London Bombs - 'News' as Pure Psyops
paul c | 27.07.2005 18:05
here is a news report released on July 27, 2005
by the times citing a report made on ABC News
ALL IS NOT WHAT IT SEEMS
by the times citing a report made on ABC News
ALL IS NOT WHAT IT SEEMS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
London bombers had nail bombs for 'second strike'
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last night ABC News in America screened unauthorised images of the damage left by the London bombs on July 7, and of unexploded devices found in a car parked at Luton railway station.
This is a transcript of the interview between ABC presenters Elizabeth Vargas and Pierre Thomas, and Robert Ayers, a security analyst who was shown the pictures
VARGAS: We have exclusive, new details tonight about the terrorist attacks that killed 56 people in London two and a half weeks ago. There were four suicide bombings, three in the subway and one on a bus. ABC News has learned that the bombers left behind a large stash of unexploded bombs in a car, 16 in all. ABC News has also obtained the first photographs of the wreckage those bombs caused deep in the subway tunnels. In London, here is ABC's Pierre Thomas.
THOMAS: These exclusive photographs show the devastation inside the London subway lines after the July 7 attacks. This is the train at Edgware Road where seven people were killed. Eight people died on this train between the Liverpool and Aldgate stations. And this shows the train between King's Cross and Russell Square, where 27 were killed.
AYERS: There is considerable damage there. You can see it has blown out the sides, it has blown out the roof.
THOMAS: Bob Ayers is a security consultant with expertise in explosives, based here in London.
AYERS: That was a good-sized bomb that that man took down there and set off.
THOMAS: And there is more troubling news. ABC News has learned the July 7 plot may have been much larger than previously known. Sources familiar with the investigation tell us an additional 16 bombs were found in a car, believed rented by suicide bombers Shehzad Tanweer. That car was found five days after the attacks in Luton, when the bombers boarded a train to London.
AYERS: I believe that the explosives that were left in that car were left there for a second strike. But the Metropolitan Police responded so quickly, they were able to get to the car and take control of the car before the second team could get the explosives and leave.
THOMAS: These pictures obtained by ABC News show the bombs for the first time. The bombs were made of homemade high-explosives. Some were packaged like pancakes. Some had nails for use as shrapnel. An x- ray picture of one of the bombs in the trunk of the car show a deadly concoction.
AYERS: You see what is bulging on the sides of the bottle are nails. Many, many nails. And the nails are put there so that when the bomb goes off, the nails will tear tissue and kill people in the area. Bombs don't kill by concussion. Small bombs, they kill by the blast effects of fragments of glass or metal, and this is designed to kill people.
THOMAS: So now, Elizabeth, you understand why police here in London are so deeply concerned. They are in a race against time, against people who want to kill.
VARGAS: All right.
Times
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22989-1710681,00.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who is Bob Ayers???????
------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote from above
"Bob Ayers is a security consultant with expertise in explosives, based here in London. "
------------------------------------------------------------------------
an expert in explosives?....er try... INFORMATION WARFARE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Ayers is director of ParaProtect, an IT security company, and the former chief information-warfare officer at the US defence department. - source 1
http://support.casals.com/aaaflash1/busca.asp?ID_AAAControl=4688
http://www.paraprotect.com/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
excerpt from a talk given by Bob Ayers:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Lee Ayers is a Director for Critical National Infrastructure Defence for Northrop Grumman Mission Systems Europe
A former US DoD official, Bob now is a UK citizen
This presentation will examine the characteristics of an effective program for defending the nations Critical computing and communications systems. The audience will gain the knowledge required to understand how to construct a national CNI Defence programme. Target audience: Senior government officials.
Interestingly he differentiated between a "conventional war" and a "logical war". In his words, there is a "clear indication of victor" in a conventional war. As well, a conventional war is, as Clausewitz would agree, between nation states, whereas a logical war is not.
He uses this terminology, which some people may not be familiar with: Strategic warning: You are going to be attacked Tactical warning: You have been attacked
An interesting point he made is that with a "logical war" you have difficulty knowing how bad the problem is.
All good indicators are observable and measurable possess a state of normality are logically predictive of the anticipated event takes place sufficiently far in advance of the event to allow you to take an action
"One indicator of a nuclear attack is a bright light in the sky. However, it is not a GOOD indicator because you don't have time to respond"
He claims that logical attacks have no strategic warning and that tactical warning requires rapid data collection and effective reporting mechanisms, which are almost always missing.
