reckon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest drblow Posted July 27, 2007 Report Share Posted July 27, 2007 4) The Police have said that the arrests on the M6 and the searches etc in Liverpool, Stoke and Staffordshire are related. I tend to believe the police when they tell me things like that - as they know they will look silly if they got it wrong. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/6918569.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest chucky.egg Posted July 27, 2007 Report Share Posted July 27, 2007 Prosecutors had claimed that the doctor's SIM card had been found in the burning car that crashed into Glasgow international airport on 30 June. But it later emerged the card had actually been found in a flat in Liverpool, some 300km (185 miles) from Glasgow, where his cousin lived. Easy mistake I suppose - burning car, flat 300Km away. Any one of us could have mixed those up. :) WTF? I think you may have converted me Doc (not to some radical Islamic cult, although I did once lend my phone to a friend) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mind_Rx Posted July 27, 2007 Report Share Posted July 27, 2007 I was surprised to see this thread on MoDaCo...but pleasantly surprised that such a serious matter is being discussed. My personal opinion is not to trust the media. And I guess I have my own system to filter out and flag up things that I feel suspicious about. And I am sure this is not fool proof but I believe that its a matter of improving with more knowledge and display of "media blunders". And I believe its a shame that we have to put up with these things in spite of being in a democratic country. In this sense, there is no real democracy in its true meaning if people at large are basing their opinions on "spin". For example, when Gordon Brown took office, the government made a concious effort to think how they refer the earlier so-called "islamic terrorist"...they decided to tone down, may be more appropriately, and decided to go with the word "criminals" without qualifying it with adjectives to suggest blame towards any religion, community or country. Although this could be argued both ways, and some may think that it actually trivialises their offence, as a criminal could be some one who stole a beer can from the corner shop too, my point is, if there is enough thought and political might, backed with media agenda-backed support, anything is believable and at the same time, anything can be dismissed as a "spin". Being a medical professional myself, we come across many spins in medical journals, where in results are doctored to be favourable or otherwise, depending who is doing the research. Faith doesnt actually need evidence. One can very well provide many to support it, but its paramount to believe first. Be it religion or someone's "faith" in the media. So if someone really believes the govt is behind some of these terror threats then they will seek evidence to support it, and vice-versa. Being rational and taking the middle way is not an easy thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mind_Rx Posted July 27, 2007 Report Share Posted July 27, 2007 (edited) The irony is that although doctors were voted the most trusted profession, we see a doctor do such a foolish and atrocious act. The journalists who came last in that particular poll, reported it. Spin?? :) Peace. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6105616.stm Edited July 27, 2007 by Mind_Rx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest drblow Posted July 27, 2007 Report Share Posted July 27, 2007 I think you may have converted me Doc (not to some radical Islamic cult, although I did once lend my phone to a friend) Excellent! :P All I wanted to do with this was get a discussion going that might just help a few people to see things ... more clearly! In my dreams one day we will all wake up ... there'll be a general election & nobody will vote ...then they'llall have to go & get proper jobs & leave the rest of us alone. I was surprised to see this thread on MoDaCo...but pleasantly surprised that such a serious matter is being discussed. I'm glad you did. I think half the problem is that if you discuss this kind of thing with people they really think you're being all 'serious'. In my experience the vast majority of the world is happier talking about football, shopping, the weather ... god forbid someone try to start a conversation about politics! I guess it's also because often people get very emotional about these types of subjects, and don't want to start an argument, which in my experience it often becomes! :) Being a medical professional myself, we come across many spins in medical journals, where in results are doctored to be favourable or otherwise, depending who is doing the research. No pun intended ... eh? ;) Thankfully in my recent experience this Glasgow thing seems to have turned more people towards my kind of thinking than the other way, certainly in Scotland. There is a general feeling that theseminor incidents are at least being cooked up into somethign they are not in the media, and politicians are at the least using them to try to influence people's thinking. The recent debate about extending the period of holding terrorist suspects to 56 days (or whatever) is a prime example of that. I wouldn't be suprised if that was exactly what the purpose of this Glasgow 'attack' was. I saw something the other day about people being sentenced to years in prison for having 'terrorist related materials' on their computers. I mean ... COME ON! These people have been imprisoned for possession of literature! I don't care if it is a book entitled 'Learn to become a terrorist & murder people - how to do it in 5 easy steps' by Osama Bin Laden. There are plenty of books that instruct people in how to commit 'terrorist' attacks, that encourage revolution, encourage people to defy the state & government ... Karl Marx, Hitler, Chairman Mao ... the American Constitution & the Bill of Rights ... the Bible??!! If people can be imprisoned for possession of literature, no matter what it's content, then we no longer live in the 'Free world'. End of story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BustaK Posted August 9, 2007 Report Share Posted August 9, 2007 I'm not defending Bill or his theories, their content, but Bill Cooper was betrayed and then cold blooded murdered by his government and most of his people he defended, by a plot thought by none other than those he set out to show up, and those he wanted to be enlightened to behind the scenes happenings of their land 'n' lives; whether he interpreted them correctly or incorrectly, and to what degree, I'm not in a position to say. Suffice to say, that the fella was very astute, learned, fearless, morally respectable and candid, had a history of utmost truthfulness and was in a very high secrecy position that VERY few actually speak out from or have been in. The slogan "More than 99.99999%" fits him in this bill of knowing above that many, quite nicely. (no pun) The media is like a toy and a tool of the government to control, feed and shape us, the civic, the more western the more that is true according to my experience, because of the financial incentives involved, the esoteric values, threats, commitments and aims lurking in the hither scenes beyond our awareness. There is NO way on earth a single piece of what they present I even pay attention to beyond a propaganda laden