for some reason the thread about the Brazillian shot in London got muddled with political conspiracies and the thread was closed. People might not agree with me but I found the conspiracy posts interesting.

So why don't you start a thread about conspiracy rather than a thread talking about starting a thread about conspiracy ;)

I think its a conspiracy myself. Starting threads about threads rather than what they are about in order to bring about a breakdown in communication and start a mass riot in cuba. This will lead to revolutions worldwide and an increase in sugar consumption meaning more money for the big corporations in order to pay for the discrimination cases brought about them,.

Dragon

I think CaroleK will have something to say about this. I think its also highly suspicious that the thread was started by Tulip, who is obviously an ex-British secret agent working for the neo-con military-industrial complex in the US. The purpose is obvious: to lure all conspiracy theorists into a false sense of security, so that they can be invited to a conference on conspiracy theories in remotest Idaho and then rounded up and sent to Gitmo (Guantanamo Bay). Fiendishly clever!

Originally posted by LordChaverly
I think CaroleK will have something to say about this. I think its also highly suspicious that the thread was started by Tulip, who is obviously an ex-British secret agent working for the neo-con military-industrial complex in the US. The purpose is obvious: to lure all conspiracy theorists into a false sense of security, so that they can be invited to a conference on conspiracy theories in remotest Idaho and then rounded up and sent to Gitmo (Guantanamo Bay). Fiendishly clever! Oh no, you have blown my cover! I thought the tiny town of Emmett, ID would be the perfect hideaway - you rumbled me. I'll have to try my luck elsewhere now.

I think you should start a career working for MI5 or Interpol LordC.:D

Originally posted by Tony
So why don't you start a thread about conspiracy rather than a thread talking about starting a thread about conspiracy ;) Well, I was hoping someone else would make the first serious post and then I wouldn't get into trouble but you've ruined my tactics now:)

Tulip ,

Just take a look out of your window. See that guy who just looks like Donald Rumsfeldt----well , it is him.

Originally posted by tulip
for some reason the thread about the Brazillian shot in London got muddled with political conspiracies and the thread was closed. People might not agree with me but I found the conspiracy posts interesting.


The thing people are being kept away from, tulip, is that SOMEBODY conspired to bomb the London underground. But it you reject 'official' suspects - the poor muslims down the road - and consider other options then you're all of a sudden a 'nutter' ... !!!


I don't think it was right to close the thread either. Conversations do tend to wander, in their natural course, and the extra comments and debates were all in the same area and related.

We're not school children. Hopefully the mods will remember that.

And whats all this 'closed for pruning' ? Are some posts gonna be taken out?

Hm, wonder which ones ...

It seemed to me that there was a fair tooing and froing of opinions from both sides. The 'officialoons' too. :)

Originally posted by Fareast
Tulip ,

Just take a look out of your window. See that guy who just looks like Donald Rumsfeldt----well , it is him. In that case he's in the cornfield, the sneaky bugger! The sweetcorn is only over 6 feet tall and covers about ten acres. I better put on my Durango boots and take my blunderbuss over there. Don't worry, I'll catch him and ask him a few awkward questions!:D

Originally posted by CaroleK
The thing people are being kept away from, tulip, is that SOMEBODY conspired to bomb the London underground. But it you reject 'official' suspects - the poor muslims down the road - and consider other options then you're all of a sudden a 'nutter' ... !!!


I don't think it was right to close the thread either. Conversations do tend to wander, in their natural course, and the extra comments and debates were all in the same area and related.

We're not school children. Hopefully the mods will remember that.

And whats all this 'closed for pruning' ? Are some posts gonna be taken out?

Hm, wonder which ones ...

It seemed to me that there was a fair tooing and froing of opinions from both sides. The 'officialoons' too. :) Conversations that stray off topic are VERY unpopular on here. If the thread is being pruned I suspect the posts relating to conspiracies will be taken out but I think we all should be able to air our views.

