Islamist terror - yay or nay?...

Welcome to UKHIppy2764@2x.png

UKHippy is a long running online community and of likeminded people exploring all interpretations on what it means to be living an alternative lifestyle -- we welcome discussions on everything related to sustainability, the environment, alternative spirituality, music, festivals, politics and more -- membership of this website is free but supported by the community.

  • Following on from a discussion in another forum I thought I'd ask anyone here who's interested if they know exactly what the evidence for (and against) the conspiracy theory that so-called Islamist terror attacks are in fact the work of western governments intent on creating panic for their own ends actually might be?

    Does it convince you, or even make you wonder?

  • Given the history of duplicity of govts throughout the ages I rarely believe anything they say any more. :)


    That doesnt mean I agree with the TFCT (Tin-foil conspiracy theorists :D ) view of it all being co-ordinated by the CIA, NSA, RSPCA or whoever but I dont discount it either.

    "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do."

  • Quote from Coyote

    Given the history of duplicity of govts throughout the ages I rarely believe anything they say any more. :)

    That doesnt mean I agree with the TFCT (Tin-foil conspiracy theorists :D ) view of it all being co-ordinated by the CIA, NSA, RSPCA or whoever but I dont discount it either.


    I'll agree with that

  • Quote from tekno slave

    :ditto:.... fook I've just dittoed Coyote....:eek::faint:


    :reddevil:


    "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do."

  • there are 1000s of extremist websites out there (for all types) I find it unlikely that the Intelligence Services are behind all of them.
    While personally not wanting to condone violence, IMO,many people all over the world do have legitimate greivances against all kinds of authority. Many of those people would and do promote violence as a way to acheiving redress.


    It wouldnt suprise me that a state from time to time would seek to exploit these groups and situations for its own benefit and I beleive that there are examples of this (cia supplying weapons and personnel to the contra's in Nicarauga or covert SAS missions in Ireland in the 80's) but to suggest that its ALL a conspiracy is actually to divert attention from the struggles (right or wrong) of the perportraiters.


    for example... If the NSA/ Cia blew up the twin towers then we focus our energy on exposing what our leaders are doing to us -Rather than looking at what we are doing to a foreign country that could make some of its citizens crash a plane into a public building killing 1000's of people.

  • Quote from mudrat

    Following on from a discussion in another forum I thought I'd ask anyone here who's interested if they know exactly what the evidence for (and against) the conspiracy theory that so-called Islamist terror attacks are in fact the work of western governments intent on creating panic for their own ends actually might be?

    Does it convince you, or even make you wonder?



    This is as good as any place to start - a fact pact leaflet re 9/11 - http://www.wearechange.org/flyer/flyer.pdf also Webster Griffin Tarpleys book 9/11 Synthetic Terror which looks a 9/11 but also places it in the context of an ongoing programme of control of the masses by the global elites. Obviously Loose Change II and Mind the Gap documentaries as well as Terrorstorm.

    A good place to start to be convinced about CIA manipulation of world affairs is Mohammed Mosadek the president of Iran who was deposed following CIA sponsored terrorist attacks following his claim for a share of Iranian oil for Iran rather than all for, I think it was BP.

    With the deathbed confession of E Howard Hunt, where he clearly points the finger for Kennedy's assination at LBJ and the state apparatus - well, if the president can be removed in such a brutal fashion and the truth remains hidden for 40 years....

    The hijackers for 9/11, 6 have ben found alive, there was no arab DNA found in the bodies and body parts of the flight that supposedly was brought down by passenger intervention, there is no evidence that any of the 'hijackers' boarded the planes. It is laughable to accept that a passenger plan hit the Pentagon. The Twin Towers fell at freefall speed - following multiple explosions. Building 7 was reported as having fallen before it fell and now the BBC have lost ALL of the original footage of the events on that most historic of days.

    7/7 the british government have refused to hold an enquiry - madness. There is conflicting evidence re the 'bombers' and no convincing cctv images have been released. The so called ringleader of the 7/7 plot is an MI5 agent and although wanted by the US was and I believe still is under British protection. The only provable facts of terrorism re 7/7 are that explosions occurred and also, a few days later of the shooting in the head, whilst being held on the floor, 8 times, with illeagal dum dum bullets, of Menendez.

