nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

If 7/7 was a false flag...

noubliezjamais

Did it bring the UK one stop closer to the "totalitarian/surveillance state regime" that people like David Icke, John Hill, Alex Jones claim?

I'm just looking at it objectively (yes even for a conspiracy), and looking at for the motives rather than the details of the events. Assuming it was orchestrated by MI5, are UK citizens much more surveilled than before 2005? Has there been legislation passed that would not have been passed prior to the attacks?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Cheerful Spring

noubliezjamais wrote: »

Did it bring the UK one stop closer to the "totalitarian/surveillance state regime" that people like David Icke, John Hill, Alex Jones claim?

I'm just looking at it objectively (yes even for a conspiracy), and looking at for the motives rather than the details of the events. Assuming it was orchestrated by MI5, are UK citizens much more surveilled than before 2005? Has there been legislation passed that would not have been passed prior to the attacks?

Is there any evidence M15 are behind it? I watched the events at the time and did not find it suspicious. Since 9/11 and events after it, young Sunni Muslims have gotten radicalised to attack the west. There no need to look at a bigger picture behind it all. If you want to know the real conspiracy its who funded and supports these movements to spiral out of control. Syria and Yemen is a perfect example of the double standards in the west. West was supporting Jihadists in the fight against Assad.

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Is there any evidence M15 are behind it?

Dohnjoe

noubliezjamais wrote: »

Did it bring the UK one stop closer to the "totalitarian/surveillance state regime" that people like David Icke, John Hill, Alex Jones claim?

I'm just looking at it objectively (yes even for a conspiracy), and looking at for the motives rather than the details of the events. Assuming it was orchestrated by MI5, are UK citizens much more surveilled than before 2005? Has there been legislation passed that would not have been passed prior to the attacks?

Always hear about it but never got the whole "false flags to pass more surveillance laws" spiel. Why would 4 or 5 year politicians apparently want more surveillance for nefarious means? do they spend their evenings yearning to read intercepted emails from their constituents?

It's so much hassle for such a weak motive that doesn't really benefit any of them as politicians

orourkeda1977

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Always hear about it but never got the whole "false flags to pass more surveillance laws" spiel. Why would 4 or 5 year politicians apparently want more surveillance for nefarious means? do they spend their evenings yearning to read intercepted emails from their constituents?

It's so much hassle for such a weak motive that doesn't really benefit any of them as politicians

Are they doing it for themselves?

Dohnjoe

orourkeda1977 wrote: »

Are they doing it for themselves?

Representing the views of their constituents. London had 4 attacks in one year, security was/is pretty high on the list

Greyfoot

Sorry for the necro but anyone around here watched 7/7 Ripple Effect yet to even question whether it was an inside job or not? Thought this is a "conspiracy" board?

jeremyj1968

Greyfoot wrote: »

Sorry for the necro but anyone around here watched 7/7 Ripple Effect yet to even question whether it was an inside job or not? Thought this is a "conspiracy" board?

I saw it a few times. The most interesting things I guess were
a) The train that was first purported to have been bombed was actually cancelled!
b) The bombs looked like they blew upward.
c) Peter Power. wtf, just very very coincidental
d) And the story about the guys having been shot down at Canary Wharf.

But there was nothing conclusive for me. Not in the same way as there is with 9/11.

daveorourke77

People often to point to this guy.

They highlight the similarities between the 9\11 and the 7\7 attacks. This is in the sense that on 9\11 there were also a number of exercises that were similar to what actually happened on the day.

Dohnjoe

daveorourke77 wrote: »

They highlight the similarities between the 9\11 and the 7\7 attacks. This is in the sense that on 9\11 there were also a number of exercises that were similar to what actually happened on the day.

Exercises happen all the time. That's what security and anti-terrorist forces do, they drill and train.

It's a coincidence unless the following questions are addressed

1) What the coincidence is in terms of an alternative sequences of events

2) What that alternative sequence of events actually is (and what supports it)

daveorourke77

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Exercises happen all the time. That's what security and anti-terrorist forces do, they drill and train.

