What are you objecting to ?

By their very nature security alerts can be vague and difficult to pin down to specific areas. Nobody (except you) has mentioned arab terrorism in relation to this flight.

Let me guess. is it all a CIA plot again ? Or perhaps Mossad did it ?? Or perhaps, and this is very extreme but stay with me, perhaps the security services received some form of information that indicated a potential threat to the aircraft and its passengers and with this in mind in light of recet events decided to be safe rather than sorry. Do you think that is perhaps more likely ??

that terrorists would use the same route again to attack the USA?

I agree with the original poster that it is likely the US government trying to force BA to do something (air marshalls). Both countries use the same tactics when they want something. eg. the UK went it a heightened state of alert just before the PM wanted to start pushing his new changes to terrorism laws through the government. People will not disagree with things i they think there is a threat.

Also, along the arab terrorist lines. It doesn't matter that the original poster mentioned 'arab'. It could just as been mongolian for the governments concerns, they just want a way to control the world without people realising.

I would think it very likely that terrorists would use the same method for attacking the US. 1) It worked once it will work again. 2) If detected the Us would have to give an order to shoot the plane down - hardly a popular move.

This is not about disinformation (as much as you would like it to be) but about avoiding harm, O and by the way BA gave permission for "Sky Marshalls" 5 days ago which rather blows out of the water the whole "It's pressure on BA" theory

If a gun is fired on an aircraft and blows a hole in the shell (never mind the poor sods who might get in the way), it can hardly be considered an act designed to keep people safe.
Security alerts can also be deliberately vague and difficult to pin down because the intention is that people will be scared and support the government in its continuous programme to curtail civil liberties often with the racist tactic of using black people as scapegoats. Have you read the Civil Contingencies bill, Dave? I suggest you do.
But then, if you trust this government to be acting in your best interests, a bill which give the government the power to arrest and detain you for a criminal offence for criticizing government policy will be just there to keep you safe, won’t it? Heres a quote, if the government decides that “a situation exists that presents a serious threat to the welfare of the population, the political or economic stability of this country, the environment or security of any part of the UK”, then it seems that the government can effectively turn Britain into a military state. Key parts of the Human Rights Act can be bypassed or suspended without the authority of parliament.
This means: widespread detention of any suspected group or individual, countrywide security checks, increased police surveillance, seizure of property

Similar powers have already been rushed through in
the USA after 9/11.

And as for not mentioning ‘arab terrorism’….
There are foreign nationals rotting in jail in this country who have been held since 2001 under anti-terrorism laws without charge or trial. The Civil Contingences Bill will have the potential to extend this hideous, inhuman, undemocratic, practice to UK citizens.

Hope that makes you feel safe.

If it doesn't, you and anyone else is welcome to come to Manchester on 17th January to Friends Meeting House on Mount Street in the City centre to talk about what we are going to do about it. Starts at 11am and lasts a few hours with workshops, ideas and plans for action.

Check out The Civil Contingencies Bill in full is at:
www.ukresilience.info/ccbill/ccbill.pdf

Heather

Thank you for your comments. Yes I have read the bill and there is much in it which worries me but I was talking about this specific incident. The reality is none of us know the real facts (although my background perhaps gives me a greater insight than most). I feel sorry for you if you really believe the government is manipulating society's view in this way and I feel that for one reason - you must have a very low opinion of the intelligence of the average British citizen. I think the average person is brighter than that.

Look the demise of the soviet union and the end of the Berlin wall was the end of the so called "Cold War"
so they needed another one but there weren't too many takers so they invented on Al Queda, which applies to anyone muslim or similar. This ties in with israeli expansion in the middle east which in turn ties in with Oil wells which is basically the only things that the yankkkee/ NWO possee are interested .
If they have to knock over a few more sky scrappers full of innocent billy bunters , I'm sure it won't be too much trouble for them .
In the meantime they need to keep the publics attention on the job in hand "The war on freedom" which will net them them the jackpot . We have already seen what the term "intelligence" means to Bliar and the labour regime. Robin Cook compares it to alphabetti spaghetti , you can find the letters to make up any old bollox you want . The public will swallow it and the tiny minority that don't can always try using their civil liberty to protest and get batter by one of the UK's finest.
You can't have a phoney war with out a bit of flapping about , the flight was probably under booked or maybe the pilot had too much of a white xmas/ OD'd on Vitamin C . BA said all right you can chop this one ...