    I could go on an on but I guess it is best to start at the beginning -

    Look at the evidenced acts of self harm and of state sponsored terrorism

    Pearl Harbour
    Gulf of Tonkin
    Kennedy
    Bobby Kennedy
    Ruby Ridge
    Waco
    JFK Jnr
    Operation Gladio
    Mosadek

    As you dig through these you will be pointed to further acts.........

    Although there are lots that despise America and the West, it seems that an overwhelming proportion of terrorist acts can be attributed to home grown spies and double agents.

  • Quote from welshlamb

    there is no evidence that any of the 'hijackers' boarded the planes.

    This kind of logic cracks me up. The CIA are capable of weaving an intricate conspiracy on a grand scale, yet they manage to leave a trail of obvious clues, failing to cover their tracks by forging such evidence? Sloppy.


    Quote

    the BBC have lost ALL of the original footage of the events on that most historic of days.

    They've lost a few classic episodes of Dr Who. Makes you think, doesn't it? :eek:

  • Quote from Atomik

    They've lost a few classic episodes of Dr Who. Makes you think, doesn't it? :eek:


    Its ok my cousin Andy has virtually all of them :D


    But on the point of lost footage - it is more than a little suss if the beeb have lost the footage of 911.....

    "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do."

  • Quote from Coyote

    But on the point of lost footage - it is more than a little suss if the beeb have lost the footage of 911.....

    Anything can appear suss if you're looking to believe. Given the amount of footage that exists from that day, I really doubt that the Beeb's footage represents the missing and damning evidence of a conspiracy.

  • Quote

    This kind of logic cracks me up. The CIA are capable of weaving an intricate conspiracy on a grand scale, yet they manage to leave a trail of obvious clues, failing to cover their tracks by forging such evidence? Sloppy.



    Its always the case that CCTV cameras do not work when the authorities ahve something to hide. There is no CCTV footage of the 'hijackers' boarding the planes. No bodies. No DNA. Just the passport that flew out of the plane that hit Tower 1 and landed intact on the pavement - which the FBI now say was a 'rumour that might be true'

    Quote


    They've lost a few classic episodes of Dr Who. Makes you think, doesn't it? :eek:



    The BBC only reported that they had lost the footage following the revelation that they had reported building 7 had fallen 30 minutes prior to it having done so. A bit like Lee Harvey Oswalds details appearing in a newspaper in New Zealand before his details had been released in the US - someone got the timezone wrong on that one.....

  • Quote from welshlamb

    Its always the case that CCTV cameras do not work when the authorities ahve something to hide. There is no CCTV footage of the 'hijackers' boarding the planes. No bodies. No DNA. Just the passport that flew out of the plane that hit Tower 1 and landed intact on the pavement - which the FBI now say was a 'rumour that might be true'

    Makes you wonder why such cunning conspirators couldn't fake such evidence, doesn't it?

    Quote

    The BBC only reported that they had lost the footage following the revelation that they had reported building 7 had fallen 30 minutes prior to it having done so.

    That old chestnut. Makes you wonder why on earth "they" would even bother releasing such news in advance. Building 7 was relatively small potatoes on 9/11. Having orchestrated such a fake attack, you'd think the government would then back the fuck off and let the news agencies get on with it. Golden rule of any conspiracy - keep it as simple as possible. :rolleyes:

  • What gets my is why some folks go on about these types of "conspiracies"....as if the govts in question dont do dubious things in the open! :eek:

    "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do."

  • Isn't it obvious? The Beeb have been orchestrating terror attacks to make up for the lack of decent news recently

  • Quote from Darkflame

    Isn't it obvious? The Beeb have been orchestrating terror attacks to make up for the lack of decent news recently


    Nah, they've simply replaced decent journalism with LCD Whorenalism (the "CCTC" programme last monday, the scientologist one last night)....:rolleyes:

    "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do."

  • Quote

    Makes you wonder why such cunning conspirators couldn't fake such evidence, doesn't it?



    Why do they need to when they control the mass media and couldn't give a fuck about the minority that see through the lies.

