7/7 "Conspiracy Files" To be shown in Autumn (BBC)

Nick_oliveri

Im not well educated about the happenings of 7/7 (god i hate that abbreviation) but the BBC are to show an unbiased :pac: view of the events of that day in the Autumn. Cue David Icke being ousted as the self proclaimed messiah..again. He has to be in it.

Anyhoo, you can read more aboot it here.

I know feck all about this attack, and really CBA about conspiracy theories ATM. The only thing that strikes me as odd is the neglection that "Al Queda" have shown to their "work" since 9/11 and 7/7.Them and their "many cells spread about the world".

Uberterror takes a break/goes on strike or whatever. Or maybe the Americans have quelled their western Jihad with some country music. Or maybe its a fun time for them in the Middle east right now. Wait stop im going off topic in the OP. Sorry guise.

You can read more about 7/7 here
Or here. yes i gave a wiki link. What?

An interesting quote i found on the blog.

Hank_Reardon wrote:

It's good to see the BBC being quick off the mark and waiting 3 years to check the facts of a massive terrorist attack.

The problem with not believing in what I am being told about 7/7 or any other area where the truth seems to have been manipulated is that automatically makes me a conspiracy theorist.

The label is handed to anyone who disagrees. If I ask a question, I never get a straight answer, instead i get treated with aggression and insults for even thinking the question, let alone asking it.

Rather than answer a straight question you get told your mad, crazy or in a state of shock because of your inability to rationalise the world around you, or you are told that to anything other than the official truth would involve an incredible amount of people and it could not be done.

bonkey

Nick_oliveri wrote: »

An interesting quote i found on the blog.

Why is it interesting, if you don't mind me asking? We've seen people make pretty-much the same claims here about pretty-much any topic ever discussed.

Hand Reardon wrote:

The problem with not believing in what I am being told about 7/7 or any other area where the truth seems to have been manipulated is that automatically makes me a conspiracy theorist.

No, Hank. The reasons you offer for not believing what you are told, and what you claim might have happened / did happen is what will make you a conspiracy theorist.

The label is handed to anyone who disagrees.

No, Hank, its not. Its handed based on how they disagree, on their reasons for disagreeing, and typically based on what they claim to be the truth. Although many are quick to argue that "we're only asking questions", generally speaking, thats not only what they are doing at all.

If I ask a question, I never get a straight answer, instead i get treated with aggression and insults for even thinking the question, let alone asking it.

My guess is that this would depend on the question, Hank. If its a loaded question, or one that pre-supposes something you have no evidence for, then you're likely to get the reactions you mention.

Diogenes

Nick_oliveri wrote: »

Im not well educated about the happenings of 7/7 (god i hate that abbreviation) but the BBC are to show an unbiased :pac: view of the events of that day in the Autumn. Cue David Icke being ousted as the self proclaimed messiah..again. He has to be in it.
.

No they've found another reprehensible Holocaust Denier to be in it. Nick Kollerstrom, prominent UK 9/11 and 7/7 "truther" is in the documentary.

Nick Kollerstrom has charming habit of harassing victims of the bombings and ringing up the families of victims to suggest their loved ones corpses were "planted" at the scene. He's turned up at court harassed survivors attending the trials of the bomb makers support team. Finally as part of the documentary he even went to Leeds to try to give flowers to the wife of one of the suicide bombers.

e has admitted he phoned the father of one victim to tell him how he believed the man's daughter's body had been planted at the site of the Tavistock Square bus bombing. The victim's family has described the phone call and subsequent claims posted on a website as "very upsetting".

He has also been accused of pestering relatives of victims and survivors of 7/7.

Dr Kollerstrom believes the four bombers who murdered 52 people almost three years ago were "innocent patsies", set up by a combination of the British, US and Israeli secret services.

Anti BBC Standard Article Here The beeb responds here

I tell this to conspiracy theorists to point out that your theories don't exist in a vacuum and that there are people out there that act on them and inflict real pain and trauma on those who have suffered.

