Remember, Freedom Is Worth Dying For

by craig on June 3, 2009 8:18 pm in Life

In the UK, we are understandably preoccupied with the fact that so many of our elected representatives are personally corrupt in terms of filling their own pockets, and appear not to be particularly distinguished or inspiring people. I actually do not believe the oft-repeated mantra that they all went into politics with good motives.

This country has been through a terrible decade. We have launched illegal wars on others, to further the economic interests of a wealthy class, and unleashed death, mutilation, poverty and grief upon millions in foreign lands. In so doing we made ourselves hated and then disliked the fear of retribution. We have substantially circumscribed our own liberties, hard won by our ancestors, and not cared because we were seduced by a dream of limitless wealth and ease. That bubble inevitably burst and proved to be based on an economic lie. Ordinary people will be paying for bailing out the extremely wealthy, for generations.

So extreme frustration is justified. But today, on the twentieth anniversary of the massacre of Tiananmen Square, we should remember that freedom is so important it is worth dying for.

That has never been a remote concept to me. I have several friends who have died struggling for democracy in Uzbekistan in the last seven years. I also still believe that the Second World War and the fight against fascism was a noble and necessary defence. Like many of my generation, there are close relatives I never got the chance to know because they gave their lives for democracy then. My mother’s only brother, for one. My grandparents never really recovered.

Today in China numerous websites, twitter, Flickr, blogger, livejournal and much else is closed down to try to prevent Chinese people from seeing any remembrance of Tiananmen. This blog was blocked there already, as it is is Uzbekistan and several other countries.

About half as many people as died at Tiananmen, died at Andijan in Uzebkistan, also massacred as they protested for democracy, just over five years ago.

When I was in Uzbekistan, the official line I was given by Jack Straw’s FCO was that Uzbekistan was following the “South East Asian Model” whereby economic liberalisation was bringing about social shifts and the development of a strong middle class, which would eventually lead to democracy. The existence of the model was not a nonsensical argument, though in Uzbekistan there was not any actual economic liberalisation, which invalidated the argument against criticising the regime.

In China there has been economic liberalisation. But precious little sign that this has led to real democratic development or even toleration of dissidence.

In those diaries, Zhao called the massacre of peaceful demonstrators at Tiananmen Square “a tragedy to shock the world”, and clearly stated it could have been averted, had any of the party leadership sided with his view that the demonstrators should be permitted to protest or otherwise be peacefully dispersed. The violent crackdown remains to this day one of the great signs that liberalization of China by trade and engagement has been a moral failure.

http://www.casavaria.com/cafesentido/2009/06/03/2891/china-still-seeks-to-hide-what-happened-at-tiananmen-square-20-years-ago-video/

The greatest sign of lack of progress over the last twenty years, is the Chinese government’s attempts even today to deny what happened at Tinananmen Square, and its Herculean efforts to prevent its population from knowing about it.

Two decades ago the air was heady, communism was tumbling everywhere, apartheid was vanishing, freedom seemed possible. We are left with a sense of ashes in the mouth. In China, the repression in Tibet and of the Muslim Uighurs – the latter a far less fashionable cause in the West – continues undiminished. But even toleration of dissent is not increasing, and there seems no end to the totalitarian desire to control what the people may know.

China may be moving towards capitalism pretty quickly. It is not even looking in the direction of political freedom.

150 Comments

  1. eddie

    3 Jun, 2009 - 8:59 pm

    Well said. The trouble is we have no idea about what is happening in China. If we did perhaps the far left would get more uppity about it, (or perhaps not as the USA cannot be blamed for it). As usual I completley disagree with your silly, paranoid thesis about our disappearing liberties. We have more freedom of thought and action now than at any time for centuries. This blog is proof of that. You have just made reference to a Freedom of Information Act request – brought in by a Labour govt.

  2. KevinB

    3 Jun, 2009 - 10:02 pm

    I agree that defending freedom is noble and viscerally important and that good people made great sacrifices for us in the past……but it is important to understand how wars have been created and to also understand the extent to which our society is truly democratic.

    Craig, please watch ‘The Moneymasters’, a straightforward factual academic history of money and financial systems over the last 2000 years. It lasts over three and a half hours but I found watching it a life-changing experience. I’ve sat through it at least three times.

    I can now believe in the idea of defending society but not in defending ‘democracy’ because the thing we call democracy is a fraud, an illusion, that will, because of its deliberate systemic deceptions, make victims of us all rather than serve our best interests.

    Understanding this might not make a person an acceptable parliamentary candidate in these days, but if enough people ‘get it’ we might all be saved in the long run.

    http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-515319560256183936&ei=7-QmSs7HO53S-gGx99ClCQ&q=moneymasters

  3. KevinB

    3 Jun, 2009 - 10:13 pm

    See what our ‘democracy’ is up to now.

    ‘We’ are already at war with Iran, though Obama, the deceiver, speaks sweetly about ‘reconciliation’.

    I wonder how the families of those in Iran who die because of the $400 million the US government invested in covert operations inside Iran will feel about our wonderful ‘democracy’(last week 15 were killed and 50 injured in an explosion in a Mosque in Tehren. The Iranian government blamed America…..well what are they spending their ‘dirty money’ on?).

    Is raising this issue on a thread about ‘defending freedom’ changing the subject?

