Between 4 and 20 August the Saudi Arabian government beheaded 19 people. Saudi Arabia, which has funded and armed ISIS from inception (initially with CIA support), is now bombing alongside the USA in Iraq and Syria.
Forget the war technology porn regularly being broadcast by western media, with those spectacular photos of missiles erupting from ships into the night sky. Those missiles and bombs eviscerate and maim innocents as well as combatants, children as well as terrorists. The West always first denies, then regrets, “collateral damage”. The propaganda can be laughable. During the invasion of Iraq I remember a news propaganda item about how a cruise missile can enter a specific window, being followed by the next item – the US had apologised to Syria for two missiles aimed at Iraq which had hit Syria by accident.
If we can accidentally bomb the Chinese Embassy in Serbia, we can – and do – hit civilian homes near the proposed target. Being eviscerated by a piece of flying shrapnel is no less terrible than being beheaded by a jihadist. Let us not pretend that our violence is somehow nicer. Children will be dying under our bombs soon.
Other than the two extraordinary crazed Nigerians, there have been no recent Islamic motivated terrorist attacks in the UK and even a slowdown in the propaganda of phoney attacks. This was a threat to the major financial interests of the security industry, in both its governmental and private branches.
There can be no greater nonsense than the idea that the Caliphate poses a direct threat to the UK. This is even more crazy than the claim that Saddam Hussein posed a threat to the UK. But by seeking to join in the bombing campaign, and initiating a new round of fake “anti-terror” arrests in London, the British government is doing everything it possibly can do to try to provoke terrorist violence on British streets. The interests of the security state are therefore secured. I am longing for somebody to explain to me the precise mechanism by which our bombing Islamic countries helps prevent terrorist incidents in the UK. The way it can provoke such incidents seems to me too obvious to need stating. Indeed it says a great deal for the wisdom and tolerance of Britain’s Muslim communities that it has not provoked more. They could teach government a great deal about the good sense of not resorting to violence to gratify passions and earn short term acclaim.
“How Hostile you are…Tucked Away up there… Let me tell you..you are by FAR the most Hostile highland Dweller than i herd of…The No vote Broke my heart…i spent my Friday with Scottish NO voter…Best friends Always… Are you just in this for the wind up.”
I didn’t call you names Brian, here you are with a personal attack on me, calling me hostile. Why are you attacking the person not the issues Brian?
So you are the only person in Scotland entitled to an opinion are you? There wouldn’t have been people just as heart broken if Yes had won. If Yes had won the No voters would have been entitled to ignore the wishes of the majority, ignore democracy and just declare themselves winners would they?
The referendum is over, the people have made their wishes known, it’s time to move forward to a united Scotland working together for a better future not the minority having tantrums like a spoilt five year old that didn’t get it’s way.
Damn, I fell into Anon1’s trap : distracted into talking about 911.
Forget it, Anon1, I don’t care what your official output is on this subject.
Ba’al; “it’s perhaps telling that that is the only deprecated opinion here”
Inconsistency = hypocrisy = loaded agenda.
“sheer bloody boredom of picking through hundreds of comments on a regular basis”
It takes seconds to Ctr-F through even the longest threads, and seconds to determine is a particular comment is beyond the pale.
“screaming frustration of having to deal with the inevitable complaints of the deleted”
Never seems to have bothered Craig before.
“the trolls are part of the scenery”
For sure, but I’ve never come across any other Blog that gives them such free complete reign to the extent that discourse is effectively sabotaged; I contend that Craig slyly encourages, aids & abets those trolls whose prejudices & loathing of “Lefties” matches his own. I further suspect that the thrashing of those two threads had more to do with the exposing the trolls had received, in particular by the highlighting of their hypocritical lack of reaction to Craig’s “self-hating anti-British” comments.
Have you never noticed how when Craig’s position is taking a hammering on a particular thread, whoosh, suddenly a new Post appears to draw attention away ?