I tend to be in trouble a lot for straying off topic because I reply the last post. I can't see the problem but then that's why I get into trouble because I'm 'bloody minded'. The mods. say it's a tedious task having to remove all the off topic related posts and wastes their time. Hopefully this new thread will be deemed ok:)

' The mods. say it's a tedious task having to remove all the off topic related posts and wastes their time.' - tulip

Makes you wonder why they bother. They seem to be the only ones concerned about non-official speculation.

But I'm sure we could take on this likkle task for them, tulip.

Think they'd go for it? ;)

I f you beleive in some kind of conspiracy I think you are mistaken, its all to do with the islamic faith and how its translated,nothing to do with conspiracy.
As to the brazillian who was shot the fact is he should not have been in this country as he was a overstayer,his leave to remain had expired.

Originally posted by polish_lady
as to the brazillian who was shot the fact is he should not have been in this country as he was a overstayer,his leave to remain had expired.

so its ok to shoot him coz he's overstayed?

:loopy:

Originally posted by MTheo
so its ok to shoot him coz he's overstayed?

:loopy:


He would not have been shot had he obeyed the rules of your country and gone home when his visa expired.

Originally posted by polish_lady
He would not have been shot had he obeyed the rules of your country and gone home when his visa expired.

no..he would be detained and deported

Originally posted by MTheo
no..he would be detained and deported


Same thing he would NOT have been shot.

As someone pointed out on an earlier thread, his being an illegal immigrant has nothing to do with the fact he was shot. He could have been a legal non-English speaking tourist.

I previously thought the police did the only thing they could given the situation but now I am starting to have serious doubts. I have been told by someone in England that this man was not wearing a heavy coat but a denim jacket, he didn't jump over the rottweilers at the tube station but used his travel card to get through and the police offered no warnings. I was told this by someone close to me but it is second hand information. If this is all totally wrong then I will be on the phone to the girl who gave me false 'facts'.

I saw the 'eye witness' account of events at the tube station on the news here. The freelance journalist who went into so much detail about the short episode, it sounded scripted - like it was his scoop that he had written for whatever newspaper he was going to sell his story to.

Has anyone else got any info about this? I also heard the cctv cameras were not working even though London was on high security alert:confused:

I think it is very ironic that the thread about the Brazilian man being shot was closed because people wanted to talk about conspiracies. Now this thread has turned into the one that was closed! :confused:

Originally posted by tulip
I have been told by someone in England that this man was not wearing a heavy coat but a denim jacket, he didn't jump over the rottweilers at the tube station but used his travel card to get through and the police offered no warnings. I was told this by someone close to me but it is second hand information. If this is all totally wrong then I will be on the phone to the girl who gave me false 'facts'.


Those 'facts' were also posted by me in the very last message in the old thread before the mods closed it. Again they are not 'facts' but witness reports repeated by a newspaper, - can't now remember if it was the Times or the Independent.

We now have to be patient and await the results of the IPCC inquiry. The IPCC have been actively seeking eye-witnesses to the incident at Stockwell station and I assume they will also be asking journalists to reveal the identity of all the eye-witnesses they have been quoting.

ISTR that Tony intends to re-open the old thread once the 'conspiracy theories' material has been edited out, - if he doesn't then there's another conspiracy you can get your teeth into :D

Thanks Greybeard.

I suppose everything will be up in the air until the inquiry is over.

I hate the thought of conspiracies though. I don't want to feel like I'm burying my head in the sand. I'd rather know the truth about these things but until some kind of reliable evidence is put forward I want to keep an open mind:)

Originally posted by polish_lady

As to the brazillian who was shot the fact is he should not have been in this country as he was a overstayer,his leave to remain had expired.

You've gone off topic! This thread is about political conspiracies.

Will this thread now be closed, or will the off-topic posts get pruned? :confused:

Originally posted by redrobbo
You've gone off topic! This thread is about political conspiracies.

Will this thread now be closed, or will the off-topic posts get pruned? :confused: I'm guilty too :rolleyes: I get drawn into what other people are posting. I did try to point out the irony of this thread but carried on responding to the off topic stuff regardless:| I just can't help myself!