    I don’t think so.

    http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/06/02/war-with-iran-has-it-already-begun/

  4. technicolour

    3 Jun, 2009 - 10:27 pm

    PJ O’Rourke: Eat the Rich. Says it all. China is corporate communism – the worst of all options. Slaves to a commercial regime.

  5. JimmyGiro

    3 Jun, 2009 - 10:58 pm

    technicolour,

    I think they are slaves to success.

    When I was in China in 2004, I noticed a lot of old guys sitting aimlessly along the pavement walls either side of the forbidden city, at the edge of Tiananmen Square. They were of the age that made them too old for new dynamism that was China, and yet not so old as to have been weak during 1989.

    I believe they were of the generation that was prominent during Mao’s cultural purges; they were the peoples soldiers that committed the great cleansing of the old traditions, so allowing the new China to grow; though not as Mao envisaged.

    I think that they were the angry locals that sparked the Tank charge in 1989. Those guys at the forefront of the cultural revolution, may have felt betrayed by their subsequent insignificance in the new China, post-Mao.

    I heard that a single army vehicle with four soldiers turned up in the Square to tell the peaceful students to go home. But the angry locals (possibly the old guard) attacked the vehicle, and killed three soldiers; the fourth was rescued by the students, who wanted a peaceful protest.

    A few hours later, possibly as a result of an enraged local commander, in went the tanks to avenge their comrades.

    These days I don’t believe the Chinese suffer from lack of democracy; they are too busy chasing Yuan to give a damn about politics. And the old communists are too old to be dangerous. The problems will come home when their white hot economy implodes, owing to the west being too poor to buy their stuff.

  6. Courtenay Barnett

    4 Jun, 2009 - 1:09 am

    Jimmy Giro – speakng of “slavery” I make the following observations:-

    There is an inversion of “freedom” as it is preached by the Western World:-

    1. Read Lord Mansfield’s decision in the James Somerset case ?” the air of England is too pure to be subjected to slavery ?” so, set the Black free. But , continue exploiting them for centuries onwards overseas.

    2. Then there is the case of the Zong ?” and that is a case where they are determined, under “civilised” English law, to be mere property with no legal locus standi.

    3. Fast forward to the present day ?” there are rich countries ?” there are poor countries.

    4. The rich countries are preoccupied with telling everyone about “civil liberty rights” ( e.g. right to freedom of expression). Pray tell where is the preaching about “survival rights” ( i.e. by that I mean that people have to have food, shelter and clothing, before they are really positioned to embrace, or are able to afford the challenges that are embedded in the next tier ?” and the Western World is fully cognisant of this ?” but its own history of exploitation gives good fodder for the debate).

    5. Pray tell ?” how do you tell a starving man in many a poor country that it is more important to embrace the “freedoms” as defined by the wealthy ?” over- embracing the development of your own country to advance to the position where ?” actually ?” the people are empowered to be able to choose and decide their destiny). As small nations ?” Cuba and Singapore immediately come to mind.

    The cart of Western liberalism cannot pull the horse of economic and political realties as regards development and these needs for survival that have long existed and still are unfolding in the world, cannot be resolved via resort to Western sentimentalism.

    My point is that the West at core is most hypocritical, but if it can sell its political message, without in any honest detail examining how it arrived at a state of wealth, then keep sending the law books, the liberal theories, the well educated Third World intellectual ( let Nehru fuck the British PM’s wife ?” if that’s what it takes) ?” but never, never, never, address the underlying core problems of global economic inequalities and how same are structured or how same can be addressed, forget human needs and inequalities.

    I see precious little integrity in most operations emanating from the West ?” indeed brutality from other quarters does also exist ?” but, if anyone out there ?” globally ?” disagrees with me ?” let the debate begin. I conclude that there are honest and humane individuals both North and South of the globe.

  7. anticant

    4 Jun, 2009 - 7:20 am

    “We have more freedom of thought and action now than at any time for centuries.”

    What planet does this idiot live on?

  8. KevinB

    4 Jun, 2009 - 7:38 am

    anticant,

    planet eddie.

  9. stef

    4 Jun, 2009 - 7:38 am

    “I also still believe that the Second World War and the fight against fascism was a noble and necessary defence.”

    Many of the Poles, Czechs and Slovaks I have known have a somewhat more ambivalent attitude to that conflict

    Once the banksters had created the conditions and made the finance available on which fascism could thrive no, there probably was no alternative to going to war. But, personally speaking, I would never describe WW2 as a noble, Just war without the addition of a whacking big caveat

    I’m not trying to be a pedant here. The ‘Justness’ of WW2 has been repeatedly used in support of many of the other wars which have followed it. Saddam Hussein was, after all, the ‘New Hitler’. I know this because I read it in a newspaper

    Just Wars; incidences of the morally justified use of state violence against the ordinary citizens of another state, are rare as hens teeth.

    Just Insurrections and Revolutions are a lot more common

    Not common enough though

  10. Alsaid

    4 Jun, 2009 - 8:08 am

    Craig;

    casavaria.com, the website you have linked to is a very poor one, I’ve seen the reports about the massacre in Gaza, they unashamedly sided with the Zionist bombs and repeated occupaiton propaganda.

    I would believe that nothing happened in Tianamen had this website been the source of the story.

    One more thing, people who click on links will leave your site, websites usually set the links up to open in new windows in order not to work as a linking site for others….