This new measure – categorising ‘conspiracy theories’ as non-violent extremism and then controlling them with anti-terror laws – is the most alarming idea I have ever heard from our government.
Ever.
In my lifetime.
“This new measure – categorising ‘conspiracy theories’ as non-violent extremism and then controlling them with anti-terror laws – is the most alarming idea I have ever heard from our government.”
Did you actually listen to the speech Cameron made to the UN?
I sense Macky would like to be a moderator.
Re. Craig’s not having been bothered by the pleas of the deleted, that’s because he deletes rarely – and, it seems, unselectively. My guess is he ignores them anyway. Probably the best policy. Whatever.
My point is that with separate open threads, in a forum format, for eg, 9/11 woo theorists to engage with their hopelessly rational adversaries; for the defenders of Israel to fight off the salvos of terrorist e-missiles launched from evil Iranistan ( allegedly); for globalism to be unpicked for inspection…etc…* there would be less tendency to introduce irrelevancies into any one discussion. And all would be visible for as long as they lasted. No more scrolling back 100 years for the Al-Hilli enthusiasts. And the trolls would be diluted.
*Not to mention the many iniquities of Tony Blair. I said not to mention…
fred 30 Sep, 2014 – 11:15 am
“Did you actually listen to the speech Cameron made to the UN?”
Yes.
Ba’al; “I sense Macky would like to be a moderator”
Your dragon sense is letting you down, as most certainly not !
“there would be less tendency to introduce irrelevancies into any one discussion. And all would be visible for as long as they lasted. No more scrolling back 100 years for the Al-Hilli enthusiasts. And the trolls would be diluted”
All focus & discussion naturally transfers to the latest thread, especially as there is no way easy way of knowing if a particular older thread is still open, or if it has had a new comment posted. Rather it’s the tendency of omission of certain relevancies in all discussions that is the problem here; not much to see after selective editing, except for an ocean of troll excrement.
Adolf Camerons speech to the UN is shocking. It sound suspiciously like the run in to WW3. I guess if they get the UN controller of violent and non violent extremism ..that’ll be it …no more free speech and can’t they only get away with that when the world is at war?
seriously stark raving bonkers
“Yes.”
Good, now let’s see which part you didn’t agree with.
Saying that 9/11 was a Jewish plot sounds a lot like incitement to racial hatred to me. Especially as everyone knows the planners and perpetrators were mostly Saudi Arabian. All of that, taken in context with the rest of the speech, sounds to me like he’s describing incitement to racial and religious hatred. Nowhere does he say anything about making conspiracy theories illegal unless they are being used to incite racial or religious hatred.
I’d like the blog to stay as it is with one exception.
There would be a ‘naughty step’ thread. Rather than delete squabbling and irrelevant comments, the mods would dump them here where the tantrums could be acted out for those who choose to read them. No justification from the mods, like it or lump it. We’d soon learn.
Fred, are you reallysaying that you believe this is about racial hatred? That 911 ‘conspiracy’ websites which don’t blame Jews will be left alone? You believe that 911 was an inside job. Cameron is threatening your right to express that opinion.
I absolutely believe that Muslims are persecuted all over the world as a deliberate act of Western policy. How is my belief an incitement to racial or religious hatred?
This is more than an attack on free speech – its thought control.
First thay came for……David Cameron. And eveyone seem’d quite happy about that.
Fred; “Saying that 9/11 was a Jewish plot sounds a lot like incitement to racial hatred to me”
Surely you mean “religious” hatred ? Anyhow, if apparent circumstantial evidence exists, that appears to suggest that a certain country conspired to engineer a specific event, say like invading Iraq on a false pretext, would it be “inciting racial hatred” towards Americans or British people to point out this circumstantial evidence, and it should therefore be illegal ?
“Especially as everyone knows the planners and perpetrators were mostly Saudi Arabian”
In light of the well-known dirty State practice of using patsies, are you really sure that most people actually “know” who actually planned 9/11 ?
There would be a ‘naughty step’ thread.
