BBsCum

The BBC newz (newz, ‘cos it certainty ain’t news) and current department really turns my stomach. Medialens [1, 2, 3] amongst others has consistently uncovered the filth (my words, not their) that gets passed off as journalism, and not only that, but insanely the worlds best journalism – so they would have us believe]. Far from the pinnacle of journalism, it’s the pinnacle of propaganda and downright lies.

Here’s an article stolen from: http://landdestroyer.blogspot.mx/2012/07/bbc-rides-with-al-qaeda-in-aleppo-syria.html (thanks to ICH for publicising it]

–

BBC Rides with Al Qaeda in Aleppo, Syria

BBC Covers Up War Crimes – Misleads Over Syrian Security Operations.
by Tony CartalucciUpdate: Indeed BBC did not see “MIGs” bombing Aleppo, though it appears they weren’t even anti-tank SU-25’s but rather training aircraft. Aero L-39 Albatros are also not even “Russian-made” as the BBC claimed. The article below has been amended to reflect this information. Read here for more. 

July 25, 2012 – When big lies must be told, BBC is there. From Iraq to Afghanistan to Libya and now Syria, BBC has paved the way for Western disinformation meant to mange public perception around a war the public would otherwise never support or tolerate.

The BBC, caught on record producing entire “documentaries” on behalf of corporate-financier interests, has already been caught in immense lies regarding the NATO-fueled destabilization of Syria. This includes the disingenuous use of photos from Iraq, to depict a so-called “massacre” in the village of Houla, Syria.

Now, as NATO’s Al Qaeda mercenaries operating under the banner of the so-called “Free Syrian Army” flow over the Turkish-Syrian border in an attempt to overrun the city of Aleppo, BBC is there, attempting to manipulate the public’s perception as the conflict unfolds.

BBC’s Ian Pannell admits he rode with a convoy of milatnt fighters into Aleppo at night. He claims many are desperate for the FSA to succeed, “clamoring for freedom denied by their president,” but concedes many others fear an “Islamic takeover” and sectarian “division and bloodshed.” The latter of course, is self-evident, while the former is the repeated, unfounded mantra of the Western media used to cover up the latter.

Pannell poses amongst staged settings, claiming a single burning tire equates to a barricade set up by the militants (see more on the use of burning tires as propaganda here and here). He concedes that militants are taking to the rooftops with sniper rifles in the districts they claim they control – begging one to wonder where else terrorist snipers have been, and how many “sniper” deaths have been mistakenly blamed on the government.

Covering Up FSA War Crimes

Pannell then attempts to cover up serious war crimes committed by the FSA militants he is traveling with, claiming that men the FSA arbitrarily rounded up while “seeking revenge” were “suspected Shabiha,” harking back to Libya’s NATO-backed terrorist death squads rounding up and killing Libya’s black communities in orgies of sectarian genocide – which outlets like the BBC defended as simply rebels targeting “suspected African mercenaries.” Pannell papers over what he just reported with the unqualified claim that there is “little justice” on either side. What became of the FSA’s victims is not revealed.

Image: From BBC’s Ian Pannell – young men “suspected” of being “Shabiha” are rounded up as the FSA “seeks revenge.” BBC fails categorically to explain how NATO-backed terrorists can “liberate” a city that is admittedly pro-government – but it appears it will be done through terrorism, brutality, mass murder, and intimidation. 

….

BBC reporter Ian Pannell’s failure to report on the war crimes he admitted witnessing, smacks of endorsement and complicity – an attempt to preserve the romanticism the West has desperately tried to associate with their FSA death squads. Pannell’s report also confirms earlier descriptions of widespread atrocities committed by the so-called “Free Syrian Army.”

In Libya, when the government of Muammar Qaddafi collapsed, and as Libyan terrorists overran the last of the nation’s security forces, entire cities of Libya’s blacks were overrun, their populations either mass-murdered, imprisoned, or forced to flee to refugee camps. These are people who had lived in Libya for generations. A similar fate awaits Syrians should NATO prevail.