  11. eddie

    4 Jun, 2009 - 8:27 am

    anticant and Kevin B – you abuse but you can’t come up with arguments against. Sad. I have been through all this with you and others before. If you lived in the seventies you must accept that we have more liberties and freedoms now. If you want to debate the issue without resorting to abuse I am happy to do so. Obviously in your muddled world of paranoid conspiracy theories we are living in 1984 but the reality for the mass of the people is very different.

  12. eddie

    4 Jun, 2009 - 8:34 am

    Just as a starter for ten, many of your co-thinkers are constantly telling us that they never read newspapers or watch the corporate media. Instead they get all their “facts” from the internet (and doesn’t it make them feel superior). Well I wonder what they did thirty years ago? Is that in itself not a symbol of the democratisation of information and a widening of freedoms? I have already mentioned the Freedom of Information Act. Compare the access to public information now with thirty years ago and there is a chasm between the two. I could go on and on. But perhaps these things mean nothing in your shabby little worldview.

  13. stef

    4 Jun, 2009 - 9:00 am

    Thirty years ago I could turn on a television and watch some genuine investigative programming such as World in Action or Panorama, pick up a newspaper and read some genuinely dissenting investigative journalism from someone like John Pilger…

    The reasons why things have changed so very, very much is worth much more thought than you could type into a poxy comment box. This book is a good start…

    http://www.flatearthnews.net/

    and eddie, your compalining about personal abuse might carry a little more weight if you didn’t sneer at, patronise and insult people with different views to yourself in the same breath

  14. anticant

    4 Jun, 2009 - 9:04 am

    Eddie, I am 81 and I grew up during the 1939-45 War, which I very much doubt you know much about. We knew then what freedoms, and what sort of society, we were fighting for. Even in wartime, there was much more personal liberty and privacy than there is now, with all the snoopery and relentless collection of personal data which NuLabour has introduced since 2001.

    All this is amply documented, and it is sheer ignorance – or partisan effrontery – for you to deny it.

    I am not paranoid, nor do I have a “shabby little worldview”, which is a more accurate description of some of your ramblings.

    As for “the mass of the people”, I cannot claim to speak for them as confidently as you do. But I doubt whether they feel as free as you say they do.

    I cannot debate this at length now, as I am about to undergo a cataract operation and shall be offline for a few days at least. So I must leave it to others to point out the rosy colour of your political spectacles.

  15. Anonymous

    4 Jun, 2009 - 9:09 am

    Eddie

    Craig isn’t being paranoid about loss of freedom its being eroded as we speak. Just people like you don’t see it as you look through your rose coloured myopic specs. Look around you CCTV, emails being monitored, stopped driving down the street for terrorist searches, Draconian laws with reference to protests. If it wasn’t for the inefficiency of the police courts and other agencies we wouldn’t be able to do anything. My ex wife was brought up in communist Warsaw when she first came to the UK her first observation was “You can’t do anything here its worse than Soviet Poland you have laws to prevent everything” I have been surveiled had my emails intercepted and my flat broken into by persons unknown. Craig has had worse including his career ruined and his health compromised.

    My daughter keeps bringing home spurious “homework” asking what food do you have in the fridge? What time do you go to bed? Then they teach her global warming as if its a fact in science. Brain washing of the youth from an early age. This is coming out now in the work place where younger people don’t understand greys only black or white. They follow orders like they have been trained without question. When I was at school I had great teachers that vaguely followed the curriculum but rambled on about everything. Probably why I did appallingly in my exams but havnt done too bad in life since thanks to my teachers and parents. Now teachers have to parrot Labour propaganda without question. Without the freedom to stray, or the inspectors will mark down the school and funding will be cut.

    Police used to be able to use discretion that was fundamental to are democracy and was the first tier of the judicial system. Being told off by the local bobby and being put in his pocket book for playing football in the street or pinching a penny chew was punishment enough. Now police have to arrest you, take your DNA (On the pretext of “you might become a rapist later”)File forms with the social services consider you for an ASBO or caution . The net result? The same as before you are told off just we now have all your details on their computer systems have your DNA and prints. The Government and its agencies have paranoia about anyone they haven’t got data on. You must be hiding something why have you never come to notice. Why hasn’t your child ever fell over in the park and bumped there head so police can fill in a data base on the pretext that your child isn’t safe in your care as they fell over. Maybe you are hiding the fact because you beat them and don’t take them to hospital? This isn’t paranoia this is fact and how police government think.

    All this seems very sensible in isolation but put it all together and it becomes more sinister.

  16. eddie

    4 Jun, 2009 - 9:22 am

    Anticant “Even in wartime, there was much more personal liberty and privacy than there is now, with all the snoopery and relentless collection of personal data which NuLabour has introduced since 2001.” I respect your age and the fact that you lived through the war, but this is utter nonsense and I am sorry to say that age does not always bring wisdom. Any reading of history will tell you that access to information was much more restricted during the war and that secrecy was paramount. Read Antony Beevor’s book on D Day for starters. As for “snooping and personal data” please furnish me with examples and tell me precisely how they adversely impact upon your freedoms and liberties. The people around here like having cctv on the streets, it makes them feel safer. That is a fact. The truth is we live in a different world to 1945, and there is a danger of seeing that period through the rose tinted spectacles that you accuse me of. My parents both served in the war so I do know something about it.

    I wonder how many of you have ever read the Euroopean Convention on Human Rights to which we are signatories? It puts us a world away from the position even thirty years ago.