Originally posted by polish_lady
Same thing he would NOT have been shot. Purely out of curiosity, Can I ask why you have a quote by Adolf Hitler as your 'signature?

Originally posted by CaroleK
The thing people are being kept away from, tulip, is that SOMEBODY conspired to bomb the London underground. But it you reject 'official' suspects - the poor muslims down the road - and consider other options then you're all of a sudden a 'nutter' ... !!!


I don't think it was right to close the thread either. Conversations do tend to wander, in their natural course, and the extra comments and debates were all in the same area and related.

We're not school children. Hopefully the mods will remember that.

And whats all this 'closed for pruning' ? Are some posts gonna be taken out?

Hm, wonder which ones ...

It seemed to me that there was a fair tooing and froing of opinions from both sides. The 'officialoons' too. :)

I hope our comments dont get withdrawn CaroleK as yours in particular make me smile!

I respect anyones views and as Tulip stated i ejoyed reading the original thread. Your views are very extreme and i shake my head in disbeleif but still it makes interesting reading!

Originally posted by tulip
Purely out of curiosity, Can I ask why you have a quote by Adolf Hitler as your 'signature?

I think this is rather strange too, particularly if we take into account what Hitler (and also Stalin of course) did to the Poles during WW2. He also regarded Poles as sub-human.

Lord Chaverly ,

Although I agree with the nub of your comment , I must disagree on one point.
Certainly , Stalin treated the Poles extremely badly [ even the Polish Communists had to be very careful when dealing with Uncle Joe !] but my impression is that Stalin , whilst not fearing the Poles as a military force , had a grudging respect- cum- fear of them as being superior in many respects to the Soviet peoples.
The motives behind the Katyn massacres was to , "cut off the head " of any body of men who might later try to create a strong , independent Poland -----and thus leave a vacuum for Stalin's stooges to fill.
Whereas Hitler really did regard every non-Germanic race as inferior , Stalin was more pragmatic than that ; just as ruthless and cruel but I think for a different reason.

Originally posted by Fareast
Lord Chaverly ,

Although I agree with the nub of your comment , I must disagree on one point.
Certainly , Stalin treated the Poles extremely badly [ even the Polish Communists had to be very careful when dealing with Uncle Joe !] but my impression is that Stalin , whilst not fearing the Poles as a military force , had a grudging respect- cum- fear of them as being superior in many respects to the Soviet peoples.
The motives behind the Katyn massacres was to , "cut off the head " of any body of men who might later try to create a strong , independent Poland -----and thus leave a vacuum for Stalin's stooges to fill.
Whereas Hitler really did regard every non-Germanic race as inferior , Stalin was more pragmatic than that ; just as ruthless and cruel but I think for a different reason.

Fareast,

Quite so. I never said that Stalin mistreated the Poles for overtly racial reasons, although there was a longstanding hostility between Russians and Poles going back centuries (with the latter tending to regard themselves as culturally superior to the Russians and also Westward looking, being for example Catholic rather than Orthodox). The Soviets also resented the Poles for halting the Soviet westward expansion after the Bolshevik revolution (who now remembers the Russo-Polish war of 1919, when the Poles pushed the Russians back?). The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was basically a deal to carve up Poland between the Germans and Soviets, with the Germans taking western Poland and the Soviets eastern Poland, which is essentially what happened in 1939/40. In addition to doing nothing to prevent the crushing of the Warsaw uprising, Stalin also pushed the borders of Poland westwards after the war (what used to be Eastern Poland is now part of West Ukraine for example) and imposed a hated and repressive communist regime on Poland, one which the Poles did their best to get rid of in 1956 and at various points thereafter.