Agree, if this is possible outside full forum format. Engforum.pravda.ru used to have a ‘Bardak’ (whorehouse) room, I remember. Probably still does, but it has become an unfunny crap forum: years ago it was at least entertaining, and Bardak was one of the highlights. Rehmat’s posts sometimes ended up there – he’ll tell you.
But that, again, requires continuous moderation, and (as Macky has now declined the position), that means a masochist who enjoys being trolled by disgruntled offenders.
Fred
Do you mean illegal to write about them or talk about them?
Yes, …Node that’s right he means …illegal to think about them!
Does Cameron believe his own rhetoric or perhaps his IQ is too low to understand it? Maybe they have some information on him hes scared they will reveal or did he get loads more millions to say what he said. I think like Blair and Obama he will soon begin to develop that haggard mask of shame..he truly needs to
I’d say there is way to much negative focus. Rather than try and stamp out the evil and focus on it all the time, what about expanding the good?
It seems if there was more people posting, or more posts that kept focus and ignored such issues it would create an environment far less fitting for a few.
Maybe people could think of an angle or area they wan’t and try and stick to it.
Just some thoughts.
Personally I don’t know for sure if it was just specialized, high tech state of the art thermite based incendiaries (as put forward by the architects and engineers people on their web site at AE911Truth), high explosives, mini-nukes or even a combination of some or all of the above. However anyone, engineer or not, who can watch the videos embedded at the following link and say that the 3 WTC buildings (1, 2 & 7) collapsed on 9/11/2001 solely as a result of structural failures caused by impact damage with aircraft or falling wreckage (in the case of WTC7) and (as the Official Conspiracy Theory that Cameron presumably believes in states) is seriously lacking in gray matter between the ears (or is being deliberately dishonest) – IMHO.
SEE:
How it Was Done: 9/11 and the Science of Building Demolition
As public awareness grows about the truth about 9/11, it serves to point out that many features of the towers’ destruction fit perfectly with standard patterns of demolition. Evidence which at first seems puzzling is in fact consistent with known demolition techniques.
WTC 7 differed from Towers One and Two in that WTC7 was a traditional “bottom-up” implosion. The Twin Towers, on the other hand, exhibited the more unfamiliar pattern of a “banana peel” demolition, which starts at the middle or the top of a building and progresses downward. The below demolition in China shows the pattern of streamers of arcing debris that we see coming from the Twin Towers, as the cutting of supports begins high above ground level and works its way down.”
More (with embedded videos)at: http://911explained.blogspot.com/2013/09/911-how-it-was-done-science-of.html
I still don’t get why there is not more support. People who must read this but dar’nt say anything?
One of the early suggestions of the government shutting down this etc made me think. Do people really believe they would act so openly bad? Doubtful, but even if so is that really such an issue?
I think it’s crazy, So he answered back in class. So he’s no longer ‘acceptable’ to the establishment. And he writes articles on a blog. So what? So what it’s frequented by obvious insiders. All the more reason to support. It’s not on.
Leading uk truth teller gets only a handful of largely anonymous supporters. Sigh…
Ps. Our governments invite conspiracy. This idea that people should have unquestioned belief flies in the face of history. Anyone suggesting that should certainty be treated with suspicion…
Seems thinking of the possibilities of a situation (conspiracy) is what every law enforcement procedure does as a matter of course, They don’t know the facts of a crime at the start, but the procedure is to apply scenarios from previous investigations to see if that reveals the truth of the current event .
Maybe it could be said that we’d never learn about anything without initially entertaining conspiracy in some form?
Kashmiri commented, some distance above, that Syria was about gas, not oil. I queried this. I withdraw the query:
http://www.businessballa.com/2014/01/126494/russia-finds-path-mediterranean-gas-through-syria
The Russians aren’t too worried about the current instability? Ok, we’ll just have to bugger the country up completely. Especially as the Russians will be competing with Tony’s TAP pipeline.