    June, England worse than communist Warsaw. Give us a break. Your rant says nothing serious on the subject.

  17. stef

    4 Jun, 2009 - 9:24 am

    And on the subject of the title of this post…

    George Patton once said -

    ‘The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other guy die for his’

    Dying for Freedom is dandy but I’d rather go with, or help come up with, a Plan that sees the other guy Dying for Oppression thank you very much

  18. eddie questioner

    4 Jun, 2009 - 9:48 am

    Eddie,

    Leading but…

    Have you taken a contrary view on any major, or minor, social or political policy instigated by the government?

    Would you like to tell us about the policy and your views?

    If so, have you taken any action whatsoever to be heard?

    What was your experience?

    Were you successful?

    If not, why not?

  19. KevinB

    4 Jun, 2009 - 10:07 am

    eddie,

    To be fair, you are right about the internet. There is remarkable and, let us admit, unprecedented freedom of expression here.

    If it was not for the internet I personally would probably never have discovered the depth of the tyranny that elsewhere enslaves us. The mainstream media and major political parties would certainly have kept us in the dark forever.

    My entire worldview altered when I came to realise (irrefutably) in 2005, that 9/11 was an ‘inside job’. Controlled demolition of World Trade Centres 1, 2 and 7 is now proven. Apart from the fact that by the ‘official narrative’ the collapses violate two universal laws of physics, we now have a group of university professors who have published a research paper in which they identify particles of ‘nanothermite’ in samples of the WTC dust. This is full-on forensic evidence. In a courtroom it trumps any amount of blather. The issue is PROVEN beyond the tiniest doubt.

    eddie, I find the idea of governmental forces (whoever they are) murdering thousands of their own citizens so that that they can wage war elsewhere and murder over a million more innocent human beings TOTALLY FUCKING UNACCEPTABLE.

    How free are we when such dramatic real evidence of such a shocking crime is neither discussed in the mainstream media nor debated in parliament.

    There’s your ‘freedom’. Things that REALLY MATTER cannot be even talked about.

    TABOO!

    Our ‘freedom’, like our ‘democracy’ is an illusion. We can say what we like provided it does not change anything.

    If the power-that-be ever start to feel threatened by people saying these things in the public domain (this forum is not, quite, the public domain) then they will show us their true face.

    There is subtle and oppresive oversight of our political system that prevents the thoughts of even moderate radicals, like Craig, impinging on the public consciousness. While these people can control minds through the media and parliament and can hand out guns to fools who will shoot us, they have nothing too serious to worry about…….

    …….apart from the total collapse of their financial house of cards, that is.

  20. eddie

    4 Jun, 2009 - 10:07 am

    I am a member of the Labour Party. I don’t agree with ID cards or kettling or general police tactics on G20 and have written to Gordon Brown and others to say so. ID cards will not happen. Kettling is under review and will probably be scrapped. Does that answer your question?

  21. eddie

    4 Jun, 2009 - 10:15 am

    KevinB I agree with your first sentence. The rest is bilge. It’s hard to know where to start with your stupid “facts”. Your thesis is basically this: dark forces control the world; I am an intelligent person who can uncover the evidence of these dark forces via the internet; if only other people were as intelligent as me they would come to their senses and overwhelm our elected governments and we would then have peace, love and the brotherhood of man.

    As I say, bilge. Every conspiracy theory since time began has the same focus. “I know things you don’t and I am therefore a better human being than you.”

    But if it makes you feel happy and superior to the rest of us, and it stops you getting into bother, good luck to you.

  22. stephen

    4 Jun, 2009 - 10:16 am

  23. Anonymous

    4 Jun, 2009 - 10:24 am

    You gotta love the Americans political elite…

    trying to vote through a bill reuiring that the red cross and the UN investigate war crime by China over the Tianemin Square massacre.

    Clean your own house first…springs to mind

  24. anticant

    4 Jun, 2009 - 10:29 am

    Dear sneery eddie

    Wisdom doesn’t come with age – it’s more a matter of life experience and knowledge. What’s yours? If, after the events of the past twelve years, and especially the last twelve months, you are still a member of the Labour party you strike me as being an utter fool.

  25. Chris

    4 Jun, 2009 - 10:35 am

    Eddie,

    there are certainly ‘freedoms’ that are available now that were not always available in the 70′s or whichever other period you wish to evoke. The question is: what is the balance between what has been gained (or granted) and what has been removed. The deficit lies in the quality.

    I lived through the seventies and I would have to say that I enjoyed more freedom then in all important senses of the word. I had a media which reported difficult issues… Now I can write here on a blog with 70,000+ visitors. Then, as mentioned above, I could read Pilger exposing the iniquities of power in a newspaper selling millions. Now I read him online or in the darker recesses of a relatively small circulation magazine.

    There are many examples to illustrate the point that there is a huge deficit between that gained and that lost. To suggest otherwise is to miss the point.

  26. Jon

    4 Jun, 2009 - 10:43 am

    I’d join into the debate but it is getting abusive, again. Not my cup of tea!

    @stef – interesting that you mention Flat Earth News. I went to see Nick Davies do a talk and some of his stories – in particular the racist world-view at one of the middle-class tabloids – were quite illuminating. I have a copy of his book ready for reading, but am somewhat put off by a Media Lens review, which reveals the author’s own conservative biases.