BBC Confirms Syrian Army Use of Heavy Weapons ARE Proportional to FSA Threats

Pannell’s propaganda in Aleppo continues, where he admits FSA militants possess tanks they allegedly “captured” from the Syrian military, but then, showing video of what is either an anti-tank SU-25 aircraft or an Aero L-39 Albatros training jet, rolling in with machine guns, claims it marks a “dramatic escalation” and a sign of “desperation.”

Image: From BBC’s Ian Pannell -FSA tanks are positioned in or around Aleppo, according to BBC. The myth that NATO-backed militants are “lightly armed” is unraveling as they attempt to take on large cities flush with cameras and media from both sides. Eager propagandists attempting to portray victories have more than once shown “captured tanks” in the hands of militants. Heavy militant weapons beget heavy government weapons. 

….

In reality the Syrian army is using force directly proportional to the threats NATO-backed militants have presented. Tanks and heavy weapons mounted on trucks, also featured in the BBC report, are legitimate targets for government heavy weapons. The precision an SU-25 lends the battlefield versus heavy artillery bombardments when neutralizing FSA heavy weapons is the only conceivable way to minimize civilian casualties.

Images: (Top) From BBC’s Ian Pannell – BBC and other Western media outlets have claimed “MIGs” are bombing Aleppo’s civilian populations. This all based on a single “tweet” made by BBC’s Ian Pannell. Pannell now reports this video depicts what he saw – which in reality is either an anti-tank SU-25 or Aero L-39 deploying machine guns, not bombs, versus what Pannell already admits are FSA heavy weapons, not civilian populations. (Bottom) Several orthographic views of the SU-25 and Aero L-39 for comparison. 

….

And as the Western media is so found of reminding its viewers, Aleppo is decidedly pro-government, and pro-President Bashar al-Assad. Therefore to indiscriminately use disproportionate force serves no purpose for the Syrian government, who has gone through extraordinary lengths and placed its soldiers at great risk to minimize damage to the city and its inhabitants – a city and population that serves both an important role economically and culturally for all Syrian people.

Remember Fallujah, Iraq

A government is put in a difficult position when armed gangs enter a city “seeking revenge” as BBC’s Ian Pannell puts it, when these gangs have trucks mounted with heavy weapons as well as tanks in their possession. For the West, to berate the Syrian government and portray its security operations as unmitigated “brutality” is disingenuous at best, especially considering the militants are there solely because of years of financial, military, and political support from the US, Israel, and the Gulf State despots.

Image: Western hypocrisy – Fallujah, Iraq in 2004 was bombarded by artillery and airstrikes for weeks leading up to the final invasion. When over 10,000 troops entered the city, they were accompanied by tanks, and supported by heavy artillery and airstrikes. When the West is subjugating others, heavy weapons seems acceptable – but not when another nation attempts to defend itself from admittedly Western-backed terrorists. 

….

The West might want to also revisit the lessons it learned from flattening the Iraqi city of Fallujhah, twice. The US bombarded the city for weeks prior to its final invasion in 2004, where over 10,000 troops entered with heavy artillery and air support. Apparently it is acceptable for the West to subjugate others using such tactics, but nations are prohibited from using similar tactics to defend themselves. The Syrian uprising was a foreign-plot stretching back as far as 2007, foreign militants admittedly flowing over the border from across the Arab World, admittedly armed and funded by the US, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar.

The Battle of Fullujah is considered a notch in the belt of Western military prowess, while the West condemns Syria’s attempts to defend one of its most important cities from foreign-subversion and destruction. While NATO believes it can still win the geopolitical battle it is waging against the Syrian people, it has already long lost the battle for moral superiority.

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

Zionazi’s at it again

The sexual pressure has gotten too much. It’s been too long since Zionist Israyhellis last masturbated over the bodies of dead Palestinians. So to get their sexual catharsis, they’re once again killing more kids and innocent adults whose crime has been to be born on land the Ziofreaks decided to steal. All fully supported by fellow necrophiliacs Obama and Cameron, like all US and UK ‘leaders’ before them.

The real modern axis of evil USUKZ simply cannot stop. It’s love of slaughtering people seems insatiable.