Offensive IW techniques occur prior to declaration of war.
I would say that IW is also extremely hard to model - which means hard to train for! (The military motto of "train like we fight" is nearly impossible to achieve, in my opinion.)
https://lists.immunitysec.com/pipermail/dailydave/2004-October/001032.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Calling something 'national critical infrastructure' is another way of giving the military control of something civilian
https://www.immunitysec.com/pipermail/dailydave/2004-October/001039.html
a comment made by someone attewnding that presentation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
so we have a n article by the Times transcripting an ABC
News show, which in effect PURE PSYOPS
WE HAVE TALK OF EXPLOSIVES BY
AN EXPERT IN INFOWARFARE
FOR NORTHRUP GRUNMANN & THE PENTAGON
ASK YOURSELF THIS:
WHERE DID THE LUTON 7-7 2005 CCTV REALLY COME FROM???
WHERE DID THE CCTV OF THE LATEST BOMBINGS 21-7-2005 REALLY COME FROM?
WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE???
London bombers had nail bombs for 'second strike'
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last night ABC News in America screened unauthorised images of the damage left by the London bombs on July 7, and of unexploded devices found in a car parked at Luton railway station.
This is a transcript of the interview between ABC presenters Elizabeth Vargas and Pierre Thomas, and Robert Ayers, a security analyst who was shown the pictures
VARGAS: We have exclusive, new details tonight about the terrorist attacks that killed 56 people in London two and a half weeks ago. There were four suicide bombings, three in the subway and one on a bus. ABC News has learned that the bombers left behind a large stash of unexploded bombs in a car, 16 in all. ABC News has also obtained the first photographs of the wreckage those bombs caused deep in the subway tunnels. In London, here is ABC's Pierre Thomas.
THOMAS: These exclusive photographs show the devastation inside the London subway lines after the July 7 attacks. This is the train at Edgware Road where seven people were killed. Eight people died on this train between the Liverpool and Aldgate stations. And this shows the train between King's Cross and Russell Square, where 27 were killed.
AYERS: There is considerable damage there. You can see it has blown out the sides, it has blown out the roof.
THOMAS: Bob Ayers is a security consultant with expertise in explosives, based here in London.
AYERS: That was a good-sized bomb that that man took down there and set off.
THOMAS: And there is more troubling news. ABC News has learned the July 7 plot may have been much larger than previously known. Sources familiar with the investigation tell us an additional 16 bombs were found in a car, believed rented by suicide bombers Shehzad Tanweer. That car was found five days after the attacks in Luton, when the bombers boarded a train to London.
AYERS: I believe that the explosives that were left in that car were left there for a second strike. But the Metropolitan Police responded so quickly, they were able to get to the car and take control of the car before the second team could get the explosives and leave.
THOMAS: These pictures obtained by ABC News show the bombs for the first time. The bombs were made of homemade high-explosives. Some were packaged like pancakes. Some had nails for use as shrapnel. An x- ray picture of one of the bombs in the trunk of the car show a deadly concoction.
AYERS: You see what is bulging on the sides of the bottle are nails. Many, many nails. And the nails are put there so that when the bomb goes off, the nails will tear tissue and kill people in the area. Bombs don't kill by concussion. Small bombs, they kill by the blast effects of fragments of glass or metal, and this is designed to kill people.
THOMAS: So now, Elizabeth, you understand why police here in London are so deeply concerned. They are in a race against time, against people who want to kill.
VARGAS: All right.
Times
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22989-1710681,00.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who is Bob Ayers???????
------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote from above
"Bob Ayers is a security consultant with expertise in explosives, based here in London. "
------------------------------------------------------------------------
an expert in explosives?....er try... INFORMATION WARFARE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Ayers is director of ParaProtect, an IT security company, and the former chief information-warfare officer at the US defence department. - source 1
http://support.casals.com/aaaflash1/busca.asp?ID_AAAControl=4688
http://www.paraprotect.com/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
excerpt from a talk given by Bob Ayers:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Lee Ayers is a Director for Critical National Infrastructure Defence for Northrop Grumman Mission Systems Europe
A former US DoD official, Bob now is a UK citizen
This presentation will examine the characteristics of an effective program for defending the nations Critical computing and communications systems. The audience will gain the knowledge required to understand how to construct a national CNI Defence programme. Target audience: Senior government officials.