A few weeks ago some bloggers noticed that Nick also had some reprehensible views on other matters and was in fact a holocaust denier.
The University were he holds a research fellowship was contacted and;

Dr Kollerstrom was last month stripped of an honorary research fellowship at University College London after it emerged he had written a paper entitled The Auschwitz "Gas Chamber" Illusion on a far-Right website - claiming it was like a holiday camp where inmates sunned themselves by an "elegant" swimming pool and listened to orchestras.

Despite the constant whinging by conspiracy theorists that people connect the 9/11 truth movement with holocaust denial as a "smear" it is shown time and time again that is simply the truth.

Take a long hard look at your fellow travelers, and really question, "Is this company I'm proud to keep?"

Mahatma coat

many people question the 'facts' of the Holocaust. So what?


how does that affect his opinions on other matters.

Diogenes

Mahatma coat wrote: »

many people question the 'facts' of the Holocaust. So what?

I find it funny the people who question the "facts" about the Holocaust are usually the sort of people who would like to see it happen again.

I noticed that your put the word facts in inverted commas, something you'd like to elaborate on Mahatma?

how does that affect his opinions on other matters.

Two reasons, I was illustrating how abhorrent his behaviour is to survivors and victims families. Do you think it's acceptable to call a father and make up horrendous lies about their child's death?

Secondly, it once again demonstrates that scratch a truth and you're more or less likely to find a holocaust denier, or find that they've gotten their information from a holocaust denier. People who consistently misrepresent history in order to further their own extremist ideology. Thereby you have to wonder about whether they could be considered a reliable and credible source of information on other matters.

Nick_oliveri

bonkey wrote: »

Why is it interesting, if you don't mind me asking? We've seen people make pretty-much the same claims here about pretty-much any topic ever discussed.

I find the first few paragraphs interesting to start up a bit of discussion from me OP. Seems to have worked.

bonkey wrote:

No, Hank, its not. Its handed based on how they disagree, on their reasons for disagreeing, and typically based on what they claim to be the truth. Although many are quick to argue that "we're only asking questions", generally speaking, thats not only what they are doing at all.

Most give conclusions after asking questions, and thats when the fun begins TBH, if it wasn't for most of these people (me too at one time) we wouldnt have had the big 9/11 thread or the ones that followed. It was fun reading that and watching reactions, groups for and against. Thankfully it never went too overboard with bull**** pointless slagging matches.

Suppose though, it goes around in circles. Same questions (and conclusions and accusations) are being asked and "summed up".

I used to love it when new stuff happened like that BBC "forewarning" thing and the editors responses and watching it being debated here, at Randis an at ATS. It goes to show on both sides how we have clung on to and moulded such an event. In a debate such as this, both sides have a mindset "you are either with us or against us".

Every post that either side writes seems to have a stamp of approval from hisor her counterparts. How can one be on both sides debunking, concluding and still asking questions. But whats left to ask that hasnt been asked or debated already?

Theres nothing left really. Only the WTC7 report will spark up another reasonable debate. Jim Corr certainly wont. I fear to listen to that interview because of the lulz that will follow.

ETA: Noone should question the Holocaust. Thinking about such a PROVEN thing would make a person nausiated. To debate a non believer about it would take some balls. I can show you my balls in this thread or you could start up another if anyone wants to debate it.

Mahatma coat

Diogenes wrote: »

I find it funny the people who question the "facts" about the Holocaust are usually the sort of people who would like to see it happen again.

I noticed that your put the word facts in inverted commas, something you'd like to elaborate on Mahatma?

OK gimme your numbers and a breakdown of them please.

Two reasons, I was illustrating how abhorrent his behaviour is to survivors and victims families. Do you think it's acceptable to call a father and make up horrendous lies about their child's death?

you may say they are lies, he may say that you are mistaken

Secondly, it once again demonstrates that scratch a truth and you're more or less likely to find a holocaust denier, or find that they've gotten their information from a holocaust denier. People who consistently misrepresent history in order to further their own extremist ideology. Thereby you have to wonder about whether they could be considered a reliable and credible source of information on other matters.

what about Holocaust questioners?