One of the most interesting things about corporate media reports is checking the scource , I get 565 google hits for "Unamed Israeli" 90% of these are quite important stories all of which can from the same(?) unnamed Israeli . I wonder who tipped them of about flight 223, probably some geezer down the pub !!!
might even have Bin London out on a binge ..

CIALQueda (all one word)

hard to say who is more stupid. brits or americans , that's tough one , call it a tie !

If they issue a warning specific enough to be one flight, twice.... surely they know who the bloody hell it is......... unless they are planning a bruce willis stylee hijack of the flight in mid air (somehow the image of a chopper full of al-qaeda terrorists hovering mid-atlantic looking at their watches does not fit)....Most of the passengers are changing to different flights so why have one of these not been grounded?

Its not convincing BA to have flight marshals but the public. Faced with endless cancellations.... booh har! bad for our businessmen needing to fly club class to the USA for a really really important meeting.... will eventually agree that gung ho, sorry, highly trained operatives carrying weapons are OK on flights.

about conspiracy theories that it allows the loonies to be right every time. So we cancel flights after a possible threat - we're wimps in thrall to the zionists. We don't cancel and something does happen - it's a cover up! Mossad was responsible! WHy was it allowed to happen??

Someone mentioned the possiblity of aircraft being fatally damaged by sky marshalls firing bullets inside them. There's more than one type of gun and quite a few types of bullet - and so it is possible to have a gunfight in a plane without the whole thing blowing to bits.

I can't remember where I read a discussion of the subject but have a look on sites like Jane's - probably have something to say on the matter, and less embarrasing than actually buying 'Guns n Masturbation Weekly' from Smiths.

The world leaders, their intelligence services and media propagandists are proven liars, viz Iraqi WMD. It would be reasonable to assume that the entirety of their words and actions re the'War on Terror' are simply lies
It's time for people to jack the shitload

The world leaders, their intelligence services and media propagandists are proven liars, viz Iraqi WMD. It would be reasonable to assume that the entirety of their words and actions re the'War on Terror' are simply lies

No, it wouldn't be reasonable it would be nonsensical. Your statement is the equivalent of saying I ate an apple and it was rotten therefore it is resonable to assume that every other apple I eat will also be rotten. The only conclusion you can legitimately draw is that they may be rotten, not that they will be rotten. This does not mean you can conclude that they will not be rotten. Note that they _may_ all be rotten, but this does not mean that the argument made is invalid if they prove to be so, since all apples being rotten is a subset of some apples being rotten (note this is logic here not natural language some does not exclude all - it merely states an unknown but positive number (since at least one apple was rotten) so that could be one, all, or anything in between).

So to get back to your original statement you could reasonably conclude that some statements on the 'War on Terror' may be lies. It is a weak argument, however, since the 'War on Terror' is not synomous with 'Iraqi WMD' or even the War on Iraq. This is an unstated premise, but a premise all the same and no less wrong for being unstated. You further undermine yourself be eliding world leaders, their intelligence services and media propagandists (what ever 'their' media propagandists are), especially since no individual part of the three could really be considered to be homogenous even by itself. Furthermore nobody has been proven to be a liar over WMD's - you cannot prove the negative (cf Popper - 'it takes only one black swan to disprove that all swans are white but no amount of white swans can prove they all are so').

It is tempting hear to sit back and see If I could draw any accusations of naivete etc, but I shall go on since you have missed a much stronger argument and in doing so have put yourself in the same category as those you attack (i.e. you have made unfounded assertions). While the accusations that IRAQ had weapons of mass destruction can never be finally disproven, the burden of proof is not upon those who say they did not, but upon those who made the accusations in the first place to come up with the evidence (and we have long since past the point where they could be reasonably given the benifit of the doubt). Since they have singularly failed to do it is both reasonable and logical to state that we have grounds for doubting any further statements they make, in the absence of evidence to the contrary.(though not to say they are lying). While this argument may bear a superficial similarity to the original statement, a closer look will show it substitutes a weaker conclusion for a stronger (and defensible) premise.

A reasoned and supportable argument, as oppposed to spouting off your prejudices, is the difference between credibility and stupidity. A point you might do well to bear in mind if yoy are to avoid sounding like an idiot everytime you open your mouth.

(Astute readers will notice that I deliberately commit the same logical error that you made in your statement - I cannot, of course, reasonably conclude you sound like an idiot everytime you open your mouth, only sometimes. Though I suspect I have the stronger argument since it should not be impossible to find a true statement by George W. on these matters if only 'I will invade Iraq'. I will leave it as as exercise to the reader to find the logical errors in the original story- not to mention the not so subtle racist undertones which unfortunately play straight into the hands of those who would equate all criticism of Israel with anti-semitism (an argument with plenty of logical holes itself)).