And of course the shitty BBC/BBZ is talking about it as there are no instigators and no victims – other than the poor Israyhellis of course. As usual when the BBZ can be bothered to talk about the killing of a Palestinian, then that Palestinian is  ‘Militant’ as though the accused was on some operation in progress with just seconds left before Israyhell came to a fiery end.  The BBZ is a real nasty piece of work – a perfect companion to lick the hand of who it loyally serves. It simply cannot and will not report things as they are regarding to the genocide against the Palestinians. It always counters the MASSIVE, instigation of  force and bombs (supplied by US with full support of the UK) with some mysterious and totally inapplicable and sickly laughable  notion of balance, reducing the eye for an eyelash to equality.

Just imagine them applying their Israyhelli methodology to Cambodia.

I hope and pray the BBZ’s lies and deceptions are easily sen through by the people, and I think they may well.

I seriously look forward to the day the BBC makes it’s last rotten broadcast.

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

 

Whose racism is it anyway?

In addition to trampling around the world stealing peoples resources and slaughtering millions of people, The British are also accomplished at kicking up a fuss about nothing, and because the world in their eyes revolves around them, they often say the most amazing of ignorant things.

There’s a case in progress as I type: Regarding Liverpool Football Club player Luis Suarez. Apparently people who know him would not call him a racist (actually I think everyone is racist to a degree – especially if you are really honest about the definition of racism – i.e. treating people differently because of their racial traits, but what I mean is that Suarez (probably) does not believe in  or conduct spiteful/hateful/ugly/intimidating racism), but those who don’t know him say he is a racist. Hummm.

Suarez is said to have called the Manchester United player Patrice Evra, ‘negro‘ many times in a football match a few months ago.

Apparently, in Uruguay, the term ‘negro’ is not offensive, but it is (supposed to be) here in the UK, and as we know, the world must conform to white, pretty-hollow-in-sincerity, feel-good British political correctness.

I’m pretty crap with names myself, and I see no reason why Suarez must know Evra’s name to address him by. Is it a compulsion that a footballer must know all the names of all the professional footballers in any particular nation du jour? Remember the frequency of meeting a fellow professional footballer is probably going to be about a usual 180 minutes per year (2 football matches bonding most teams together in a home and away fixture). OK, I guess he could have asked or could have looked at the back of his shirt even!

The BBZ is loving all this racist pantomime. It reports lord Ouseley as saying…

“…all we have heard are denials and denigration of Evra..” – source: h ttp://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/16424487.stm

That’s absolute crap. All we’ve heard about is Suarez’s alleged racism and the manufactured outrage – like Ouseley’s

Ouseley is practically given a soap-box by the BBC and goes on to say:

“…Liverpool’s vitriol has increased.” – Although Ouseley may fantasise Liverpool doing that, they haven’t. Ousely is just talking bollocks!

Going on even more, Ouseley, WHO HAS NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH ANY OF THIS, says

“…This was a dreadful knee-jerk reaction because it stirs things up.”

Ouseley I think, should engage in a wee spot of self-analysis.

–

Windbag Ouseley, having deflated himself, leaves the BBZ on the prowl for some other stirrer to try and keep the anthropogenic storm-in-a-tea-cup on the move.  Such behaviour by the BBZ is far from uncommon. Every time the US brews up a ‘terror’ incident, the BBZ wheels out some idiot who takes themselves far too seriously, such as that spine chilling creep Frank Gobeles Gardner – the aptly branded terrorism expert(!) – to say all the ‘right’ things of ‘Al Qaeda hallmarks and sources say this and sources say that…. etc etc etc *yawn*…

The BBZ plummets for Piara Powar. Yeah, Piara Powar. Come on, you know… P i a r a  P o w a r.

The BBZ reports Powar as saying:

“Liverpool have constantly undermined the investigation and its outcome,” he told BBC Sport.

The BBZ doesn’t say whether Powar’s view was solicited or that Powar took it upon himself to contact the BBZ, but I have my suspicions as to what went on there.