Mahatma coat

Nick_oliveri wrote: »

ETA: Noone should question the Holocaust. Thinking about such a PROVEN thing would make a person nausiated. To debate a non believer about it would take some balls. I can show you my balls in this thread or you could start up another if anyone wants to debate it.

yer PROOF please

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

Mahatma coat wrote: »

yer PROOF please

I question the moon. got any proof?

Dathai

Diogenes wrote: »

I

Secondly, it once again demonstrates that scratch a truth and you're more or less likely to find a holocaust denier, or find that they've gotten their information from a holocaust denier. People who consistently misrepresent history in order to further their own extremist ideology. Thereby you have to wonder about whether they could be considered a reliable and credible source of information on other matters.

There have been books and articles published regarding the holocaust, and questioning certain "facts" or what have you, regarding it's existence. And it's use by jewish organisations today, that have been written by Jews. Many of them discredited by their universities or organisations because of these publications. Norman G.Finkelstein for example.

I think a subject which deals with such tender issues like this, will draw large controversy. Regardless, people can have opinions and views on the subject, that I believe they should be allowed to keep, until proven wrong.
But I think the idea that these people are just "denying" the holocaust, purely because they hate jews is ridiculous, because to many it's just a historical revision.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

finklestein doesn't deny the holocaust, he just argues with people who use it for political purposes.. iirc his parents were holocaust survivors.

Dathai

Yes, I didn't say he denied it. I said he questioned it's use by Jewish media, and organisations. And also that he was discredited for doing so.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

Jewish Media?

Diogenes

Mahatma coat wrote: »

OK gimme your numbers and a breakdown of them please.

Excuse me? What on earth are you blithering on about.

you may say they are lies, he may say that you are mistaken

And what right does he have to phone a victim's father and make stuff up?

what about Holocaust questioners?

It's a funny irony that the people who usually call into question whether the holocaust happened are generally the same people who would like to see another one.

Nick_oliveri

So wait, are we arguing the definition of the word or the facts of concentration camps and mass, mass murders, fatal medical experiments and general immoral ****? Because if its the latter theres no talking to you.

Wiki wrote:

The word "holocaust" has been used since the 18th century to refer to the violent deaths of a large number of people

the free ditionary wrote:

1. Great destruction resulting in the extensive loss of life, especially by fire.
2.
a. Holocaust The genocide of European Jews and others by the Nazis during World War II: "Israel emerged from the Holocaust and is defined in relation to that catastrophe" Emanuel Litvinoff.
b. A massive slaughter: "an important document in the so-far sketchy annals of the Cambodian holocaust" Rod Nordland.
3. A sacrificial offering that is consumed entirely by flames

The Jews were never persecuted tortured, experimented on and mass murdered. Also Elvis still lives and i smoked three blunts with Tupac today.

Can i has post pics of such brutality? DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE DENYING?
I deny your existence. Prove me wrong.

Talk about feed the trolls.


http://history1900s.about.com/library/holocaust/blpictures.htm


GJ

Mahatma coat

Excuse me? What on earth are you blithering on about.

OK I'll rephrase the question.

how many people did the Nazi's exterminate?

how and where did they do it?

what was the ethnic/social/political breakdown of those sent to the Gas Chambers?

Diogenes

Mahatma coat wrote: »

OK I'll rephrase the question.

how many people did the Nazi's exterminate?

how and where did they do it?

what was the ethnic/social/political breakdown of those sent to the Gas Chambers?

Okay before I become your chimp lets get into a simple yes and no, questionnaire shall we?

So Mahatma.

1) Did the Nazi's engaged in a genocidal campaign to exterminate "enemies of the Reich"?

2) Was the ethic group who suffered worst under this campaign the Jews?

Before you get into demanding that I support my claims, why don't you come up and show a pair, you're the one making the odious and astonishing claim, you're the one who support your case, not vice verus.


Oh and while we are on the subject of finding out claims

Do you believe that Auschwitz-Birkenau was

A) a camp designed for the mass extermination of thousands of people a day in the greatest stain on the soul of humanity of the previous century.