Interestingly he differentiated between a "conventional war" and a "logical war". In his words, there is a "clear indication of victor" in a conventional war. As well, a conventional war is, as Clausewitz would agree, between nation states, whereas a logical war is not.
He uses this terminology, which some people may not be familiar with: Strategic warning: You are going to be attacked Tactical warning: You have been attacked
An interesting point he made is that with a "logical war" you have difficulty knowing how bad the problem is.
All good indicators are observable and measurable possess a state of normality are logically predictive of the anticipated event takes place sufficiently far in advance of the event to allow you to take an action
"One indicator of a nuclear attack is a bright light in the sky. However, it is not a GOOD indicator because you don't have time to respond"
He claims that logical attacks have no strategic warning and that tactical warning requires rapid data collection and effective reporting mechanisms, which are almost always missing.
Offensive IW techniques occur prior to declaration of war.
I would say that IW is also extremely hard to model - which means hard to train for! (The military motto of "train like we fight" is nearly impossible to achieve, in my opinion.)
https://lists.immunitysec.com/pipermail/dailydave/2004-October/001032.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Calling something 'national critical infrastructure' is another way of giving the military control of something civilian
https://www.immunitysec.com/pipermail/dailydave/2004-October/001039.html
a comment made by someone attewnding that presentation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
so we have a n article by the Times transcripting an ABC
News show, which in effect PURE PSYOPS
WE HAVE TALK OF EXPLOSIVES BY
AN EXPERT IN INFOWARFARE
FOR NORTHRUP GRUNMANN & THE PENTAGON
ASK YOURSELF THIS:
WHERE DID THE LUTON 7-7 2005 CCTV REALLY COME FROM???
WHERE DID THE CCTV OF THE LATEST BOMBINGS 21-7-2005 REALLY COME FROM?
WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE???
paul c
Comments
Hide the following 21 comments
Great Work!!
27.07.2005 21:24
7/7 was obviously to serve as a distraction from the Downing Street Minutes (documentary evidence proving both Bush & Bliar KNEW they were LYING about Iraq), the TREASON of Karl Rove, etc, etc, etc, as words like "INVESTIGATION, IMPEACHMENT, and PROSECUTION" grow in both popularity and volume.
Last week's "incidents" were obviously designed to leave behind "evidence", which could then be used to guide investigators towards a potential target, presumably one of the PNAC military destinations, like Iran or Syria.
This would also draw attention away from the fact that the Bliar Conspiracy Theory doesn't hold water, and that several key pieces of hard evidence are glaringly absent, like surveillance images.
Don't Fall for the PsyOps
hmmm
27.07.2005 21:39
This kind of media technique is typical Fox (is ABC murdoch, probably). Something strange is going on at the Beeb, has been since Gilligan it would seem. In the last week the BBC has been beaten to almost all of the "terrorism" stories as they broke and on 21/7 despite one of the incidents being at Shepherds Bush, their coverage was woeful - hours of pictures of police vans close-up and the same eyewitnesses ad-infinitum, sandwiched by speculation from an "expert". If you wanted any form of breaking news, you had to go to Sky.
Could be the terminal stage in the murdochisation of the beeb.
Sham
No Coinkey-Dink
27.07.2005 23:47
His job is to further the Official Conspiracy Theory, draw attention from the fact that key, independently-verifiable evidence is missing, and hide the fact that this is a False Flag, intended not only to strike fear in the hearts of Britons, but make them forget that Bliar's LIES about Iraq have been exposed, and possibly goad the UK into another Act of Aggression.
If this was not the case, the media would not have put any effort into hiding this man's background.
Don't Fall for the PsyOps
Don't Fall for the PsyOps
28.07.2005 08:23
Not magoo honest!!!
A bit of a climb down
28.07.2005 10:31
Wh'appen?
al-qaeda
28.07.2005 11:20
Oh, the al-qaeda thing is a red herring. What we have is a fracturing of a broad movement which draws ideological inspiration from Bin Laden, but probably not much else.
Jason Burke's articles are good on this:
http://www.observer.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1525351,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,,1524322,00.html
As for Mr/s "Don't Fall for the PsyOps" who has been keeping us all so entertained in recent days:
>>7/7 was obviously to serve as a distraction from the Downing Street Minutes (documentary >>evidence proving both Bush & Bliar KNEW they were LYING about Iraq),
"Obviously", you say? Hardly.