    Early on he apparently dismisses “Marxist” conspiracy theorists, by which he probably means one of the most thorough works on media bias to date, “Manufacturing Consent” by Chomsky and Hermann. That work is a tough read, as it is presented in quite an academic style, and it is now some years out of date (though I suspect the theory still holds). Nevertheless, it remains a worthwhile read for anyone seriously interested in how biases find their way into their newspaper.

    Nevertheless I will give FEN a go at some point… perhaps after I’ve re-read MC ;-)

    @anticant – all the best for the operation.

  27. tony_opmoc

    4 Jun, 2009 - 10:57 am

    In many ways society is freer and more liberal than it was 50 years ago. The UK population has become a very tolerant society and behaviour that would have to be hidden 50 years ago can now openly be expressed. It is now O.K. even to be Gay. The internet has also openned up an entire new source of communication that is mostly free and uncensored.

    But other things have got considerably worse and freedoms have been lost, and nearly all of this is due to a move towards Dictatorship in Government and the most outrageous control and censorship of the media.

    I personally became aware of this cultural change and move towards dictatorship at about the same time Blair was elected in 1997, though didn’t link the connection at the time.

    Dictatorship is an appallingly inefficient way to run any enterprise – be it a Government, Business or a Social club. The reason this is so, is because it eliminates the possibility of other, better ideas being discussed and promoted. It assumes that whoever is the Dictator has the best knowledge and understanding – when usually, this is the direct opposite of reality. So society ends up doing incredibly stupid things as a result of the Dictator’s orders.

    This happenned to me personally in my last job. When I started it in 1995, I was empowered to make decisions myself to get the job done, to take responsibility, to raise issues, to challenge others, to come up with new ideas and present them even right to the top of the management chain if appropriate. It was the same for everyone in the company I worked for. We all worked together and made the impossible happen and achieved real success. A few years later we were effectively taken over by an internal dictatorship. We were told exactly what we would or would not do. People who said this decision is crazy – were fired. The place became intolerable. It changed from being a place where I loved going to work – and would put my heart, soul and enormous amount of time and dedication – to a place I hated. It was such a relief when they finally made me redundant. It took me 3 years to achieve it.

    The same cultural change has happenned throughout society – and we are increasingly and rapidly moving to a fascist dictatorship.

    We need to fight for leaders that will empower and encourage us to achieve – not for leaders like Blair and air-head Cameron. They should all be cleared out and we should start the democratic process again.

    Tony

  28. MJ

    4 Jun, 2009 - 11:07 am

    eddie: your kneejerk reaction of describing anything that doesn’t correspond with your fantasy world-view as “bilge” or a “conspiracy theory” is a woefully inadequate response to facts. KevinB is perfectly correct to point out for instance that the controlled demolition of WTC has now pretty much been proved. See the recently published paper from the University of Copenhagen, “Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe”

    http://tinyurl.com/de6448 for the abstact and a link to the full paper.

    anticant: all the best with your op.

  29. Craig

    4 Jun, 2009 - 11:13 am

    Alsaid,

    It is a good article. If I only ever linked to sites where I agree with everything they say, I would never link to anyone.

    I have even been known to link to Guido or Harry’s Place! I am not endorsing anyone, just pointing at an interesting article. I don’t believe anyone is right about everything. If you want blind certainty, go to the SWP.

    It is perfectly possible for an individual to be wrong on Palestine and right on China. I was even wrong about something myself once. I think it was in 1986 :-)

    Not that those sites ever link to me. The extraordinary thing is, we get such a high readership despite a de facto link “boycott” by all the big sites. In large part because I don’t ally with any party.

    I hate ending up with loads of browser windows open myself, so I don’t do pop-ups for links and stuff.

  30. eddie

    4 Jun, 2009 - 11:16 am

    anticant – as usual you don’t answer my points but just resort to abuse. What’s the point? Your age certainly doesn’t give yo wisdom. I don’t know what you did in the war, if anything, and you know nothing about me. If you want to know about my life experiences I can share them with you. There are thousands of members of the Labour Party and it is one of the two main political forces in this country with strong links in the trade union and labour movement, so your sneering is beneath you. It is also the party that created the NHS, the national parks, built millions of houses etc – all the things that you allegedly fought for.

    Chris your comment is more sensible but unfavourably to compare Human Rights legislation with the fact that the Mirror no longer publishes Pilger (who really is a fool in my opinion) is laughable frankly. Is that the best you can come up with?

    Tony – sounds like your persoanl problems have clouded your judgement. If you think we are moving towards a fascist dictatorship a) you don’t mean it and b) if you did you don’t understand what the words mean.

  31. Abe Rene

    4 Jun, 2009 - 11:26 am

    New Labour will not interfere in the freedom of the majority of people where it affects their perceived quality of life. They might of course outlaw people “glorifying terrorism”, which affects only a minority. Similarly with control orders similar to apartheid South Africa’s banning orders. They might outlaw “being in possession of information likely to be useful to a terrorist” which affects everybody, but the perceived effect is not great as again only a minority are prosecuted. Similarly “failure to disclose information”.

    They might arrest people demonstrating for Tibetan independence when a Chinese dignitary is on town, or shoot innocent people’s brains out, conceal relevant facts, and also say that the policy leading to the death must be maintained to better protect us from Terrorism – but again, all this affects only the minority.

    1997 was a slaughterhouse. I look forward to next general election night!