acrimonious campaign full of bogus material. In recent times, prior to Americas fascist crusade on the Muslim world, this was less effective. I would never believe a word of what anyone stated on the street who I had not met before, talking about my house being on fire while my Lamborghini door was open 10 meters away from us both in our vicinity, and knowing that he doesn't even know me or my house. So why should I believe any person being PAID to provide sentimentally arousing and emotionally rollercoaster incepting material presented by the media? Are they priests, gurus, rabbis, mahadevas, saints, walis or prophets that they can never lie and are known for their honesty, moral justice and commitement to unbiased truth? That's akin to me employing a federal lawyer or a politician to teach me the truth of the world. What a disaster, if any, that eclipses Vietnam terrorism! :) One major theory behind the media outlets is the amount of rigmarole they tend to spew out in any one given time... it seems repetitive shenanigans without quality or factual content tend to be accepted by society, once regurgitated in their face over months, suddenly they become passively accepted truths - systematic indoctrinization. This occurs in my field of science all too often too. It's a complete farce that the occidental nations, especially, have come to solely and blindly have acolyte faith in media/government, like the coming of Christ. There's a psychological aspect in all this; if you make little use of the brain in assessment and analysis by principles, you tend to believe those of your race, color, religion and nation over anyone else. Majorities. Many wise men can look over this little farcical to see the sense and beyond the muddy waters. The Glasgow, or any preceding and forthcoming such events are what some of we read and traveled individuals in the medical societies recognize as "systematic indoctrinisation to an anathema terrorist agenda of political entities espousing one another's cause of territorial colonization and unanimous standardization with mass market heavy-handed financial bonuses, long planned". To make "we" the King and everyone else obedient to us omnipotent elitists anyway we can get that to happen. Since "we" have control and knowledge of all happenings given to us by the citizens which they don't, we can concoct anything beyond their grasp and knowledge, a perfect means to meet our demands, regardless of the immediate cost or loss to "our" citizens. They have government "think tanks" for a reason. :D The new "buzz word" they chose to hype and get this religious cult following is "terrorism" - sounds so emphatic, befuddles the senses to a militaristic devotion. What would you do if all global "powers that be" were immorally bent on destruction and capture of others at any cost? I doubt anything but comply and hardly recognize the political dance. Oh yeah, all this route also gives a natural alibi to feed the twisted and mostly, mentally lunatically perverted bands of soldiers in militia (less in any national forces but good 'ol, er, young, America) love of porn, free mass rapes, free supply of women they can imitate what they learn from their 20 years of blue movies on, incessant forced homosexuality, lewd incest, unbound beer and drunkly intoxicated torture, mutilations and killings. Why allow it nationally, open the doors to wipe out those we hate the most and are most alienated from quicker. Our aims are further back than 1050000BCE, to consolidate a barbarian world comprising of political chauvinism, cultural racism, international terrorism, genocide, tyranny, rape and plunder of masses of "others"; by "we" the technologically advanced and financially superior pale colored beasts of planet Earth, for money, luxury, power and a world of no boundaries and limits in exploiting others. :P OK. I came across rather sternly deep there, but as profound as it is, lest it become confusing and parabolic, it highlights the gist of my anger at all this occurring contemporaneously around us, and my shame of being an American born and jointly British bred pale skin educated individual. One whose lived and traveled to Iraq, Syria, KSA, UAE, Kuwait, Sudan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, China and many more nations as part of my triennial profession in life, and thats pre, during and post all the pre-emptive and pre-conceived injustice and invasions. Thomas wanted to create a liberally morally bounded nation in respect of social needs, justice, equality and well-being first. He and his band of colleagues were extreme terrorists from the British perspective, just like the modern Greek ancestors were to the Ottomans when they rebelled against their rulers and allied secretly and deceptively with the powerful nations of Britain and Russia to defeat the Ottomans and win an independent land to govern. Any amount of rhetorical sophistry and spin could be applied to portray that back then, which is what happens now and is readily thrown in our faces in commonly met events. Thomas got the first aim of liberalization to no ends and peaks, but the exploitation of the first was all the ruin of the latter aims. "Every nation oscillates in history, once a king, next a slave" - here's hoping 50-100 years from now, the backlash isn't as bad as the atrocities which it succeeds. Peace ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest drblow Posted August 10, 2007 Report Share Posted August 10, 2007 Wow! :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Skeese Posted August 10, 2007 Report Share Posted August 10, 2007 (edited) Some videos you people might find interesting...It's upto you what you make out of them Video1 Video2 Edited August 10, 2007 by Skeese Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest drblow Posted August 10, 2007 Report Share Posted August 10, 2007 Nice post! I've seen the 2nd one before. I'mnot sure about the whole "explosives" theory - but there is quite a bit of evidence that indicates it. I much prefer theories that involve the old MI6/IRA tactic, which was they used to gather impressionable youngsters in Belfast under the guise of being a dissident Republican terrorist group, initiate them, indoctrinate them & then send them off on an assassination mission, which would then be thwarted by the Police (who were obviously being tipped off the entire time). This accomplished 2 goals for the British - they got to publicise a news story about how effective the anti-terrorist branch was, and the Republican movement recieved negative publicity as a result. I wager that the CIA is/has been/always will be using tactics like this to "create" Al-Queda. It's a pretty good system to use - the terrorists are "real" in the sense that they actually believe they are conducting operations for AQ, when/if they are arrested then they are unaware that they have been used as pawns (they think they really are AQ), if anyone else stumbles across the plot then there is sufficient "deniablity" for the authorities, and ultimately they can create any number of different scenarios that they want to happen. It's the PNAC (Project for the New American Century) statements that really worry me. They openly discussed pre-9/11 about how a "new Pearl Harbour" was necessary to allow the US to engage foreign (mainly oil producing) nations, under the guise of military action to "protect" the American public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now