Heather:
Sympathetic, though I am, to your attempts to draw attention to the Civil Contingecies Bill, I am afraid your arguments about guns on planes can hold no water. It may well be the case that firing a gun on a plane may endanger that plane, but set against the near (or at least perceived) certainty of being blown out of the skies its is a reasonable risk to take. (a.k.a. the lesser of two evils). If I deliberately ride my bike into a ditch because a car appears to be driving staight towards me I run the risk of sustain injuries as a result. But only a fool would refuse to do so, because of that possibility, when they face the near certainty (or a least a significant chance) of being hit head on by the car.

.. is not the possibility of another attack like 911, nor the wisdom of protecting air passengers by endangering their lives with the presense of guns on board.

Nor is is the myriade of unanswered questions about what really happened on 911 - such as: why did the security at airports allow the 'terrorists' through (hint: israeli companies were responsible for security there); how did the planes execute incredibly difficult flight patterns, for which a few hours training on light aircraft could never suffice, nor in fact for which the aircraft in question were specifically designed to avoid and BAR (hint: it IS possible to remotely control planes of this type and size - look up the glowing stories about the achievements of the global hawk project featured in several popular publications BEFORE 911!); why did the first three [ever] steel constructed buildings fall as the result of fire (hint: only two of them were hit by planes!) and in a manner consistant with controled demoloition (hint: freefall times for the material were consistant with gravity, indictaing that the building were 'freed' from their ground support - also see the seismic data from the NY Pallisade monitoring station, which showed a strong release of energy JUST BEFORE the collapse) ...

I hope you all realise that questions like these would take up an enourmous amount of space, an age to read, dedidication and hard work to compile and a brief instance to be totally ignored, sidelined or ridiculed by a complient media and a system of govenment denial denail denail that has been working hard to convince us who are "real enemies" are.

Meanwhile, 'they' and their friends openly make BILLIONS of dollars from the panic and the re-oganisation of society, which makes their positions stronger and ours weaker, with less rights ...

... And yet still, the very idea that we have been lied to, are being lied to, is met with howls of indignation, accusations of mental instabilty or hints that the questioner has a hidden agenda either political or as the result of some inner conflict unresolved since childhood ...

I suppose taking on board the notion that 'they' don't have our safty in mind when they cage us, don't respect our inaliable rights to freedom when they restrict what we can say where we can say it and to whom, have no track record of protecting life (how much of that $87billion would be needed to iradicate disease and poverty?) and have no interest in our progress, evolution and development ... well, these notions take a bit of getting used to!

Don't take to long please, we are all dependant on each other to suvive this reichstag fire.

Looks like "Dave" is the local zionist spook - probably sent by the ADL or JDL or one of the other countless misinformation zionist organisations (seen it all before Dave - don't waste my time) ... He probably posts under lots of different names (as they do in thier vain attempt to make IndyMedia look like the zionists' favourite hangout!). Go back to reading the zionist extremist hate site LGF, "Dave" ...



Posted by "oiyoi" on the "Armed pigs might fly" post (  http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2003/12/283282.html ) ...:


"Of course the people don't want war... That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country." - Hermann Goering, Adolf Hitler's Deputy Chief and Luftwaffe Commander, at the Nuremberg trials, 1946.

you could be arguing in your spare time !

They are Bloody Liars,our whole lives are part of a charade , a big game and they have been at since the off . the reason for cancelling BA flights will be 100% bullshit.
oh yeah talking WMD as in weapons of mass decpetion ie "their" corporate media .

Ok I have to say something back..
"It may well be the case that firing a gun on a plane may endanger that plane, but set against the near (or at least perceived) certainty of being blown out of the skies its is a reasonable risk to take. (a.k.a. the lesser of two evils). If I deliberately ride my bike into a ditch because a car appears to be driving staight towards me I run the risk of sustain injuries as a result. But only a fool would refuse to do so, because of that possibility, when they face the near certainty (or a least a significant chance) of being hit head on by the car".

I have listened to the government. I have listened to many others using a variety of sources. I have listened to people’s opinions and I think most people know the government lies. People are not stupid. They know the government that has been elected does not represent them and talks shit.
Personally, I think the way forward is to disengage from the pathetic game that passes for organised party politics and to do stuff ourselves.
There may well be ways of firing bullets on planes which bounce (oh please!) off the aircraft hull and don’t bring the plane down but people will still get in the way. You know the ones. Blood and bone.
So its about risk.