A butlins like holiday camp with a swimming pool for inmates, a cinema and childrens camp.

Because Nick K believes in one thing and the entire rational world believes another. So who's camp are you in?


You seem, frankly pathetically ill-educated on the holocaust, I suggest you purchase, Vasily Grossman's, A Writer at War. Grossman is the inspiration for the Fiennes character in Enemy of the Gates, and is one of the great Soviet novelists. He was a war corespondent during the second world war and his account "The Hell of Treblink", was read into the record at Nuremburg.

Mahatma coat

Diogenes wrote: »

Okay before I become your chimp lets get into a simple yes and no, questionnaire shall we?

Y'd have to do a bit more to even qualify as 'Chimp'

So Mahatma.

1) Did the Nazi's engaged in a genocidal campaign to exterminate "enemies of the Reich"?

Yeah its called WAR

2) Was the ethic group who suffered worst under this campaign the Jews?

If you believe the Jews then thats the line yer presented with, however I believe a far greater number of people were killed in Eastern Europe and Russia who were of Russian and Slavic Descent, they just didnt have the Israeli PR machine

Before you get into demanding that I support my claims, why don't you come up and show a pair, you're the one making the odious and astonishing claim, you're the one who support your case, not vice verus.

the Gas Chambers, Furnaces, even the Rail system have physical capacaties, I find it difficult to believe that (and bear in mind the furnaces etc didnt go Full tilt till 43) it was possible to eliminate 11 million people in that space of time, 4 - 5million max, 2mil Jews Tops.

Oh and while we are on the subject of finding out claims

Do you believe that Auschwitz-Birkenau was

A) a camp designed for the mass extermination of thousands of people a day

Hundreds Maybe, mainly due to being worked and Starved to Death and the diseases that were left unchecked in the prison population

in the greatest stain on the soul of humanity of the previous century.

Conjecture

A butlins like holiday camp with a swimming pool for inmates, a cinema and childrens camp.

this was the image projected by the Reich

Because Nick K believes in one thing and the entire rational world believes another. So who's camp are you in?

again the relevance of what he thinks on one topic has SFA to do with his opinions on an unrelated topic, cept not for you cos you have a very closed mind

You seem, frankly pathetically ill-educated on the holocaust, I suggest you purchase, Vasily Grossman's, A Writer at War. Grossman is the inspiration for the Fiennes character in Enemy of the Gates, and is one of the great Soviet novelists. He was a war corespondent during the second world war and his account "The Hell of Treblink", was read into the record at Nuremburg.

Are You Jewish??

Diogenes

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Yeah its called WAR

What a farcical answer.

Answer this yes or no.

Did the Nazi's have a systematic campaign called the Final Solution to the Jewish Question, that was formalised in the Posen conference, the plan to kill all the Jews in German controlled Land?

If you believe the Jews then thats the line yer presented with, however I believe a far greater number of people were killed in Eastern Europe and Russia who were of Russian and Slavic Descent, they just didnt have the Israeli PR machine

If I believe the Jews. The Jews?!? You are tottering seriously close to racism here mate.

It is not the opinion of the Jews, it is the opinion of ever credible historian that 5.5 to 6 Million Jews died in the Holocaust. Christ Adolf Eichmann put the figure at 6 million, during his own trial at Nuremburg. The death Toll among Poles, and Russians in in the neighbourhood of 5 million, and thats including Soviet POWs killed by the Nazis.

the Gas Chambers, Furnaces, even the Rail system have physical capacaties, I find it difficult to believe that (and bear in mind the furnaces etc didnt go Full tilt till 43) it was possible to eliminate 11 million people in that space of time, 4 - 5million max, 2mil Jews Tops.

And I suppose you have figures that prove this vile nasty little assertion?

Heres a fun little fact for you. In 1994 Interahamwe militia in Rwanda killed Tutsis and Hutu moderates. They only had machetes. They didn't have the infrastructure of Germany in WW2, they didn't have the weapons. In three months they killed 800,000 people

Hundreds Maybe, mainly due to being worked and Starved to Death and the diseases that were left unchecked in the prison population

Unbelievable.