Thjanks for that memory jolt on extremismn Macky, its a brand new piece of rubber being prepared for us to stretch/cover all those who dare to speak up.
Bob Simon who wrote the wire is about to make another series dealing with the increasing alienation of the US at alrge with Congress and Government, the ueber alles domination of markets and multinationals whom we have gioven far too much powers.
In the US, just as here, these powerfull corporations project their own news and use their levers to lobby for lesser regualtions, tax breaks and lower tax rates, preferable conditions of private/public services whilst demonising the Unions. Workers are more and more despised and the middle classes fear for their jobs.
Its the teachers, police/firemen who now are targetted by the system, denigrated, and the same is happening here.
So, what better to label us extremist when we object to fracking, especially when the nice Mr. Radcliffe (flogger of fracking chems) wants to bribe those whose land is fracked below them.
The metropolitan policy to rid themselves of homeless, as so stark in view over Newham councils disguisting hostel tales that are coming out now, refusing to house people in adequate housing because they want to speculate with land, with poor people being just in the way, they will have to move to Manchester or elsewhere, away from their families and friends.
But its not only the homeless,a nurse for example, relying on her mother for childcare to pay rent, working 45 hours a week trying to make ends meet, is threatened with losing her home due to this speculative craze that is being played out in an unsustainable London. If she moves to Manchester she will be unable to pay for expensive childcare.
The system is creaking and the powers to be feel threatened in their political legitimacy, not commanding majorities, but usurping with guile and cunning as a minority. They don’t want to,let go of power for all the reasons Udo Ulkotte mentioned, selfserving circles in with the establishment just don’t like to let go of the Taxdodging, so they call anyone objecting EXTREMISTS.
This morning Conservative rightwingers in cabinet, now fully exchanged for the likes of Willis and Clarke, are calling for a coalition of the willing with UKIP. Should that ever happen, Osbornes excessive and onesided austerity measures point towards it, with Labour’s bad reputation gettiong worse in Scotland, then they are declaring an open season.
Who will be the extremismn czar, who will get the job at ‘fighting extremism?
BTW. is it extremist to ignore tax evaders and off shorers? Is it extremist to allow industry and multinationals to make up their own tax regimes and colonise our high streets with their uniform and much polluting chains.
Is it extremist to fight tax evasion, by any means possible, when the chancellor does not feel up to dealing with his mates? and rather kills a few with his austerity measures, whether its the NHS or the disabled who take their lifes after being made to feel insecure.
“Fred, are you reallysaying that you believe this is about racial hatred?”
Those are the words he said so that is all I can base my opinion on. Pretending someone said something they didn’t say so you can argue against it is called building a straw man. As far as I can see the examples Cameron gave at the UN are probably already illegal under existing legislation.
“Surely you mean “religious” hatred ? Anyhow, if apparent circumstantial evidence exists, that appears to suggest that a certain country conspired to engineer a specific event, say like invading Iraq on a false pretext, would it be “inciting racial hatred” towards Americans or British people to point out this circumstantial evidence, and it should therefore be illegal ?”
But Cameron said nothing about any state. He said “The peddling of lies: that 9/11 was a Jewish plot”. Jewish, not Israeli, a race or religion if you prefer, not a state.
fred 30 Sep, 2014 – 3:48 pm
“Those are the words he said so that is all I can base my opinion on.”
No, you can base your opinion on those words plus your lifetime experience of politicians. Do you believe manifesto promises?
So if you won’t answer my first question, what about the second:
“I absolutely believe that Muslims are persecuted all over the world as a deliberate act of Western policy. How is my belief an incitement to racial or religious hatred?”
I framed that question using Cameron’s exact words, it is his example of the kind of ‘non-violent extremism’ that he wants to “deal with.” Do you agree with David Cameron that I should lose the right to express that view?
Fred; “But Cameron said nothing about any state. He said “The peddling of lies: that 9/11 was a Jewish plot”.
