The London Bombings - 7/7/05 - Conspiracies, politics, commentary

Here is another link with stuff that is just difficult to ignore

This site does however encourage users to encrypt their internet browsing.

You can find loads of paranoid rubbish on the interweb -wow, two bombers claim the CIA told them to blow stuff up, such reliable sources!

As regards the previous post "When does a bomb, which kills innocent people... become a terrorist bomb, or be lesser classified as 'collateral damage' ?"

The wording of this is strange, but there is a huge difference between (as an example) civilians being killed by a stray missile intended for a military target and civilians deliberately being targeted. Its a question of intent. Its the difference between murder and manslaughter.

Attacking civilians is a sign of weakness.

Thanks for the report from Wisteria Drive.

Who-ever co-ordinated the bombs in London, must be hugging each other for their achievements. Probably banging their heads on the floor in ecstacy.

Home grown cell, or north african? Does it matter? It happened here. They have achieved their objective. Made a statement.

What to do? - - - - They are really not far removed from the demonstrators seen smashing windscreens in the G8 protests, or the Animal rights people destroying property!

Here, the Sunday papers are full of it. All the leaders of the government and lesser parties are having their say. But in this era of political correctness, and Human rights, not to mention "Legal Aid" for the suspects, they have to be very careful in what they say.

My partner thinks that my politics are a little to the right of "Ghengis Khan". But I think that the indiscriminate bombing, of places, by who-ever who'm, declares that they have no rights whatsoever.

In democracy - - you have the right to your say. The freedom of speech. Not to kill and maim people! It is a cowardly and despicable attack by people infected with a virus that makes them think they have a right to change other peoples views.

According to Sharia law, - - - Stoning, -- beheading --amputation - - - are all perfectly legal, and are witnessed in the local square every Friday.

The leaders of the Muslim communities are quick to climb on board. Undoubtabley there are thousands of law abiding followers. What about the little enclaves that want to destroy our England? What about the Clerics who know of the zealots prepared to blow themselves into shanglira?

They do exist - - who teaches them?

This is my Country, and if multi-cultures brings us to this, and by that I mean "Vipers in the nest", then ask the leaders of such communities to root them out.

They would obviously know the zealots, and the preachers fuelling their thoughts.

[MOD NOTE] Political/aftermath end of other bombings thread merged with this one.

Originally posted by 1Man&hisBMW

I was thinking about something earlier... and perhaps my fellow forum members can put their views forward on it.

 

When does a bomb, which kills innocent people... become a terrorist bomb, or be lesser classified as 'collateral damage' ?

 

Are we experiencing the same horrors witnessed in Israel/Palestine, Iraq, Spain etc...

 

Leading to my final question.... do you believe a government could kills its own people to meet a political objective....

two different answers to that.

As far as the government/media/propaganda machine is concerned, it's a terrorist bomb when it isn't one of ours. Ie all the insurgents/freedom fighters attacks are terrorist actions (even if targetting military targets).

The more objective answer is that it's terrorist action if it deliberately attacks civilians in order to cause terror. So insurgent attacks on military targets (even if causing civilian casualties) should not be called terrorist attacks, technically they are irregular iraqi forces fighting the occupation.

If we target a tank or a camp and someone screws up and we blow up a hospital (how exactly does that happen?) then as we had no intention of killing civilians it's collateral, not terrorism.

I'm sure the germans called the french resistance terrorists, we called them hero's. It's always worth trying to see if we have a parallel where the roles are reversed.

Originally posted by sheffco

In democracy - - you have the right to your say. The freedom of speech.

But for how long ?

Tony's cronies are determined to push the religious incitement bill through, and once that's enshrined in law you'll be liable to prosecution for suggesting without proof that Mulsims were responsible for the tube bombings.

I really am amazed by the posts who are "Slightly" anti British.

If you don't like the status quo, vote against it. Don't in anyway excuse violence as a means of protest, then abhore the reaction to it.

The people creating these incidents, believe in these ancient creeds. - - - Vengence being the accepted code.

Unfortunately, when apprehended, they have the resources of "Legal Aid", and "Bleeding Heart" societies.

Find Em - - stick em on a plane to where they came from, or bang them up on a dis-used oil platform in the north sea. Feed em, and leave the rest to their own anarchy. This happens in their own country! Why do we have to appear as a benevolent society, prepared to put up with the scum of the world?

Totaaly agree sheffco, not sure alot of the do gooders on here will agree tho? :thumbsup:

Originally posted by Cyclone

two different answers to that.

 

If we target a tank or a camp and someone screws up and we blow up a hospital (how exactly does that happen?) then as we had no intention of killing civilians it's collateral,.

WE being the operative wordWE

This is not a game of youthful groups playing around with theories, but lives and families etc.

If WE could identify a possible assasin? Would it be in the interest of the greater good to just "Take Him/her" out?

People seem to object to locking these possible assasins away. Do we have to wait until they prove themselves a threat!

Just watch the news, how many bleeding hearts society commentators are up there pleading there cause. (Salary)