More bollocks. Liverpool FC did NOT undermine the investigation. It simply showed support for one of it’s employees which it felt (with natural vested interest of course) had not engaged in racism.

Oh, by the way, did you know Powar’s wife, Assmah Mir was a BBC Five Live (radio) presenter. Funny coincidence that, hey?

Power rattles on…

“They have been disrespectful to the FA and questioned its integrity and neutrality. “

Yeah, The only reason therefore that the FA have taken NO action against Dalglish or Liverpool FC, is because the cat ate the charge sheet and the only reason Liverpool have decided to challenge the ban & fine…. NOT, but Powar obviously thinks acceptance of the punishment isn’t relevant.

But the BBZ isn’t finished yet, not by a long chalk. It makes a story about the PFA

h ttp://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/16424872.stm

It reports Blackburn striker Jason Roberts (who doubtless like Ouseley and Powar pro-actively contacted the BBC Sport department and weren’t solicited for their views by the BBZ) as saying this…

“If you’re going to come and play in the Premier League and live in our society it’s important that you understand the rules we abide by.”

One remembers BBC Radio legend, Alistair Cooke (RIP) and his “Letter from America” program telling us how the term ‘African-American’ was actually thought of as racist in the US, in Cookes era. With this revelation and an appeal for you to ponder what, in reciprocity, cultural education should be given to European footballers on the naming of African players should they ply their profession in Uruguay, cements perfectly my opening paragraph.

–

–

—

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

Why Haqqani

About a week ago I came across  this article on ICH.

Extract:

America’s “worst enemy”

The Latest Orchestrated Threat and The End of History

By Paul Craig Roberts

September 27, 2011 “Information Clearing House” — Have you ever before heard of the Haqqanis? I didn’t think so. Like Al Qaeda, about which no one had ever heard prior to 9/11, the “Haqqani Network” has popped up in time of need to justify America’s next war–Pakistan.

–

PCR seems to have been right. There’s Haqqani here, Haqqani ther, here a Haqqani, there a Haqqani, everywhere a Haqqani.

Perhaps their Al-CIAda organisation reached its sell-by date. The terror lost it’s fear factor.

The imminent attacks couldn’t muster the necessary terror quotient, despite the CIA/FBI busting their own group on occasion. But I’m wondering could there be a new reason for this new ‘terror’ group? 9-11 defines OBL, and the USUKs coalition of the killing has managed to pin the Taiban to 9-11 too, in certain quarters they pinned Irad and Saddam to 9-11 also. So what’s gonna end up defining Haqqani? Is it going to be “Look! we were soft on terror [we only bombed about 10 countries and killed almost 2 million – not that we care – we don’t do body counts] this is what happens when we are soft on terror”Is the breadcrum trail going to lead to Somalia/Iran/Yemen/Syria?

–

One begins to wonder what the next terror group will be called. Chances are it’ll sound foreign with the ‘throaty’ sounds that so terrify English speakers.

One wonders how many sleeper cells Haqqani has. What false flag it’ll be blamed for. What Muslim charity group will be closed down and have it’s accounts frozen. What happens to those frozen accounts anyway?

No doubt these Q’s will be answered in the fullness of time.

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

NATO assassinate Afghan peace negotiator Burhanuddin Rabbani

The BBC instantly blames the ‘taliban’ – the group who are not the mythical Al Qaida, alleged interpretors of 9/11, but th group that reportedly offered to hand Osama bin Laden over to the US for trial, if the US was to deliver proof of OBL’s involvement with 9-11.

So I will take it that NATO assassinated him.

I just don’t believe that all these assassinations are done by people defending themselves from 800 lb bombs and sadistic NATO soldiers.

Burhanuddin Rabbani’s peace was probably not the kind of peace the USUK scum-suckers were probably looking for. i.e. it probably didn’t involve acting as a hooker to some global corporation conglomerate while smiling at the passing trucks stealing your natural resources overseas, being booted off your land for a NATO airbase at the same time, while worrying that in 13 years time some USan soldier will rape your newborn little girl.