  32. eddie

    4 Jun, 2009 - 11:26 am

    Oh no, not the WTC again. It’s like William Brown’s secret society and on about the same intellectual level. Read David Aaronovitch’s book on conspiracy theories. You may hate him but you can’t refute the research and the arguments. Conspiracy theory = history for the stupid. Where do you get this stuff? What next, Jews complicit in the Holocaust? Oh, I forgot, you’ve already peddled that one. I’m surprised you haven’t mentioned Lehmann borthers yet. Even Al Fayed now admits that Diana died because a driver was drunk and for no other reason ( and it cost us millions of pounds to get to that stage). But if it makes you happy, go for it. You know what? I could find a group of academics somewhere in the world who would find evidence of anything I wanted them to find. Academcis are as intelligent and stupid as the rest of us, and in my experience they are often the latter. They are frequently wrong and frequently blind to the truth. IF you know anything about the MMR vaccine you will understand the point.

  33. tony_opmoc

    4 Jun, 2009 - 11:38 am

    “I remember when, I remember

    I remember when I lost my mind

    There was something so pleasant about that place

    Even your emotions have an echo in so much space

    And when you’re out there without care

    Yeah, I was out of touch

    But it wasn’t because I didn’t know enough

    I just knew too much

    Does that make me crazy?

    Does that make me crazy?

    Does that make me crazy?

    Possibly

    And I hope that you are

    Having the time of your life

    But think twice

    That’s my only advice

    Come on now, who do you

    Who do you, who do you, who do you think you are?

    Ha ha ha, bless your soul

    You really think you’re in control?

    Well, I think you’re crazy

    I think you’re crazy

    I think you’re crazy

    Just like me”

    eddie,

    It is certain that Terrorists were responsible for 9/11. But who was in control of them?

    You believe what you were told, because like a child you trust your government like a parent.

    Others look at the evidence and ask questions. When they find the ugly truth, that it is our society and culture that is incredibly Evil – and not some alien one – they may seem a little bit crazy to the rest of society.

    You meanwhile are comfortable in your naivety blaming Muslims – without even thinking about it.

    I don’t think you are crazy – you are simply a sheep, asleep with a closed mind. Most members I know of the original Labour Party left it when they realised what a Fascist Blair and Nu-Labour was. In no way do they represent the interests of Labour – the interests of the Common Man.

    Tony

  34. JimmyGiro

    4 Jun, 2009 - 11:45 am

    eddie wrote:

    “[The Labour Party]… is also the party that created the NHS, the national parks, built millions of houses etc…”

    A rose by any other name, would still smell as blue.

  35. paul

    4 Jun, 2009 - 11:51 am

    Reminds me of another general, Smedley Butler, war is a racket.

  36. lwtc247

    4 Jun, 2009 - 11:58 am

    Two decades ago some believed the direction many countries were taking to emulate our own, was a good thing. Twenty years ago, we deluded ourselves and still do today.

    Sorry folks but I find it laughable that should western hegemony succeed (e.g. in China) then the world would have made {some, laudable} ‘progress’. Do I detect the seeds of the Empire are still fertile??

    Our own govt is FAR FAR worse than the Chinese govt. Over the last 20 years, far FAR more people have lost relatives due to British illegal wars than have under the Chinese govt. and with the USUK DU legacy, many more generations are doomed by British hands. Then of course we have British Economic policy. How many hundreds of millions have dies as a result of those murderous policires, sorry, policy mistakes.

    And of China (and Russia) don’t they have the right to stamp out US and UK influence? If you’ll allow the casual analogy, one thinks of African female circumcisers swimming the English channel razor blade gripped in jaws intent to cut the rose of all British women.

    Weren’t the “pro-democracy” (whose definition/version of democracy anyway?) students connected with the Americans.? If only other South and Latin American governments had stamped out ‘Americanism’ then the century of death may never have occurred for them. It so happens China’s stamp was apparently a crime, and the wrong way to stamp.

    To call Tiananmen an act of anti-liberalism is surely a fudge. Not that I’m particularly keen on Chinas “economic miracle (which is as fake as ours and WILL pop one day)” but it is possible the Country would be decimated and Hong Kong would still be British.

    Oh yeaah! It’s thum Brits again.

    As for WW2, why no repercussions of the scum that bank rolled WW2 Rothschild’s and BuSh’s? That Hitler is where the buck stops is frankly silly.

  37. eddie

    4 Jun, 2009 - 11:59 am

    Tony

    I don’t believe what I am told. I believe what I discern for myself. If you are stupid enough to believe that some vast conspiracy placed charges in the wtc and blew them up shortly after two planes entered the tallest towers you go ahead and believe it. If you believe that the hijackers were controlled by the CIA or other dark forces you go ahead and believe it. Your attitude is basically elitist, because it implies that the average Sun reader is too thick to understand the truth. It must make you feel so superior. IF you know the truth why is that no one will take you seriously? I think I know why.

    As for the Labour Party not representing the Common Man (whoever he or she is), can you tell me why most trade unions are affiliated to the Labour Party?

  38. MJ

    4 Jun, 2009 - 12:14 pm

    I repeat eddie: the controlled demolition of WTC has now pretty much been proved. That’s proved. As in proved. You can witter on about David Aaronovitch to your heart’s content: unless he’s provided superior research on the content of the dust from ground zero his views have absolutely nothing to illuminate this matter.