I think it's long been known by those who care about such things that the WMD claim was false. I don't see that any more documentary evidence is going to create a worse political problem for governments which don't have to face the electorate again for several years.
Blair, you'll recall, won (badly, but won) an election just a few months ago, despite having pretty much lost - I think - the argument over Iraq. Bombing London therefore seems somewhat unnecessary.
>>the TREASON of Karl Rove
Yeah, I don't think most people in Britain know who Karl Rove is, or care about whether or not what he did was "treason" (what kind of right-wing language is that?). Certainly if people knew anything of the story it would be likely to have approximately zero impact on their opinions about anything either way. I doubt Bush can do much to improve his ratings in the UK.
>>Last week's "incidents" were obviously designed to leave behind "evidence", which could >>then be used to guide investigators towards a potential target, presumably one of the >>PNAC military destinations, like Iran or Syria.
Ah ha, so this is presumably why the people involved appear to have been of Pakistani, Jamaican and Somali origin? How devious our governments are! Clearly if Pakistan, Jamaica or Somalia are in the frame, the first thing that will happen is the tanks roll into Iran or Syria. It's so obvious now!
>>this is a False Flag, intended not only to strike fear in the hearts of Britons, but make >>them forget that Bliar's LIES about Iraq have been exposed, and possibly goad the UK into >>another Act of Aggression.
In Madrid, a train bombing led to the ousting of an explicitly pro-War government and the election of one committed to withdrawing troops from Iraq, so it's far from clear how this is supposed to work.
It seems more likely that the bombings will increase public skepticism of involvement in imperialist military action alongside the US.
I'm afraid you show no sign of understanding the nature of public political opinion in the UK.
chatterton
jeeeeeeeeez
28.07.2005 12:41
media control by Centcom
and its GPS controlled corporate tentacles
General Electric = NBC
GPS = Pentagon
Murdoch = Blair = Queen = Aegis = corporate mercenaries
round and round we go - its a death-machine
there is no political bias
there is no politics in the media...
its all manufactured perception management
switch the telly on
have a look
blimey
how dumb do you need to be
to see you are not being told
the truth
or even an opinion that questions
the truth
every talking head is a corporate whore
or a spook with interests in getting QUEENIE her
AFRICAN RESOURCES
so she can hoard more gold
and fix the FEDERAL RESERVE
with the help of China and their bond buying / currency
redefinaition scheme
why do you think there is
a famine in Niger
the corporate controllers of grain...and cereal banks
have left the farmers high and dry
to enable the OIL/GOLD/MINERAL magnates
to drive through Niger from the north- Algeria
and from the south upwards from Nigeria
see also : ethnic driven conflict in SUDAN for resource control
and the training of US UK troops in Western Sahara
for 5 years
this planet is a slave colony
and your minds are being massaged by snippets of goo
vomited at you by representatives of
these global corporate wars
as they vie for position
at a trough
lined by billions of dead children
IT MUST BE STOPPED
paul c
Focus Is Interesting
29.07.2005 00:31
Hmm. You talk like a Spook. And no, that's not an uneducated assertion, that comes from several run-ins with positively-ID'ed Spooks working several IMC sites. Glad to know my work has raised your hackles a bit.
>>7/7 was obviously to serve as a distraction from the Downing Street Minutes (documentary >>evidence proving both Bush & Bliar KNEW they were LYING about Iraq),
"Obviously", you say? Hardly."
Really? What's been the top story for three weeks running ... ?
"I think it's long been known by those who care about such things that the WMD claim was false. I don't see that any more documentary evidence is going to create a worse political problem for governments which don't have to face the electorate again for several years."
It's not about elections. It's about holding these LIARS and War Criminals responsible, as the Law demands. That hasn't been done yet.
"Blair, you'll recall, won (badly, but won) an election just a few months ago"
Perhaps. The recent Fraud in the USA doesn't bode well, considering all the noise about mail-in ballots in the UK.
>>the TREASON of Karl Rove
"Yeah, I don't think most people in Britain know who Karl Rove is, or care about whether or not what he did was "treason" (what kind of right-wing language is that?)."
Most Britons I know understand who he is, and care a great deal about what he did, and how it relates to the issue of Iraq.
And that is only "right-wing language" when the Hard Right uses it in a laughable matter to silence critics. Under the legal definition, what Rove did was Treason, and he should be held to account for it.
"Certainly if people knew anything of the story it would be likely to have approximately zero impact on their opinions about anything either way."
