Xt500 Â Â 10 #25 Posted November 1, 2010 Just like the truther sheep who seem to believe all the stuff that is presented to them on youtube Here comes billy no life! Where ever the source of information comes from an inteligent person will view it with an open mind and judge for themselfs.You can understand that cant you? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
splodgeyAl   10 #26 Posted November 1, 2010 I merely commented on the OP's posts and implications relative to the subject - how about you do the same, rather than trying to take this into a completely unrelated and unnecessary argument with me?  I have no agenda, thank you, and I am not interested in yours.  Ok, I agree with him, that in light of the Brum 6, Guildford 4 et al, it seems naive to assume that the authorities current version of the story is in every way the truth.  If you don't mind, I'll nitpick and argue along with the "please make it true" brigade Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Agent Orange   11 #27 Posted November 1, 2010 Here comes billy no life! Where ever the source of information comes from an inteligent person will view it with an open mind and judge for themselfs.You can understand that cant you?  Yes, I would have a life, but as I don't spend my days dreaming up theories I just don't have the time  Ok, I am reasonably intelligent. I view the news and other information from reputable sources with an open mind and at times, will question it. However, the source of some of these theory vids is somewhat questionable. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Xt500   10 #28 Posted November 1, 2010 Yes, I would have a life, but as I don't spend my days dreaming up theories I just don't have the time  Ok, I am reasonably intelligent. I view the news and other information from reputable sources with an open mind and at times, will question it. However, the source of some of these theory vids is somewhat questionable.  What do you call reputable? The BBC? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Agent Orange   11 #29 Posted November 1, 2010 What do you call reputable? The BBC?  Erm, a little more reputable than some amateur conspiracy video posted on a second rate website. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Conrod   10 #30 Posted November 1, 2010 Ok, I agree with him, that in light of the Brum 6, Guildford 4 et al, it seems naive to assume that the authorities current version of the story is in every way the truth.Funny you should mention those. They got off because there were errors made in the 'due process' of their convictions.  Not because they weren't guilty. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
boyfriday   21 #31 Posted November 1, 2010 Funny you should mention those. They got off because there were errors made in the 'due process' of their convictions.  Not because they weren't guilty.  'Due process' exists to ensure that the people convicted of crimes are in fact guilty. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
truman   10 #32 Posted November 1, 2010 'Due process' exists to ensure that the people convicted of crimes are in fact guilty.  But it doesn't necessarily mean those that are found "not guilty" are innocent... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
splodgeyAl   10 #33 Posted November 1, 2010 Funny you should mention those. They got off because there were errors made in the 'due process' of their convictions.  Not because they weren't guilty.  Those "errors" being things like: * coercion by the police * intimidation * torture * threats against family members * having witnessed alibis ignored  Any more? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
splodgeyAl   10 #34 Posted November 1, 2010 But it doesn't necessarily mean those that are found "not guilty" are innocent...  I wonder what you're not guilty of? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
boyfriday   21 #35 Posted November 1, 2010 But it doesn't necessarily mean those that are found "not guilty" are innocent...  I don't think I suggested otherwise truman. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Longcol   594 #36 Posted November 1, 2010 "A witness, Richmal Marie Oates-Whitehead, aged 35, who worked at the BMA in Tavistock Square, and was hailed as a heroine for her actions during the London bombings, said she heard two explosions on the bus.  I wonder how difficult it is for an explosion to echo in a built up area of Central London? Not hard I'd think.  That's the trouble with "truthseekers" - they never think outside the narrow confines of the "conspiracy". Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...