  39. Jaded

    4 Jun, 2009 - 12:21 pm

    Eddie is a spook. Why engage with him? There was a spook prick called ‘The Jessy’ that used to lurk on this blog. He seemed to leave after being outed and humiliated, but then another spook prick called eddie showed up. Coincidence? I think not. :-0 I notice he didn’t pooh pooh my John Smith assassination theory. Now, why is that? I know the answer. It is a theory that is barely propagated at all. Therefore, it doesn’t serve any purpose to argue it and draw any more attention to that theory, as opposed to your usual necessary 9/11 conspiracy counter arguments. 9/11 truth is mainstrean now and soon, if not already, the official parrots will be the ‘crazies’. He will squirm reading this post. Come now eddie, pooh pooh me…

    And as for:

    ‘IF you know the truth why is that no one will take you seriously? I think I know why.’

    That was funny. I know you know that’s not true, but still, very funny. Good one eddie. Hope I don’t upset you too much my old mucker…

  40. stef

    4 Jun, 2009 - 12:30 pm

    One thing that was certainly less restricted in the 70s was the ability to discuss the probability that elitist class interests are sometimes pursued with deliberate and covert intent

    Nowadays, sure as eggs are eggs, some useful idiot will attempt to confuse the issue by conflating that belief with belief in crop circles, space aliens, an undying elvis or Hitler worship

    If that doesn’t work Plan B usually involves trying to obscure the issue by chucking insults around whilst claiming to hold some kind of moral or intellectual high ground

    and as for awesome generalisations such as…

    “Every conspiracy theory since time began has the same focus. “I know things you don’t and I am therefore a better human being than you.”

    I’m curious to know if say, for example, the disgraceful state-sponsored Bologna Station bombing atrocity and the subsquent discovery of the P2 network counts as one of those conspiracy theories

  41. stef

    4 Jun, 2009 - 12:42 pm

    It’s a funny thing, I always thought ‘conspiracy theorists’ were obsessed with infecting other people with their insane beliefs

    Now I discover that we CTers don’t won’t anyone else in on the secret because then we wouldn’t feel so superior

    If ‘eddie’ is a spook, which I very much doubt, his bosses should be asking for their money back

  42. MJ

    4 Jun, 2009 - 12:43 pm

    If eddie’s a spook I wish to complain, in the strongest possible terms, that our taxes are being spent on such low calibre operatives.

    Not a spook. Not smart enough and can’t engage with evidence. Just a Zionist, New Labour fantasist.

  43. eddie questioner

    4 Jun, 2009 - 12:45 pm

    Eddie,

    Thanks for answering my questions.

    Freedom is an act. A superior power bestows it on an inferior power. To know that one has it one has to act. To continually test the superior power.

    From your experience, you are free to write letters of disapproval and therefore are in the happy and unassailable position of being able to comment on the letter writing freedom we enjoy.

    Are you seriously extending your very particular experience of freedom to a wider, more general notion of freedom?

    You disapprove of uk police tactics in demos. Good for you. How far will you protest that? May I suggest you try handing out leaflets? Possibly condemning the death during the G20 meetings in the City? Or the policing policy? Whatever you like.

    Try a day of it. I would be extremely interested in reading about your experience.

  44. Chris

    4 Jun, 2009 - 1:02 pm

    Eddie

    “Chris your comment is more sensible but unfavourably to compare Human Rights legislation with the fact that the Mirror no longer publishes Pilger (who really is a fool in my opinion) is laughable frankly. Is that the best you can come up with?”

    I didn’t mention Human Rights legislation.

    And no it isn’t the best I could come up with but I didn’t want to posit anything too intellectually challenging lest you failed to comprehend.

  45. eddie

    4 Jun, 2009 - 1:09 pm

    So no arguments, just abuse then? I am waiting. You said there was a huge deficit against freedom and liberty. I quoted the European Convention on Human Rights as an example of the extension of freedom and liberty. You quoted what? Pilger being thrown off the Mirror for writing turgid and tendentious polemics. Anything else? Do tell. As I said, is that the best you can do or do you just want to abuse people you can’t argue with?

  46. tony_opmoc

    4 Jun, 2009 - 1:10 pm

    eddie,

    The trade union movement has been smashed to hell since Thatcher. Blair merely completed the job. What’s left of it is there supposedly just to represent workers in the public sector – the same public sector controlled by Fascist Nu-labour.

    It’s beyond me why any trade unionist would voluntarily contribute to such a Fascist Government – maybe they think its the last chance they have of preserving their pension rights, or maybe they still think they actually have any real influence with regards to worker’s rights and can actually influence policy.

    Personally I think all Labour MP’s who actually knew the truth about Blair’s lies re WMD and still voted for the Iraq War – should not only have over 1 Million deaths on their conscience – they should also be on trial for War Crimes against humanity.

    The stupid ignorant ones – may escape a jail term – whilst charges against the rest may be escalated to treason – which I believe still carries the Death Penalty – which I am a fervent opponent against – as it is much too kind.

    Personally I think people like Blair should be kept in jail for the rest of their lives as a living exhibit of evil – a bit like preserving a concentration camp as a museum piece.