Really. That's why the PNAC Regime is scrambling to cover it up and avoid talking about it, I suppose ... It is another piece in the puzzle proving that Bush/Blair knowngly LIED, in order to justify a pre-planned, ILLEGAL Act of Aggression, for which they have not yet been held to account.
>>Last week's "incidents" were obviously designed to leave behind "evidence", which could >>then be used to guide investigators towards a potential target, presumably one of the >>PNAC military destinations, like Iran or Syria.
"Ah ha, so this is presumably why the people involved appear to have been ..."
According to the LIARS, perhaps, but the evidence doesn't support this assertion. Neither does it address the point at hand ...
>>this is a False Flag, intended not only to strike fear in the hearts of Britons, but make >>them forget that Bliar's LIES about Iraq have been exposed, and possibly goad the UK into >>another Act of Aggression.
"In Madrid, a train bombing led to the ousting of an explicitly pro-War government"
That's great for the Spanish People, but that was simply the last straw, and the bombers turned out to have been former assets of the intelligence services.
Back to London ...
"so it's far from clear how this is supposed to work."
Watched the "news" lately?
"It seems more likely that the bombings will increase public skepticism of involvement in imperialist military action alongside the US."
Indeed. But that doesn't address the central issue - that the people who brought us "Iraq has WMDs" can't seem to be able to prove their ever-shifting Theory. Nor does it demand that Blair et al be held to account for their criminal actions under the law. It's simply a nice distraction. The People never supported the war.
"I'm afraid you show no sign of understanding the nature of public political opinion in the UK."
Most certainly I do.
Don't Fall for the PsyOps
square peg, round hole
29.07.2005 08:55
"Hmm. You talk like a Spook. And no, that's not an uneducated assertion, that comes from several run-ins with positively-ID'ed Spooks working several IMC sites. Glad to know my work has raised your hackles a bit."
You couldn't spot a spook if Stella Rimmington gave you a wedgie. From my perspective, the only way you could argue spooking on this site would be all the silly conspiracy theories as a tactic to marginalise thise site. But sadly, I think the reality is that we have a bunch loons here, not spooks. Why? Because this site is of little consequence/threat to the Establishment- sorry to burst that bubble Mr Ops.
Do you really think there is a big room in London or Cheltenham with a team of people wearing tweed jhodpurs and barbours payed to come to places like this and argue the toss with crackpots? If this place was deemed a threat to national security they would infiltrate and destroy it invisibly from within. You think MI5 are incapable of that?
As rightly asserted, the WMD claims had been thoruoghly discredited in the UK long before the parliamentary vote. Christ, even a quick shuftie at back issues of Private Eye would reveal the Iraqi dissidents who supplied the intel were in the pay. You also forget that MI5/6 were none too happy with Campbell rejig. But, with a lack of public accountability what can be done? Why did the vote go in Blair's favour. There's an *erm* secret weapon called the 3 line whip... go research it.
Karl Rove: you must move in some dreadfully dull circles then. Most people I know don't him.
If you undestand public political opinion so well, riddle me this Batman: why is there a shift away from supporting ID cards. Why are so many mainstream people (who take their cues off opinion) breaking rank and linking the attacks to Telic? Which actually is keeping Iraq in the public mind... precisely what the bombers wished to achieve, just like in Madrid. Now Madirid was truly an act of stupidity for a conspiracist. Did you know that there was a suppressed threat from Bin Laden in the run up to the last UK elections? But I suppose you did being so in touch with spookdom. How does that factor into Operation Half-arsed?
The only person I know who is "scared" is someone who witness the bus bomb happening. I think you conveniently or unwittingly are taking what is being stated in regards to the US situation and applying it to the UK- the same mistake the NeoCons and NeoLabours are making. We have been living with terrorism for decades. Same shit, different smell.
You live in a paranoid fantasy world of the stubbly Black Hat Gang and the clean-shaven Lone Ranger and shadowy figures with poison-tipped umbrellas in dark trenchcoats. Neither of those worlds EVER existed. You haven't yet understood that the world can't always fit into your prejudices and rather modifying your opinions you just dig yourself in deeper and deeper into delusion.
It would suit me down to the ground for all the people I despise to be responsible, caught and chucked in jail. But life is never that elegant. I'd suffice for the real criminals to get their cummupence. After all, I don't want to live in Zimbabwe or even go back to Thatcherite justice.
magoo
ta very much
29.07.2005 09:16
keep going ... cogent analysis is urgently necessary ...