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

Dear white Europeans

“Dear white Europeans, please come out in mass protests condemning the terrorist attack in Oslo, don’t be silent, the moderates amongst you must reject him. If you don’t, how do we know you don’t all agree?”

–

Craig Murray also put up a good post entitled “Islamophobia Run Wild” about the BBC (and other Corporate MSM) on this terrorist attack.-

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

 

On the Syrian Snipers

You can see some footage of these alleged snipers (murderous assassins is a better description I feel) at Information Clearing House: Who Are These Snipers In Syria? (Video) These videos are said to show devastating head shots by snipers in Syria.

If you read the comments, you will see suggestions that these snipers are Israyhelli snipers. The more I think about that, the more annoyance I feel, No, not because I have any sympathy for that filthy murderous imposter of a once magnificent God fearing state (thousands of years ago), because I don’t. I want to see Israyhell wiped from the political map and those Zionist activists hung from a slowly constricting rope.

What I find annoying is something I’ve seen in “alternative view” holding people for some time now [note: it hasn’t escaped me that this could be a result of manipulation]. These people can only think in binary. They can only entertain one of two views. Anything more than that and well… meltdown.

In their minds, those Israyhelli snipers can just march into Syria and do anything they want. Of course there is no Syrians who ever have had this training. Oh no! Never. There are no forces; military/paramilitary/police that have long harassed the people. That tanks are mobilised right now against the people protesting isn’t in fact a sign that these snipers being Syrian is wholly consistent.

Stupid idiots.

Bipolarised fools in denial of a tyrannical regime trying to retain its grip onto power. Power which has seen the anti-human  actions of the Israyhell pass with impunity. Syria has been struck my Israyhelli missiles a numbr of times. Syria did nothing. Assad is probably paid to do nothing. The guy’s a schmuck as some NY Jew might say.

Over the years, credible stories about Syrian collusion in the USUK’s ‘extraordinary rendition’ program, e.g. Maher Arar. Oh, but don’t let your bipolar disorder switch off here, please, label him as a CIA agent or something crap like that. Go on, deny his torture. Tell you what you enter those Syrian torture dungeons or Egyptian dungeons, or Tunisian totrure dungeons and get yourself beaten black and blue, lashed with shredded cables.he was a US plant right? Then come out (if you are lucky enough) and say it never happened.

Who is saying all this Israyhelli agents are on the streets of the Arab countries? Who knows, but it looks well connected to the ACLU. That homosexual ‘tolerance’ promoting body that strangely seems to be speaking out against most instances of USUK fascism than anyone else(good) therefore denying others a voice of opposition groups like Muslims, thereby benefiting from the bipolarisation of people minds and preventing, say, an real Islamic voice from emerging.

Clever sods, and Muslims support them like fish eating the hooked worm.

Mind you, where are the Muslim voices to challenge this homo-foisting ACLU ‘opposition’ group? It’s not like there are actually many Muslims standing up for an equal say. The Muslims are being told to and/or being encouraged by their leaders to shut the hell up and accept whatever crap ges lobbed at you.

These so called self proclaimed leaders are truly miserable. Islamic leadership has never been so utterly crap. And as for these western Imams, oh boy. An arm band float in a pool of lava would be more useful than these people. Well, maybe not. These western Imams who refuse to criticise the hideous acts of their government or these tryants in places like Tunisia, Egypt or Syria etc etc. are actually useful, but not to Muslims or Islam.

It was hilarious to hear one of them issue statements of support to the unarmed ordinary people fighting oppression on the strret of Cairo, while they cowered in the US Embassy: I propose this is used as the new definition of Islamic leadership. Leading you to…

Dear oh dear.

Yeah, this offend some people. At times, ones slumber needs a sharp slap on the face. This is it.

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

Jim Corr – doing what he feels is right – speaking the truth as he sees it

It really is easy pickings to show the BBC throwing out garbage dressed as journalism.

Simply read a page on its website.