    Quote


    That old chestnut. Makes you wonder why on earth "they" would even bother releasing such news in advance. Building 7 was relatively small potatoes on 9/11. Having orchestrated such a fake attack, you'd think the government would then back the fuck off and let the news agencies get on with it. Golden rule of any conspiracy - keep it as simple as possible. :rolleyes:



    If your not up to speed with developments and 9/11 info should you really be saying things like 'that old chestnut'. It was just a couple of months ago that it was revealed that the BBC had reported the building falling 30 mins before it did. Building 7 is not small potatoes. Do you know what was in building 7? I guess not.
    Building 7 had to go and there needed to be a story outlined to the press, but it should have been given after the demolition. This is massive news, it confirms building 7 as the smoking gun.

  • Quote from Coyote

    What gets my is why some folks go on about these types of "conspiracies"....as if the govts in question dont do dubious things in the open! :eek:



    They mostly do stuff in the open. I don't regard any of the list in my original post to this thread as conspiracy theories, as they are now proven and in the public domain.

    Foe example

    Waco was in front of our eyes, the senate hearing saw the branch davidians being burned, gased with cyanide gas and shot with machine gun fire as they tried to escape.

    But the report by the senate hearing lays the blame for the deaths squarely at the feet of the davidians themselves and does not mention the fbi claiming to not have fired a single shot, does not lay the blame at the feet of Clinto for ordering the murders.

    The elites like to do stuff in plain view - it demonstrates our impotency and their power.

  • Quote from welshlamb

    Why do they need to when they control the mass media and couldn't give a fuck about the minority that see through the lies.

    If that was the case, then why would the BBC need to lose footage? You can't have it both ways. ;)

    Quote

    If your not up to speed with developments and 9/11 info should you really be saying things like 'that old chestnut'. It was just a couple of months ago that it was revealed that the BBC had reported the building falling 30 mins before it did.

    It's already been debated on this forum. Here, it's an old chestnut. If you're not up to speed with the conversations we've had, you should really avoid patronising people before you know what you're talking about.


    Quote

    Building 7 is not small potatoes.

    Building 7 was absolutey small potatoes from the perspective of the point you're making. People were transfixed by the twin towers - the media didn't need to be spoon-fed information about building 7.


    Quote

    Do you know what was in building 7? I guess not.

    Yes I do. You wouldn't be making an assumption there before you have any actual evidence would you? :whistle:


    Quote

    Building 7 had to go and there needed to be a story outlined to the press

    You're contradicting yourself. One minute the conspirators don't need to worry about details because only the minority will ever see through their lies, the next minute the conspirators need to cross every "t" and dot every "i".


    Now on another note.... can we please avoid this becoming a 9/11 thread? The original poster asked a general question about Islamic terror, and it would be nice if we could get back to that topic. Feel free to start (another) 9/11 thread.

  • Quote from welshlamb


    Waco was in front of our eyes, the senate hearing saw the branch davidians being burned, gased with cyanide gas and shot with machine gun fire as they tried to escape.



    Waco was the sort of disinformation governments really do get up to. The Branch Dividians didn't resist the second attck serious and were killed by the FBI and the fire they started, not in a mass suicide as was claimed.

    BUT the FBI did not invent the cult, nor did they fake the original ATF raid.

    911 has been used as an excuse for the Bush administration to do what they wanted to do anyway, but I'm not convinced that they had any part in 911.

    It raises too many questions:

    If Bush knew it was a fake why didn't he play the hero rather than look confused and fly off to a secret bunker somewhere?
    Why were the fake hijackers Saudis (our friends) and not Afghans and Iraqis (the people Bush and co wanted to get)
    Etc etc



  • I have ben asked to not bang on about 9/11 in this thread but I could offer sound evidence to support a theory that Bush did not know and was in fact under threat himself, from a coup, which wanted to manipulate his decisions and force his hand re Afghanistan and Iraq.

    Also, there has been no evidence that the hijackers are who the US government say they were and there is no evidence that they got on the planes....

    Perhaps I will start a 9/11 thread.......

  • Quote from welshlamb

    but I could offer sound evidence to support a theory that Bush did not know and was in fact under threat himself, from a coup

    This is exactly the problem with most conspiracy theories. In order to legitamise themselves, they become increasingly convoluted, postulating ever more implausible scenarios in an attempt to encompass all the facts that inconveniently undermine their case. It's kinda like trying to catch water in a sieve. And then we're told that on the one hand, the government can perpetrate these wonderfully convoluted conspiracies under the full scrutiny of the world's media without anyone of significance noticing, then on the other hand, it appears that any old bunch of hippies on the internet can discover all about it!