... don't worry about getting it wrong sometimes ... we all do ...
... your detractors are worried too, but by something else!
one love.
jackslucid
e-mail: jackslucid@hotmail.com
La la la
29.07.2005 10:32
>> It's about holding these LIARS and War Criminals responsible, as the Law demands.
It's highly unlikely a legal move against Blair will work (there is an attempt, actually). It might against Bush since impeachement is an established procedure.
But any genuine progressive knows that there is no substitute for building a movement. To turn the struggle against imperialism into primarily a middle class issue for highly paid lawyers would be a huge mistake.
So I think you're on completely the wrong path there, certainly as regards the UK scene.
>>Most Britons I know understand who he [Karl Rove] is
I bet! But you don't know "most Britons", who don't even read newspapers much any more. But even those who do won't know much about him.
The Daily Mail, one of the biggest selling conservative tabloids, has mentioned Rove about half a dozen times in the last year, and hasn't mentioned the current controversy at all.
The Guardian, a low selling slightly left of centre newspaper, has mentioned him just over 60 times in the same period, and has covered the controversy.
The Daily Telegraph, the biggest selling conservative broadsheet, has only mentioned him 36 times.
The Express, another conservative tabloid, has only mentioned Rove 3 times, in passing, in the last year, and has not mentioned the CIA story.
The Sun has mentioned Rove twice. Once in August last year and once in September last year.
[Source: Lexis Nexis]
So, you know, I think general knowledge is going to be low.
>>It is another piece in the puzzle proving that Bush/Blair knowngly LIED
We already know that the WMD claims were false, though. So unless you're a lawyer, I don't get why we're supposed to be excited by this, or why Blair would be so worried by it he would kill 60 people and injure 700 in London.
>>The People never supported the war.
Well, it seems most people would have supported the war with a new UN resolution (I would have opposed it whatever on anti-imperialist grounds, just as I would have supported non-imperialist removal of Saddam whatever on libertarian political grounds). Once the war started, opinion moved in favour of military action, as expected. The peak of opposition was around the massive march in London in 2003, when about 52% of people polled said they opposed the war as proposed.
But, as you'd expect, it was all quite wishy washy in the end.
Certainly strong enough for you to build your argument on.
chatterton
jackslucid
29.07.2005 10:55
By your own logic: how do you know there ever was a shooting?
magoo
Focus Still Interesting
29.07.2005 21:30
It's not a name so much as a warning, but I like the defamatory tone. Supports what I'm saying.
Interesting that you've decided to pay so much attention to me specifically ...
"Hmm. You talk like a Spook. And no, that's not an uneducated assertion, that comes from several run-ins with positively-ID'ed Spooks working several IMC sites. Glad to know my work has raised your hackles a bit."
[You couldn't spot a spook if ...]
I've spotted, and routed out, with the help of Administrators and fellow volunteers, several positively-ID'ed Government Spooks during my time on IMCs. It's mostly in their language and focus which identifies them.
[Because this site is of little consequence/threat to the Establishment- sorry to burst that bubble]
Yes, language like that ...
More people now get their news from the web than the MSM, because the MSM has observably destroyed its own credibility over the past four years. I've worked in both the US and Canadian media, and know for a fact that at the very least, the Media Establishment is very worried.
And it was the 'net that was instrumental in exposing these LIARS before their long-planned war.
[Do you really think there is a big room in London or Cheltenham with a team of people wearing tweed jhodpurs and barbours payed to come to places like this and argue]
I don't pretend to know where they're working from, but yes, I do. Your Disinformation about the specific setting doesn't hide that fact. The people I've helped identify have worked out of Israel, Maryland, Vancouver, Langley, VA, and especially the brand new, multi-billion dollar Cyber Warfare Centre at Fort Bragg.
The FBI's work in this specific area has recently been a subject much covered by a MSM attempting to claw its way back into relevance. Seems the PATRIOT Act is responsible for much of this work, but such activities have always gone hand-in-hand with political activism.
Hoover, anyone .. ?
[But, with a lack of public accountability what can be done?]
That's a silly question. This is the central issue that was being heavily-debated when 7/7 occured, and words such as INVESTIGATION, IMPEACHMENT, and PROSECUTION had grown in both popularity and volume.
[Why did the vote go in Blair's favour.]
Postal vote fraud, perhaps?
[Karl Rove: you must move in some dreadfully dull circles then. Most people I know don't him.]