Consequently, it’s really quite boring to keep referring to it, but sometimes I cannot just let it pass unchallenged. While going through it’s swin(dl)e flu nonsense (e.g. computer models of what to do in possible said pandemic cases)

tip: use this image if you want one to illustrate garbage in garbage out.
Do not use google image to look for gigo
unless you like pictures of men is strange shaped underpants.

I spotted a link to Jim Cor and conspiracy, or HIS conspiracy as it said twice in the very short article. Being the BBC it’s gonna try and paint him as a nut-job or anti-Semite (or double jeopardy: both!). As it turns out the BBC(hite) tries to make it look as if these opinions are his and his alone, which of course they are not. It continues…

“Mr Corr said he took an interest in what he calls “geo-politics” – source http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-12268558

Oh, so now “geo-politics” is a term, his term, that’s specific to Corr. The BBC really have no shame. And if the BBC ever use that term are they going to put it quotes along with the overtones of eye-rolling ridicule.

Here’s Jim on RTE’s ‘The Late Late Show’

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=seU4xsz9vsY

P.S. When I lived in Ireland as a youngster I used to watch the show. Gay Byrne (Gaybo as he was affectionately known) used to present it then. But looking back I think that program plus the influence of British culture upon the Irish youth who migrated in droves to the UK in search of jobs when Ireland’s economy was said to be terrible (my, how history repeats – but this time it’s got loads and loads of lovely debt to service too!) was a pivotal point for Ireland as it began to destroy the restraints the Catholic church placed on society. Now, it seems to me,  Ireland is pretty much a polythene version of the neighbouring nightmare neighbour the UK. Shame.

Anyway, reading the “article” I began thinking (re-thinking is more accurate) that it seems (I may be wrong) that people who have time for one conspiracy seem more prone to embrace the other quite well known conspiracies as a package.

The BBC showed this (as of course was their intention) mentioning HAARP / Earthquake causing technology and man made viruses (H1N1) something I actually agree with. And they do it as a way to ‘rubbish’ such conspiracies. The extremes of this are UFO’s. Which hardens my opinion that these fringe conspiracies are disinformation/diversion.

By way of deception thou shalt wage war. A motto المسيح الدجّال‎ would be proud of.

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

New 7/7 footage: conclusive proof the 4 bombers did it.

Well no, it doesn’t, like nothing about 7/7 does,  but don’t let that stop you from allowing the BBC’s NLP telling you it does.

a) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11546549

[A lesson in NLP tricks!]

Ben Geoghagen:

“This is really chilling footage, I would describe it John”

– BBC Journo once again expressing a personal opinion, but as a BBC journo (the BBC still, incredibly, can successfully draw upon it’s image of the informed and informative ‘trusted’ institution of Britishness), he has an open passageway into your brain, even though you’ve never het him before and know absolutely nothing about him (esp. his political leanings – or how passionate he holds those views and what what extent therefore that he will promote them)

“What you’re about to see…”

NLP ‘preparation’

“I’ll show you the first one. The first one. It’s of H.H. HE exists KX underground station and you see him going into Boots…” [footage1] time = 08:59:46  “it’s part of the property there part of the concourse”

NLP ‘expansion’

[footage2]

“There you can see hi actually entering the shop”

time = 9:05:54-7 (WH Smith sign seen in footage)

“What is striking about all this footage…”

[footage3 – grey] time = 09:53:13-5

“And here is him coming out of KX station onto the main concourse…”

“…what is so striking about it, is the number of people he passes as he wonders outside Kings Cross station.”

At this point the journo talks about the problems/delays/congestion on the tube that day. [back to footage3 – grey] time = 9:53:13- Note almost impossible to identify any person. And he says

“..a lot of people are on their MOBILE PHONES making calls to friends or their bosses saying they are going to be late.”

Really??? Mobile phones at 09:52:29? This is something that should be checked. Note: it’s almost assured the BBC journo didn’t check.

“and here’s H.H. walking with this rucksack amongst them and obviously they are totally oblivious to the danger they face because here’s a man whose carry a bomb on his back and a bomb which he later detonates on the No 30 Bus at Tavistock square and kills 13 people as he does so” – This is lazy pre-concluded supposition. There is no proof he did it. There has been no trial.

