Perhaps terrorism is a bit like an ailment to the body, say a boil occasionally despoiling our skin beacause of our stupid diet.

I wonder why it is that there is little or no talk about dialogue with the people who feel so strongly as to earn the label of terrorist.

I can not understand what is meant by ‘winning’ in the context of terrorism.  How and when can we say that terrorism has been defeated?  For that matter, how can terrorists say they have ‘won’ anything when they are not making specific demands?  To talk about them ‘hating our freedoms’ is not only offensive rubbish, it is tantamount to ignoring, even exacerbating the suffering of the victims by diverting potentially remediating discourse into simplistic hate-filled rhetoric.  The idea that terror aimed at civilians is only acceptable when it is perpetrated by those in uniform is obscene, but it is being sold to us by our elected (and overwhelmingly re-elected) leaders.

There is a related question which has also been troubling me.  How can there be ‘innocent civilians’ in a true democracy?  I have marched, written and spoken in public against the war in Iraq, but if I didn’t do enough to stop it, am I culpable of failing to prevent at least Australia’s involvement?  Do we take collective responsibility as citizens of a member state of the Coalition for the bombing of Fallujah?  For the deliberate targeting of children and elderly women by snipers in Iraq?  It seems that the distinction between civilian and military is being blurred.

It is being said in high places that a terrorist attack on Australia is inevitable - sooner or later. Very likely so, particularly while we are part of the Bush/Blair ‘coalition’ in Iraq.

I am dismayed by the fact that there seems to have been absolutely zero comment in the Australian media about the Downing Street Memos - a series of top secret memos and minutes that were leaked to The Sunday Times in London 1st May.

These documents spell out in precise terms that in the first half of 2002, Bush and his minions had decided to attack Iraq, and that the strategy from that point was to fix the intelligence to fit the decision. This was about a year ahead of the actual attack when Bush, Blair and Howard were claiming there was no such plan. I should point out the Downing Streey has not denied the authenticity of these documents.

It took five weeks for there to be any mention of them in any of the US mainstream media! And even then, this ultimate smoking gun was dismissed as ‘old news’!
Tony Blair, and eventually Bush were caught up in a furore over the ramifications of these documents, which proved beyond any doubt that the assault on Iraq was based upon a pack of lies and deception. The revelations were slowly building up a head of steam in the US with a large number of Congressmen demanding an independent investigation.

Our great leader John Howard is entirely complicit in this. The fact that the Australian media saw fit to ignore all this makes a clear statement about the control the Howard government has over our media. Our mainstream media — and this includes the ABC — should hand its collective head in shame.

Coming back to the London bombings.

Most readers will I suspect think that the perpetrators were Muslim terrorists. Who else would do this?  Even though there is no evidence for that —  the one claim of responsibity on what is claimed to be an Al Qaeda website is considered to be very unreliable. Besides, it is a fact that Osama bin Laden was (and some believe still is) a CIA asset. Al Qaeda was a CIA creation from the days of the mujahadeen in Afghanistan. The Taliban grew from all this —  and they were trained and funded by the CIA.

I have no doubt that there are plenty of very angry Muslims in the world —  far more than ever before thanks to the disgusting, murderous behavior of the Americans in Iraq, and their blatantly one sided support for Israel in their oppression of Palestinians.

But —  and here you may well be shocked —  you cannot rule out that this was a black ops false flag operation by one or more of the US or British covert agencies.  These dark and secret organisations specialise in dastardly deeds, carried out at the behest of nice people like George W Bush or Tony Blair —  or Vladimir Putin. The French are not unknown in this sort of activity —  remember the Rainbow Warrior?

Why? Because these great leaders find that when support for their actions by the people is flagging, they need something to happen that gets the people behind them again.

Blair has been struggling for a long time —  he only got back in power by default. Bush has been plunging in the polls in the US as Americans have begun, in increasing numbers, to wake up from their post 9-11 stupor. There are ever more calls for him to be impeached.

Both of them badly needed something terrible to happen, to stir up fear, to reawaken the terror dragon.

At this point you may be about to consign me to the looney bin.

Before you do, I ask you to go and have a look at two post London Bombing web pages. Read them carefully. Check out the links. Think about them. Then you can begin to come to some conclusions.

Finally, don’t expect to find any of this in your newspapers or on TV. The mainstream media is a key part of the problem —  The media is nothing more nor less these days than the propaganda organ for the governments in power.  it is entirely complicit in the shocking fraud being perpetrated upon the people of the planet.

Few if any of the terrible things happening around the world today would have been possible if the media did what journalism is supposed to do —  investigate and tell the truth.

Take a look at these two sites.

Canon Fodder
What’s Behind the London Attacks?
By Matt Hutaff
Jul 7, 2005
http://www.thesimon.com/magazine/articles/canon_fodder/print_0889_what_behind_london_attacks.html

London Underground Bombing ‘Exercises’ Took Place at Same Time as Real Attack
Culpability cover scenario echoes 9/11 wargames.
http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/july2005/090705bombingexercises.htm

What drives people like Paul De Burgh-Day to believe that every bad deed in the world is in fact a Government sanctioned secret operation?