Logically, the arguments of bikes into ditches don’t hold up. Because it rests on the premise of there is a near or at least perceived certainty of being blown out of the skies. Well, there isn’t. Millions of planes fly safely every day. Very rarely, a plane flies into a building. For most people, it is entirely safe to fly on a plane. No people with guns (of whatever velocity are required).

Putting people with guns on planes may well create an added risk. Even ‘safe’ guns. The problem is that this decision is taken for our ‘good’, and so people don’t get to say anyway if they want it or not. Surprise.

And they don’t get to have any say in the decisions taken which lead to the invasion of Iraq or any of the other decisions on foreign policy in which their only participation is a feeble cross or not on a piece of paper. Most people don’t vote. Maybe because people know noone gives a shit and they don’t get asked. So stuff it.

Its not me who thinks people are stupid. Ask Tony (and the rest).

There is at least a huge element of doubt that there is a ‘near certainty or significant chance of being hit head on by a car’ if this is used as an analogy for risk related to planes flying into civilian building (which happens how often??)

Maybe we should put armed pigs into cars and vans going up the motorway just in case (a terrorist might be in the car – who knows where these people sneak up from), how about in coaches, in schools, in our homes, lets recruit people with guns to be in any public space where we need to feel safe…

Or lets go live in America.

Your comments based on the academia of philisophical logic holds no sway. We should not be dependent on the information of proven liars, mass murderers and child-killers
They offer no 'proof' either - just their say so
Fear and death and fear of death feed the controllers
They are energy vampires literally. That's why they repeatedly put this shit out while they plan the next big one
My information is just as valid as the crap they put out over the big controlled media - all 'security' controlled and equally lacking 'evidence
Know it

And you may remember, another attack may not be done so soon after this little Vietnam where the Shiites will paradoxically rise up from the South and shoo the invaders out
So let's HAARP Iran into submission
Another Mafia-style trick
It saves an invasion - another so-called war
And Gaddafi greases up
It's great ain't it
A who;e wrap-up
Just Syria to go for our New World Order

"The reality is none of us know the real facts (although my background perhaps gives me a greater insight than most)."

Dave, could you please enlighten us all with the greater insight your background priviliged you with?
Could you also tell us what this background is so we can judge for ourselves whether it makes your insight greater than ours or not?
Are you a distributor of mis-information perhaps? (N.W.O.)
Are you a mouth piece for this dis-information? (Mainstream media)
Are you as has been suggested, a spook? (Rockwell et al.)
Lastly, the reason most people read Indymedia is as an alternative to mainstream reporting so why do you expect us to believe the same "facts" they give us just because Dave says so?

Our resident zionist spook "Dave" said above that it was ME that was blaming "Arab terrorists" for these fake "terror alerts" - looks like the zionist toilet paper the Telegraph (Britian's most Islamophobic "news"paper) is blaming Al Qaeda (you know, that group they tell us is led by a Saudi millioniare hooked up to a dialysis machine in a cave!) ...

 http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=%2Fnews%2F2004%2F01%2F04%2Fwfly204.xml

EXTRACT FROM LINK ABOVE:

"More flights from British airports are expected to be cancelled this week as MI5 and Special Branch hunt two al-Qa'eda terrorists thought to be planning a shoe-bomb attack on an airliner.

It was this threat that led to last week's cancellation, two days running, of British Airways flight 223 from Heathrow to Washington.

Officials from the security service MI5 believe that two Islamist terrorists are at large in Britain and planning to detonate a bomb in a lavatory of an aircraft."





Who are the Telegraph? They are part of the Hollinger Media group. Here is Hollinger's website:  http://www.hollinger.com ... Check out who controls this zionist scum misinformation company:

"Lord" CONrad Black - raving mad zionist being investigated for financial crimes. He is married to Barbra Amiel, some fake "Jewish" (ie. zionist) dog who loves "israel" and its ethnic cleansing policies and apartheid.

Richard Perle - Neocon zionist mafia scum currently part of the zionist cabal occupying the Whitehouse

Henry Kissenger - War criminal and zionist, this little mass murderer and criminal should be facing trial and execution but is controlling what Britian reads instead.

Don't believe me? Have a look at the their names on Hollinger's own site:

 http://www.hollinger.com/mgmt/mgmt.htm

This guy obviously doesn´t live in the UK. When was the last time you saw a white man driving a bus.