Yes , I agree that there had been historical tensions , wars and general antagonism between the Poles and the Russians for centuries and that Stalin was extremely cynical in his dealings with almost everyone.
What made me mention the subject is that in your post , it appears to say that Stalin regarded the Poles as , "sub-human ". I don't think that's how he thought of them but maybe I misunderstood you .
After the war , the old rogue , again for cynical reasons , no doubt , presented the Polish people with a gift , "for their contribution to the fight against fascism......etc..... "
It was the Palace of Soviets [or Peace and Culture ?] in Warsaw. I've seen it close up and it's a true , "wedding cake " monstrosity.
The Poles hated it and used to joke that the best view in Warsaw was from the top of it , as it was the only place in Warsaw where you couldn't actually see it. It's a good job their , "benefactor " couldn't hear them [!] and in fact died , 3 years [I think ] before it was completed.

Originally posted by Fareast
Yes , I agree that there had been historical tensions , wars and general antagonism between the Poles and the Russians for centuries and that Stalin was extremely cynical in his dealings with almost everyone.
What made me mention the subject is that in your post , it appears to say that Stalin regarded the Poles as , "sub-human ". I don't think that's how he thought of them but maybe I misunderstood you .
After the war , the old rogue , again for cynical reasons , no doubt , presented the Polish people with a gift , "for their contribution to the fight against fascism......etc..... "
It was the Palace of Soviets [or Peace and Culture ?] in Warsaw. I've seen it close up and it's a true , "wedding cake " monstrosity.
The Poles hated it and used to joke that the best view in Warsaw was from the top of it , as it was the only place in Warsaw where you couldn't actually see it. It's a good job their , "benefactor " couldn't hear them [!] and in fact died , 3 years [I think ] before it was completed.

Hi Fareast, Yes, you misunderstood my meaning, but it was my fault as I should have phrased it better. What I meant to say was that Hitler regarded Poles as sub-human, whereas Stalin mistreated them as well, although for different reasons.

Originally posted by tulip
Thanks Greybeard.
I hate the thought of conspiracies though. I don't want to feel like I'm burying my head in the sand. I'd rather know the truth about these things but until some kind of reliable evidence is put forward I want to keep an open mind:)

Well this is the nub of the problem. The judiciary also want potential jurors to have an open mind. In the case of the failed bombings there is already concern that enoughh prejudicial material could be published in the media about those arrested that a successful prosecution, ie a fair trial, might prove impossible. :o

I think throughout history a lot of races were persecuted through fear of them 'taking over'.

Hitler was a different entity. I think he had a deep rooted hatred of himself so he persecuted others and tried to create his 'perfect race' to make himself feel better. If he liked himself he would have tried to pick his idea of perfection by looking for people who resembled himself. He was dangerously crazy and should have been in the equavalent of Broadmoor.

Originally posted by MTheo
so its ok to shoot him coz he's overstayed?

:loopy:

MTheo, ya beat me to it. :)

'hope our comments dont get withdrawn CaroleK as yours in particular make me smile!' - youwhtref

Good. I'm happy then. :)

If you don't believe there are ANY polical conspiracies then that would be burrying your head in the sand but you do have to keep these things in perspective. Politics is a dirty world. There are lots scape goats to blame when a plan goes wrong.

We are lucky, living in the U.K/ USA is probably better than living in a country where government sculduggery is NOT covered up. Life seems better living in a country where we are not left to die in the streets while a few rich Tyrants live in gold palaces. :|

Robin Cooke report here (http://politics.guardian.co.uk/labour/story/0,9061,1544109,00.html)

Originally posted by Greybeard
Robin Cooke report here (http://politics.guardian.co.uk/labour/story/0,9061,1544109,00.html)

I dont see what that has to do with political conspirac...oh...no...wait...now i see it :suspect: :suspect:

I think one of the worst consiparacies is the covert way in which the media taken to hype the public in order to make more money. After all bad news sells! Peoples lives have been ruined for no reason, controversy has been implicated when none exists, panic has been created and misinformation has led to foreign unrest. Freedom of the press may be a wonderful thing but it can be a terrible practice. Therefore, the true conspiracy may just be the consiparcy theory itself!

I hope there is a resident phsychiatrst reading all this?

And your well thought out comments on the links I gave are ... ?