Whatever. There's nothing dull about political intrigue, warfare, criminal conspiracy and treason. It's the stuff of lasting art, literature, etc ...
[If you undestand public political opinion so well, riddle me this Batman: why is there a shift away from supporting ID cards.]
Because people don't want to live in a police state. They want ot live peaceful, fulfilling lives, just like everyone else.
No need to get 'snippy' ...
[The only person I know who is "scared" is someone who witness the bus bomb happening.]
That's BS. This act was designed to strike fear, and it has. Fear has a funny way of keeping people compliant. There's a saying that "Citizens hold their leaders' hands more tightly in the dark", sorry I don't remember who said it, but it pertained to the way Hitler manipulated the German public with bogeyman tales of "ze terrorists".
[I think you conveniently or unwittingly are taking what is being stated in regards to the US situation and applying it to the UK]
The situation is being used in the US to manipulate opinion, just as it is in the UK. It's all related, I'm afraid. When I first wrote the comment, it was for an American audience.
[You live in a ...]
That's Disinformation. You're giving yourself away again ...
I'm not naive enough to believe that in times of crisis such as these, especially when our leaders' many conscious LIES in the service to an agenda of Naked Aggression have been exposed, a certain amount of healthy skepticism (paranoia) is warranted.
I understand quite well the history of covert intelligence work.
[It would suit me down to the ground for all the people I despise to be responsible, caught and chucked in jail.]
It's not that I despise anyone. It's that the Law DEMANDS that this occur. That, and possibly worse, are the legal recourses of the criminals actions of these men, including "the Supreme Crime, the Crime Against Peace".
[But life is never that elegant.]
That's a cop-out. What's that saying, The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing"?
[I'd suffice for the real criminals to get their cummupence.]
Good to say, but that being said, I don't understand your narrow focus on myself ...
Don't Fall for the PsyOps
Red Alert!!! Right lads, start scrambling your adverbials in the noun phrases!
30.07.2005 07:14
You are as much a sleuth as I am a spook= not.
Your pseudoscience is simple and nowt to do with language: anyone who disagrees with you is a spook. As reliable as a smart bomb, i.e. as reliable as you want to believe it is.
If you TRULY belive all that you write here, you are a first-class loon, otherwise you are no better than Fox news.
magoo
Focus Still Interesting
31.07.2005 18:44
I love the part where you keep saying I've posted here a lot under different aliases. Interesting that you would know that, and the reason I do that is because of the run-ins I've had in the past with Trolls and positively-ID'ed Spooks.
Don't Fall for the PsyOps
Don't Fall for the PsyOps
31.07.2005 19:07
BUT, I'm STILL waiting for you to publish your forensic methodology. Don't worry about it being possibly over my head I have friends in linguistics rightup to the professorship level. I'm pretty well-versed in descriptive phonology, generative grammer and sociolinguistics so I may get the gist.
magoo
I wonder....
31.07.2005 22:45
Big Bad Boab
Big Bad Boab
01.08.2005 06:42
1.) Being tenaciously opposed to conspiracy theories
2.) Being at least brighter than "dull normal" on the IQ scale
3.) Having an IP address that traces back to anywhere that is within 1 light years of any government building or includes Fort in the name (Glad I don't live in Fort William or Agusta... I have *been* to both am I spook??? Or a teuchter hahahah Good Chippie in Bill! Discounts for covert operatives on production of no ID whatsoever.)
Come on PsyOps more info how we can ALL snare spooks! Information is power after all!
Okay you are still drafting up your forensic linguistics paper. Meantine we can address the technological side:
How did you trace IP across shell accounts & proxies that were relaying from a hardware encrypted server without gaining physical access?
Or maybe you were:
a.) just on a witchhunt against the "non-believers!!!"
b.) and/or talking out talking bollocks again.
mooting magoo
The Spooks
01.08.2005 20:16
It never ceases to amaze me that in a country (well, yours and mine Magoo) where 1984, Catch 22, and other such works are on the compulsory school reading list - conspiracists are so keen to lump cynics in as Government stooges. Jings!
Still, Indymedia keeps them off the streets (and us too, but let's not go there).
Boab
Hope lies with the proles
01.08.2005 23:11
Magoo
I wonder
02.08.2005 20:12
Oh no - comments from 3 Scotsmen in a row! Prepare for Spook accusations! AHK AHK
Paranoid Pete