[Inside BMA building? footage.  Time 09:42-04. Supposed explosion on the bus at 9:42:18]

yet Bus aerial debris footage: VLW 173 time = 09:34:23 BST

Of course the “BMA? footage time and the ‘aerial blast debris time” footage is inconsistent. They differ by 7min 41seconds and TAKE A LOOK AT THE BIG TREE: The branches on the left hardly move at all. If this wasn’t ‘explained’ to you, you would have virtually no idea it was describing an explosion. There is NO obvious blast movement up or to the right on the trees left hand side. If this ‘blast debris’ was faked I’d not be surprised, esp. as there only seems to be one shot with ‘hazy blobs’ in it.

Journo goes on about

[how much footage was gone through] in order to get good evidence of the movements of this one bomber H.H.”

Who said it was ‘good’ – the journo. He’s giving you his opinion and his opinion is that it’s good. My opinion (and I’m going to cover it up that it is my opinion) is that it’s bullshit footage and it doesn’t prove anything.

“…there were cameras on some of the busses showing you footage on SOME of the busses, showing you the No 30 thirty bus that he eventually got on”

NLP again. And very clever. He ‘covers’ footage from busses, but not a peep from him about a total lack of footage is available from any specific bus he’s supposed to have gotten onto.

“to piece together his movements on that day…”

Yet more NLP commands telling you what to think. And it’s not pieced together. The timelines once again are inconsistent.

“before he detonated his device”

This is NLP ‘reinforcement’

“on that bus” – my emphasis

more ‘reinforcement’ having been told earlier about the No. 30 bus.

Not once does he expose you to anything other than it’s a ‘fact’ the these guys did it. He never said the word likely, supposed, possible or even the commonly used mild get out clause of ‘alleged”

What a terrible so-called journalist this Ben Geoghagen is. Well, that’s probably why he’s working at the BBC.

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

Iblis didn’t bow to humans – In a sence, I think I can understand why.

That title is horrible, but it gets the point across and I’m too tired and pressed for time to try and think of an alternative. Man is said to have been Gods greatest creation. Iblis refused to bow down before man. Given what I’m feeling about ‘many’ people these days, I can understand why bowing down before man might have been an ‘issue’. Of course I’m not excising Satans defiance of God.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEtm_Q2LK9g

–

The other day I was attending a philosophical discourse (actually ‘talk’ with a lot of Q and A – would perhaps be more representative descriptor) examining “Islam (in terms of immigration) in Europe”.

It was a worthwhile use of time, and I was glad to attend it. The good doc posed a number of apparently pushme-pullyou Q’s as one may expect from good philosophers ;) By the way, I wish philosophers would not only ask skilful and quirky Q’s but propose skilful solutions, even if they don’t hold a piece of paper that identifies them as being “qualified” (what ever that means) in political science.

I had the opportunity – rather, I took it – to challenge some of the assumptions I heard. For example the ‘negative’ image of Muslims due to 911 and Madrid etc, I advised caution on these ‘facts’ {not that the speaker was saying they were facts, but I’m pretty sure the audience was taking them to be so}. I pointed out that even if one accepts the 911 stuff, out of the 1 billion + Muslims, only a relative handful are involved in terrorism. Yeah, it’s the kind of thing one would expect to encounter in the first few pages of a “beginners guide to challenging your own perceptions’”, but still, it needed to be said. These ‘givens’ are quite prolific!

Some of what the audience said was slightly surreal and actually agitating, because while most of the Muslims in the ‘audience’ were challenging the basis of the European Islamophobia, many of the Muslims in the audience had inside them the same seeds but whose only difference was these seeds had already germinated in the mind of Europeans to result in their European Islamophobia. One such “seed” is a general acceptance that the Muslims did 9/11, 7/7, Madrid, Killing Van Gough* etc. I was the only one to challenge what occurred to me was a “tried ‘n convicted / done ‘n dusted” belief in the official narratives of these violent events.