Rudolf Höß the camp commandant for Auschwitz, stated at his trial that between the four "shower rooms" 20,000 people could be killed a day.

You are quite clearly ignorant of the most fundamental facts. For example there were three camps at Auschwitz, I specifically stated Auschwitz Birkenau, or Auschwitz 2, which was the extermination camp.

Conjecture

It's not Conjecture, have you ever visited a camp??

this was the image projected by the Reich

Yeah because the Nazi's had no reason to lie about camp conditions to the people they were sending there to die.

again the relevance of what he thinks on one topic has SFA to do with his opinions on an unrelated topic, cept not for you cos you have a very closed mind



Are You Jewish??

I have a closed mind? Says the guy who suspects me of being Jewish because I find Holocaust Denial reprehensible.

Whether I'm Jewish or not is none of your damn business, argue the facts, and the fact is you're coming off like a racist who hasn't read much history.

Mahatma coat

OK argue the facts, they may have killed 800,000 in Rwanda, what was the major news story?

800,000 bodies lyin around or floatin in rivers,

they have maybe 500,000 bodies from the whole Nazicampaign

Mahatma coat

Rudolf Höß the camp commandant for Auschwitz, stated at his trial that between the four "shower rooms" 20,000 people could be killed a day.

Bottlenecks, you might be able to feed 20,000 people a day into a Gas chamber, but yer efforts are limited by the fact that a train can only carry a couple of thousand at a time

the man was facing death row with nothing to lose, d'ya think he might have exagerated

r3nu4l

Mahatma, are you denying the Jewish Holocaust ever took place?

Simple question really. Don't wheedle out of it by twisting words, we all know what is generally meant by the term, "The Holocaust". A Yes or No answer is fine, you don't have to explain yourself. A simple Yes or No should allow us to move onto discussing the 7/7 conspiracy.

Diogenes

Mahatma coat wrote: »

OK argue the facts, they may have killed 800,000 in Rwanda, what was the major news story?

800,000 bodies lyin around or floatin in rivers,

they have maybe 500,000 bodies from the whole Nazicampaign

Again what on earth are you gibbering on about?

Oh I get it, where are the bodies? I mean it's not like for example the Nazis built crematoriums, and in several cases ordered up the digging of mass graves, and the burning of hundreds of thousands of bodies under Himmler's orders.

None the less there are, for example still over a hundred mass graves in Austria alone that we are aware of.

Where did you pick that figure of 500,000 out of? Thin air?

ottlenecks, you might be able to feed 20,000 people a day into a Gas chamber, but yer efforts are limited by the fact that a train can only carry a couple of thousand at a time

Utterly utterly clueless about this aren't?

The trains arrived and immediately the men were separated from the old, sick, and children. They were taken and gassed immediately. The healthy were sent to Auschwitz 3, the work camps, and as new and healthy workers arrived, the weak and tired were gassed.

the man was facing death row with nothing to lose, d'ya think he might have exagerate

Seriously Mahatma, take a moment, have it, hold it, treasure it, because that is literally the most retarded argument I've ever heard.

Why on earth would he exaggerate up? What possible motivation would he have? "Gosh maybe they'll go lenient on me if I lie and tell them I killed more.

The only thing approaching an argument you've brought to this thread is your personal incredulity that the Nazi's had neither the resources and infrastructure to carry the final solution out (an argument weakened by the fact that you have an ignorance of basic facts) and your own nasty racist suspicion about "The Jews"

Diogenes

r3nu4l wrote: »

Mahatma, are you denying the Jewish Holocaust ever took place?

Simple question really. Don't wheedle out of it by twisting words, we all know what is generally meant by the term, "The Holocaust". A Yes or No answer is fine, you don't have to explain yourself. A simple Yes or No should allow us to move onto discussing the 7/7 conspiracy.

I think he's trying to say that the Holocaust did happen, but "The Jews" exaggerated the death toll, and in fact other nationalities bore the brunt of it. "The Jews" have spun it, wildly exaggerating the death toll for whatever reason, and for some reasons dozens of senior Nazis, the USSR and it's puppet states, 50 years of German governments, and every credible historian who's ever researched the matter are all "in on it".