It's a coincidence unless the following questions are addressed

1) What the coincidence is in terms of an alternative sequences of events

2) What that alternative sequence of events actually is (and what supports it)

But its exactly the same thing at exactly the same time.

Does that represent a massive coincidence?

[Deleted User]

daveorourke77 wrote: »

But its exactly the same thing at exactly the same time.

Does that represent a massive coincidence?

Lets assume thats actually the case.
Why did the people behind the conspiracy do it?
What benefit does it give them thats worth the fact that doing so could (and apparently did) give the game away?

Greyfoot

King Mob wrote: »

Lets assume thats actually the case.
Why did the people behind the conspiracy do it?
What benefit does it give them thats worth the fact that doing so could (and apparently did) give the game away?

Have you actually watched 7/7 ripple effect? If did so your question is kinda moot. If did not then go ahead and as advised in it, draw your own conclusion.

[Deleted User]

Greyfoot wrote: »

Have you actually watched 7/7 ripple effect? If did so your question is kinda moot. If did not then go ahead and as advised in it, draw your own conclusion.

Or the question can be answered directly and clearly?

I have not watched the documentary, and I don't think there would be much point.
Always, when it's claimed that a question is answered in the documentary, with no information about where and when, it means that the question isn't answered at all.

If you could perhaps outline the answer to my question given in the documentary, it might seem more worthwhile.

JJayoo

Big foot did it?

Greyfoot

One`s opinion on the subject or any other for that matter is just that, an opinion. I am not here to discuss my own regarding who and why did it, your own question if there is sincere curiosity behind it will and can be answered if you look for said answers. Take nothing at face value, do not generalize and avoid confirmation bias. Use your own logic and sense of truth and you`ll find what you are really looking for. Regarding your question I can only direct you once again to the documentary and suggest to watch it, as far as I remember it is less than 60 minutes long. And again do not take anything at face value from it, form your own truth or stick to one you already have. Even more so if you find the film untrue or fake.

King Mob wrote: »

Or the question can be answered directly and clearly?

I have not watched the documentary, and I don't think there would be much point.
Always, when it's claimed that a question is answered in the documentary, with no information about where and when, it means that the question isn't answered at all.

If you could perhaps outline the answer to my question given in the documentary, it might seem more worthwhile.

[Deleted User]

Greyfoot wrote: »

One`s opinion on the subject or any other for that matter is just that, an opinion. I am not here to discuss my own regarding who and why did it, .

If you arent interested in discussion, why post?

Greyfoot wrote: »

Regarding your question I can only direct you once again to the documentary and suggest to watch it, as far as I remember it is less than 60 minutes long.

Experience tells me that my question is not answered by the documentary.
Whenever one of my questions is responded to with "its in this hour long rambling terrible youtube video" it has always been a waste of time to check.
I'm will to be shown to be wrong
The question I asked was pretty direct and simple and easy to answer.
And if the answer was in the video it would be trivial to paraphrase it.

Dohnjoe

daveorourke77 wrote: »

But its exactly the same thing at exactly the same time.

You may want to check the details of the drill

Does that represent a massive coincidence?

A coincidence yup. But massive? Visor's job was to run drill simulations in companies. They happened to be doing one in an office one day that was similar to the actual attack.

daveorourke77

Dohnjoe wrote: »

You may want to check the details of the drill

A coincidence yup. But massive? Visor's job was to run drill simulations in companies. They happened to be doing one in an office one day that was similar to the actual attack.

I believe that in the grand scheme of things that a coincidence like this is a big coincidence. It doesn't seem like a minor footnote or a small detail to me.

I don't think there's anything weird in this assertion.

Dohnjoe

daveorourke77 wrote: »

I believe that in the grand scheme of things that a coincidence like this is a big coincidence. It doesn't seem like a minor footnote or a small detail to me.

I don't think there's anything weird in this assertion.

It is a coincidence, so it doesn't even qualify as minor detail. It qualifies as completely irrelevant to the attacks themselves.