This is a disease amongst Muslims. They positively lap up accusations of gross crimes of terrorism upon themselves – a bit like the Germans that have been forced to be so guilty of the Jewish holocaust that they stand back once again at the Palestinian Holocaust despite them singing to the orchestrators tune of ‘never again’.

Pah! – but at the same time absolutely incredible that they are happeing today.

A real ‘crunch’ moment was someone said ‘we have to deal with the realities’

Do people actually understand what really means?

I think not!

I think they just blurt out catchphrases in an attempt to appear clever, supermarket philosophy if you will, to be intellectually lazy and avoid perturbing their safety zone.

I tried to inform them. “Whose Reality?” I asked.

You see, once you ‘deal with the reality’ what happens after that is that you have accepted the reality set by others – you become bound to operate within it, complete with its bent and twisted rules. You strip yourself of power. It’s a mugs game, a dereliction of duty to oneself and society. A failure of your own human-ness.

By NOT ‘dealing with the reality’ i.e. grabbing hold of your own destiny and making the reality in defiance of someone else’s dictated reality, I’m not talking about producing chocolate houses in the woods, giant beanstalks or geese that lay golden eggs. I’m talking about the parameters of human society, not a fairytale as a reality.

This world is CRAP because WE, you and me, have allowed it to be CRAP.

The ‘comfort zone’ is incredibly captivating and sticky. It’s also incredibly selfish and dumb.

After I had done my bit, I felt a bit like not much had soaked through their skulls, once again denting the supposed ‘potential’ of today’s humankind.

A couple of days later, I was involved in a workshop of conflict resolution. Two groups were assembled to take an opposing view of some issue. The group I was in was to defend a policy of positive discrimination in favour of an indigenous population against the wealth and educational dominance of an immigrant population. I was supposed to argue this way, but there was an opportunity here to probe people mind about what they think life is all about.

I asked Q’s like by what standard are you saying the indigenous population are ‘left behind’. You see it was the immigrants economics and way of life that was the benchmark. If the indigenous population weren’t forced into that system in the first place but allowed to operate in whatever way THEY saw fit then if they stuck with their traditions, the ‘left behind’ thing becomes a non issue. The people in my group simply couldn’t understand what I was saying. To them it was inconceivable, like I was speaking Martian. They ended up trying to ‘explain it to me’ as if I was dumb (which I may well be, but I wasn’t dumb in this case!) and that it was ME that simply couldn’t grasp the concept. I was the dumb ‘outsider’ I actually felt quite intellectually superior to these people – which in a number of ways is worrying; As I’m sure you’ll probably agree.

I’ll end with the last point today. This story:

Study examines scientists’ ‘climate credibility’

Page last updated at 08:47 GMT, Tuesday, 22 June 2010 09:47 UK
By Pallab Ghosh

“Some 98% of climate scientists that publish research on the subject support the view that human activities are warming the planet, a study suggests.” – source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science_and_environment/10370955.stm

Crikey. The HUGE majority of academic papers I’ve seen attach “hopeful” (that’s being diplomatic!) taglines to their papers saying things like “This will contribute to a cure for HIV/Cancer/Malaria” blah blah blah. One highly respected academic confided in me that they attach stuff entertaining a Darwinian viewpoint to their papers or else their papers simply won’t get published, but they themselves don’t believe anything to do with Darwinism at all.

The point is, the game is rigged and if you don’t pander to it, then your toast. It’s a ‘Mark of the Beast’ kind of thing. This BBC story, like so many BBC newz stories is meaningless bumfluff.

Man it’s been a weird few weeks.

* ‘A Muslim (not the singular) may have killed Theo Van Gogh, but no actual act of violence (which automatically gets promoted to terrorism or even better still ‘ISLAMIC terrorism’) springs forth from the vacuum, yet that is how these events are spun out, that there is a bunch of backwards men who out of their own choice decided non-Muslims must be exterminated. And not springing forth from the vacuum is NOT an excuse for acts of violence, and similarly there are provocative acts that DO require a violent response – when for example a demon like Tony Blair robs the lives of 1,400,000 men women and children. The killing of Blair’s murder by those who are his victims is a very persuasive argument – an act of natural justice.

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–