Why are some people so eager to believe everything is a conspiracy?  It’s just sad.

CONSPIRACY AND FORESTRY AND THE BUG

Well Geoff, it seems the Forest debate overtakes the little isle and the christian right vs the antichrist overtakes the world. As somebody said elsewhere in this precious little forum paper; what’s the point in taking a stance and building a case for it in the face of another doing the same thing? Or what’s the point in trying to justify your stance in the face of an opposition?
What’s the point in being suspicious and seeking the feasibilities that support your suspicions?

Having said that; most will defend and defend to the hilt if their lifestyle or that of their loved ones are threatened - even to the point of pre-emptive killing based on self righteous belief.

There are, pragmatically termed, occasions when most will entertain conspiracy for fear of being victim and for defence against it or avoidence thereof.

It’s the avoidance that I am coming to here. If we push on well motived to contribute to and work with each other in accord with truthful righteousness, ignoring the ills that prevail, turning the other cheek, then the instigators of ailment should come round and cease to ail.

But wait. There is a bug in the works, and always there is the flaw and the reaction. From whence does the bug come into this marvelous wonderlandic universe full of perpetually modern high performance nature?  From whence comes that bug?

sam

If you believe that stuff, no doubt you still put out a stocking for Santa to fill.

Our ability to concoct these stories is fabulous.

Why would the British Governmet invest so much effort into winning the Olympic Games only to destroy the sort of euphoria blokes like Blair and Howard dream of 24 hours later?

Sorry Paul,  the pixies at the end of your garden might believe it, but not the rest of us, not even those who lived the the days of the Hawthorn sock in the freezer.

More power the leach filled ditch!

I’m not into conspiracy theories, but will somebody please tell me how we will know when the War on Terror is over and who won?

It’s not really a ‘war’ on terror Justa. That’s just the Bush chest pound. It’s an international crime investigation with a liscence to kill and make collateral damage that’s worse than the ‘terror’.  It’s over when Sam’s bug is fixed. It grows from mistakes, some of them horrible, downright evil. Some believe in the mistakes and build a secondary parallel, usually I/me/mine first, civilisation which is more like a facist rat regime with in-fighting and certainly conspiracy. In my mind it is wrong to conspire against conspiracy. As far as earthly life is concerned the fascists will think they’ve won when the lithium chip implant is in nearly all (there’s some powerpoint show going round about that currently).  But as far spiritual life is concerned the fascists are going down in the end. Why is it happening like this? I don’t know but the bug will be fixed; but by separation.
mont

I don’t see that Paul De Burgh-Day has suggested that every bad deed in the world is in fact a Government sanctioned secret operation?
Nor do I see that he is suggesting that everything is a conspiracy?

It is widely acknowledged that Bush decided to attack Iraq, “and that the strategy from that point was to fix the intelligence to fit the decision”. I,m pretty sure it was no less than Paul Wolfowitz who admitted as much. Call that a plan, a conspiracy, a strategy, call it what you like.

However I would agree that the idea of the US or British covert agencies perpetrating the murderous acts seen recently in London is implausible.

I would also say though, that post 9/11 one should not be so quick to mock ideas that seem shocking to us as “conspiracy theories”.
It costs nothing to be cynical.
Ask yourselves this question. Would you have mocked Paul in the same way if in 2001 he had suggested on this website that, there were Islamic terrorists living and working in the US and training in US flight schools to fly large passenger jets with the ultimate plan to hijack such planes, and then fly them into the twin towers, pentagon and White House?

Rick,

You are correct to highlight the innacuracy of what I said in regard to De Burgh-Day’s comment.  My reply was intended to convey my frustration with the type of people who, collectively, claim everything is a “black ops” job.

However, this does not change my view that De Burgh-Day is totally and utterly wrong.

Rick, I am a pretty big cynic about a lot of things, but cynicism swings both ways.

Terrorists come from groups of people who, like de Burgh-Day, see (mainly Western) conspiracies when there aren’t any.

They then find a justifiable framework for their actions out of the conspiracy. 

I would have to disagree with you, Rat. Being an Indian, you can’t argue that it’s largely ‘Westerners’ with these ideas.

The fact is that Islam wasn’t a threat until the 9/11 attack, even though Pakistani militants have been entering Indian-administered Kashmir since 1947, killing entire Hindu villages, sometimes. It’s also true that some aspects of the 9/11 attack is dodgy - a simple example is the fact that a freefall of that height would have taken about 6 seconds. The buildings collapsed in 6.2 It should have taken longer, as not only were there floors, but there’s usually structural support.

Furthermore, it was the Americans who gave Afghanistan the weapons in the first place, and there’s actually quite a lot of evidence that the 9/11 attacks was an inside job, like the Pearl Harbour attack.

In light of this, I think it’s unfair to stigmatise all Government conspiracies as foolish. You should at least look at the cases individually, before making a decision.

It’s far more dangerous to be ignorant than to be sceptical. I’d rather be suspicious and paranoid, than ignorant and a pawn in some jack asses’ game of Human Chess.