Don't read the links - - other people comment on them though. I form my opinions from regular news, discussion programs, life experience and common sense.
To see muslim radicals spouting about their plan to rule britain, and to hear the muslim (Comittees - support groups - Councils - and even parliament of britain) still bleating about being upset over possible racial overtones, and the british liberals bleating about a possible muslim backlash.
Well, as I've said - Root them out, jail them for life, or deport them - that includes their supporters. I really don't care if they face torture or execution back home. They show no mercy or compassion in their terror attacks.
Be interesting to see how many loony groups like "Animal Rights" get swept up in the new rules.

Totally agree with your post and the points it makes. The only problem with them is people who actually agree with you wont post on the subject for fear of being brow beat and put down on this forum. It seems your only allowed to speak in a left wing do gooder tone of voice,why????:loopy:

Are you suggesting that there there is an ongoing conspiracy by the imaginary 'Sheffield Forum Lefties' then?

:hihi:

I love conspiracists.

Maybe , Maybe not but in such an uncertain world who nos???:heyhey: :heyhey:

I've been banned before - - for ranting "off thread" no reference given to the actual comments though.

Originally posted by sheffco
I hope there is a resident phsychiatrst reading all this? Why? Who is that aimed at Sheffco?:|

Originally posted by brooksy
Totally agree with your post and the points it makes. The only problem with them is people who actually agree with you wont post on the subject for fear of being brow beat and put down on this forum. It seems your only allowed to speak in a left wing do gooder tone of voice,why????:loopy: That is nonsense! you are put down and brow beaten on this forum what ever you believe :D

Take your point but ithink you no what i mean??.

Originally posted by Edd
I dont see what that has to do with political conspirac...oh...no...wait...now i see it :suspect: :suspect:

That link to Robin Cook's demise was in response to a post by Fareast that seems to have been deleted.Surprised my post wasn't also deleted as it now has no relevence whatsover. :confused:

Originally posted by Greybeard
That link to Robin Cook's demise was in response to a post by Fareast that seems to have been deleted.Surprised my post wasn't also deleted as it now has no relevence whatsover. :confused: They only target non loony leftie,sandal wearing tree huggers don't they?:confused: :D

Admin:

Yawn, yet again there is no conspiracy. Fareast asked for his post to be removed because he thought it inappropriate at the moment.

Originally posted by Tony
Admin:

Yawn, yet again there is no conspiracy. Fareast asked for his post to be removed because he thought it inappropriate at the moment. Oops sorry, it wasn't a dig at how the site is run. It was a little jest at something Brooksy just said. I'd be classified with the tree huggers:D

Tulip - did I refer to you? It was a general comment. Don't worry yourself - I'm not having a go at you.

Greybeard ,


Yeah , it's a bit complicated !
I'd done a post in response to a post from CaroleK.
In my post , I made a passing remark about Robin Cook.
I knew he was ill but thought that's only what it was -----illness.
A few seconds after that , I saw where he'd died. I had a horrible vision of a close relative being an S.F. user [ well , these things do happen ] and I thought it best to ask for the post to be pulled.
I know we often criticise those who are dead on S.F but it was the time element that concerned me .

I'm sure no-one who read it will think bad of you. Not everyone who dies is well liked by the majority of people and even if they are it would be hypocritical to pretend you liked someone after they were dead.

I admire your tact Fareast:thumbsup:

Tulip ,

Well , as I said it was the time element that concrned me .
e.g. We might say to someone , ten years after their brother's death , " Well , to be honest , I think your brother did a few silly things "
but ....it would hardly be tactful to say that at the funeral and that's , more or less , what my comment might have appeared like.

Originally posted by Fareast
Tulip ,

Well , as I said it was the time element that concrned me .
e.g. We might say to someone , ten years after their brother's death , " Well , to be honest , I think your brother did a few silly things "
but ....it would hardly be tactful to say that at the funeral and that's , more or less , what my comment might have appeared like. Yes, I totally understand why you asked for it to be removed. I don't blame you at all. If you posted something that might leave you wide open to critcism for the wrong reason then you did totally the right thing:)