It's the thin edge of the wedge of Holocaust Denial; admit that the Holocaust happened but "The Jews" conspire to make it seem worse than it really was. It's a handy number, it lets you off the hook and say "Hey I'm not a Holocaust Denier, I just like making up racist conspiracy theories about "The Jews"."

Mahatma coat

R3nu4l
I wont deny that a 'holocaust' occured, it involved Waaaaaaaay more races than just the jews,

what I am sayin is that

A the jews capatilised on the tragedy at the expense of the memory of others

B they grossly exagerated the numbers for their own gain

Mahatma coat

noticed yer second post afte I posted that one Diogeness.


RIGHT SO

I've humored you enough, wheres your Definitive proof of numbers PLEASE?

r3nu4l

Mahatma coat wrote: »

R3nu4l
I wont deny that a 'holocaust' occured, it involved Waaaaaaaay more races than just the jews,

I can see that point, thanks for answering.

what I am sayin is that

A the jews capatilised on the tragedy at the expense of the memory of others

Okay...I can sort of see what you're saying but not fully agree.

B they grossly exagerated the numbers for their own gain

Well, I'm totally unsure about that claim but I've heard it before.



Can we return to 7/7 now? :pac: I'm looking forward to this documentary, even if only to see how it's put together.

Diogenes

Mahatma coat wrote: »

noticed yer second post afte I posted that one Diogeness.


RIGHT SO

I've humored you enough, wheres your Definitive proof of numbers PLEASE?

The figure of 6 million Jews is cited by Adolf Eichmann, who was the architect of the Holocaust. This is backed up by comparisons of prewar censuses with postwar censuses and population estimates.

The Entire Nazi state exposes how massive an undertaking this was, Parish churches supplied birth records showing who was Jewish; the Post Office delivered the deportation and denaturalization orders; government transport offices arranged the trains for deportation to the camps; companies bid for the contracts to build the ovens; detailed lists of victims were drawn up using the Dehomag company's punch card machines, producing meticulous records of the killings. As prisoners entered the death camps, they were made to surrender all personal property, which was carefully catalogued and tagged before being sent to Germany to be reused or recycled.

In fact the Yad Vashem have found records of at least four million specific people and how and were they died.

http://www1.yadvashem.org/remembrance/temp_remembrance/temp_index_pot.html

Now Mahatma you said.

2mil Jews Tops.

wheres YOUR proof, to back up YOUR claims. You're making the extraordinary claim the onus is on you to back it up.

tunaman

r3nu4l wrote: »

Can we return to 7/7 now? :pac: I'm looking forward to this documentary, even if only to see how it's put together.

There is already a documentary on 7/7 available, which is well put together.

The mainstream news has wilfully spread false, unsubstantiated and unverifiable information, while choosing to completely ignore the numerous inconsistencies and discrepancies in the official story.

The government has finally, after a year, presented us with their official ‘narrative’ concerning the event. Within hours it was shown to contain numerous errors, a fact since admitted by the Home Secretary John Reid.

They have continuously rejected calls for a full, independent public inquiry. Tony Blair himself described such an inquiry as a ‘ludicrous diversion’.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4943675105275097719&q=ludicrous+diversion&ei=IElYSJucNI6kjQLl78mCDw

Mahatma coat

Diogeness are you deliberatley misunderstandin what I have been saying?

or are you really that stupid?


anyway back on topic please

Diogenes

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Diogeness are you deliberatley misunderstandin what I have been saying?

Well seeing as there is no such word as "deliberatley" or "misunderstandin" you can see where my confusion lies.

or are you really that stupid?

6 Million is the accepted figure among legitimate historians, Nazis, and anyone who has studied the holocaust. It is not "The Jew's" figure.

You've only exposed your own ignorance and wiliness to follow racist conspiracy theories, and your own gullibility.

Scratch a conspiracy theorist and find a holocaust denier underneath.

anyway back on topic please

Is that an order?