Yes Cameron chose his words carefully, so do you think that means he would be ok for people to speculate that 9/11 was an Israeli plot, rather than a Jewish plot ?
On the BBC news last night they led with a piece on Barbara Henning, wife of Alan Henning, pleading for ISIS to release him. The very next item was trumpeting how the RAF had just carried out it’s first sorties in Northern Iraq against the terrorists.
It seems exceptionally insensitive given the situation. On the one hand the poor woman is pleading for life and the next minute the very reason that he may be killed is announced to the world. Does the MOD have to release mission details like this and surely the BBC should exercise editorial restraint – do they have MOD present to them?
…does the BBC have to broadcast everything the MOD presents to them?
Blairwatching –
He was schmoozing round the fringes of the UN General Assembly last week Among others, he cornered the President of Mexico –
During their meeting, President Peña Nieto and former Prime Minister Blair discussed various topics of global interest.
The former British prime minister congratulated the Mexican president on the structural reforms achieved in Mexico, and expressed interest in analyzing them in detail.
For cash, one assumes. Peña, amigo, you can get exactly the same guff from Mandelson or Campbell for half the price.
<i)He also said that what is happening in Mexico today makes it a very attractive place in the world, and commented on the possibility of visiting our country soon.
No, Tony, that’s a certainty. You’re booked for the Mexico Business Summit at Queretaro on the 26th.
http://www.noodls.com/view/DD1F3BF8191C54D0B1DDAB7EE345AA78348D711F?5986xxx1411698153
This is the intellect and morality of another ‘liberal’. Although the local paper is parochial with a capital P, they published what must have been a press release. It is likely it will publish this.
strongAir strikes’ on extremists: Mr Younger Ross 30 September 2014
Letters Editor Mid Devon Advertiser
Dear Sir,
You report that the erstwhile Teignbridge MP, Mr Younger-Ross, endorses air strikes on Islamic extremists, and that he intends to stand again. (Mid Devon Advertiser 26 September 2014)
Given his ambition to rejoin Parliament, he will be happy to answer these questions in your columns, and in public debate later.
The air strikes on ISIL have extended into Syria and have included ‘make shift’ oil refineries in the north. Is the war on ISIL a ruse to overthrow the Syrian nation and thus be a major blow in favour of the Oded Yinon plan for decimation of all the Arab entities? For propaganda, the western nations call Dr Bashar Assad a dictator. Their main allies are the cruel dictatorships of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Bahrein.
Does he recognise that ‘air strikes’ (usually Hellfire missiles fired from ‘drones’) cause mostly civilian deaths and terrible injuries? A recent UN report shows that families suffer the most by number.
Does he see any hypocrisy in the US, UK and French posture? These and other NATO countries have supported the many terrorist groups that are attacking the Syrian population. Most of these have come from outside. Their weapons and pay also come from outside, and from Saudi Arabia and Qatar in particular. There is good evidence the US has helped train some ISIL gunmen, just as the US trained the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan to oust the Russian occupiers.
Many, many kilotons of bombs have been dropped in Arabia since Blair and Bush started their ‘shock and awe’ in March 2003. Has bombing not sown all the mayhem that is now plain? So more bombing will do the trick?
We commemorate the ‘war to end all wars’. Does Mr Younger Ross agree that instead, war has not been ended? Indeed Mr Cameron has spoken of never ending war. WW1 has spawned the terrible suffering in Palestine and much more besides.
There are too many questions but this is a final one. There are gas and oil deposits stretching from the coast of Gaza right up through Syria to northern Iraq. Those off Gaza have already been taken from the native people. Is bombing ISIL and dismantling the Syrian nation to do with domination of these resources?
Incidentally, I have scrutinised the video of one ghastly ‘beheading’. I believe it to be an illusion in whole or in part.
yours faithfully
David Halpin FRCS
Tony M, it’s as clear as crystal that you have emotional problems tolerating other people’s views. You will find no peace in being abusive and falsely labeling other commentators as trolls.