    Tony

  47. james

    4 Jun, 2009 - 1:10 pm

    Conspiracy theory, conspiracy theory…

    “Which is the grandest conspiracy theory? The interpretation of 9/11 as an orchestrated casus belli to justify US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, or the interpretation that a handful of Muslims defeated US security multiple times in one short morning and successfully pulled off the most fantastic terrorist attack in history simply because they ‘hate our freedom and democracy’? Orchestrating events to justify wars is a stratagem so well worn as to be boring.”

    Paul Craig Roberts, Assistant Secretary of Treasury under President Reagan

  48. stef

    4 Jun, 2009 - 1:25 pm

    “As I said, is that the best you can do or do you just want to abuse people you can’t argue with?”

    next thing we’ll be telling you is that we’ve just seen Elvis, eh?

  49. eddie questioner

    4 Jun, 2009 - 1:30 pm

    Eddie,

    I realise you are being debated on several fronts, but I am interested in whether or not you are willing to increase your personal experience of freedom by handing out leaflets supporting your views on current policing tactics. If you are in London, try it in the City. Providing, of course, that doesn’t break any laws.

    I notice in your last comment you feel you are subject of abuse and so presume you would jump at the chance to answer some of my questions or undermine the assumptions I make in asking them.

    I very much look forward to your response.

  50. eddie

    4 Jun, 2009 - 2:06 pm

    Tony Do you even understand what a fascist governement is? This just debases the english language frankly. It’s like trying to debate with an adolescent who accuses theur parents of being fascist. As for one million, where does that figure come from apart from the recesses of your mind? I assume you are familiar with the debate on media lens and other places on IBC? Their estimate is less than 100,000 – mostly killed by other Iraaqis, and certainly not by westerners.

    I have been active politically for many years, I have leafleted, canvassed and picketed. I am happy to do more. Your basic thesis is that we are less free now and have less liberty now than thirty years ago, thanks mainly to the “Fascist” Labour government. I have provided evidence to the contrary and none of you has been able to contradict this, other than to post ludicrous examples of Pilger being censored, cctv and vague stuff about snooping and data collection.

  51. Chris

    4 Jun, 2009 - 2:32 pm

    Okay Eddie,

    what about the fact that it is an offence to protest outside Parliament? That surely is the most base restriction of freedom and liberty there could be in a democracy.

    The ability to protest against our so-called representatives is a fundamental freedom – is it not?

    The fact that people have been criminalised for reading out the names of the dead. A restriction of freedom – no?

    Once again (I really must stop, and I appreciate that) I apologise for the abuse. It is wrong and uncalled for.

    There is a list of restrictions of freedom that characterise this appaling Government which really could run to pages and pages. Anyone who cannot see this seems to have been asleep for the past twelve years. I too was a member of the Labour Party. I regret that, and apologise unreservedly for any help I gave – in money or time – to facilitate an anti-libertarian, neo-con shower of bastards who have all but destroyed my country.

  52. eddie questioner

    4 Jun, 2009 - 2:34 pm

    Eddie wrote ….

    “Your basic thesis is that we are less free now and have less liberty now than thirty years ago, thanks mainly to the “Fascist” Labour government. I have provided evidence to the contrary and none of you has been able to contradict this, other than to post ludicrous examples of Pilger being censored, cctv and vague stuff about snooping and data collection.”

    In response to your remarkable summary, please read and independently verify the article linked to below.

    http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2009/05/19/the-barbarians-at-the-gate/

    Paragraph 3 has a long litany of laws, passed by the government.

    See also, as mentioned in that article, a list of other acts passed.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/series/a-z-of-legislation

    I’m afraid the weight of evidence is very much against you eddie.

  53. Chris

    4 Jun, 2009 - 2:37 pm

    Eddie,

    I would ask only one thing. Could you please recognise that abuse when directed by you is no less offensive than that directed at you.

  54. MJ

    4 Jun, 2009 - 2:45 pm

    eddie:

    “I have provided evidence to the contrary”

    Craig must have deleted it: I have trawled through your comments today and you have provided evidence of nothing, except perhaps your own dreary fantasy world. Perhaps not surprising really; you don’t really get on with evidence do you? Much more comfortable with belief.

    As for the number of Iraqi deaths due to the US invasion, the current estimate stands at 1,320,110 (see link at top of this – and indeed every – page on Craig’s site).

  55. tony_opmoc

    4 Jun, 2009 - 3:07 pm

    eddie,

    Whilst the following is not an example of a fascist government, it is an example of a dictatorship that is moving towards a fascist dictatorship and a Police State

    I could mention the NHS (ask any hospital doctor or nurse), but instead will mention the police.

    The Government have issued targets to the police which they have to achieve – or they will receive serious penalties in funding – you will need to ask a policeman about the details.

    But the effect is to stop a vast percentage of the police from doing the job they want to do and are paid to do. Some police men and women still manage to do a very effective job – and I have personal experience of how very good they can be.

    However, I also have personal experience of their policy of arresting extremely large numbers of teenagers who haven’t committed any offence whatsoever – and are never charged with any offence whatsover. At first I was of course shocked when the first time it happenned to my daughter – but I then discovered virtually all my friends with children the same age as mine – had had exactly the same experience.

    The clear policy of the government was to arrest as many children as possible under any pretence – so as to take their DNA. They are then given a warning and released.

    But this has very serious implications. It effectively criminalises an entire generation. It also means that they cannot for example fly to the USA on a visa waiver – and have to declare that they have been arrested – because the US immigration authorities have access to the UK police database. It also potentially affects them from all kinds of potential employment – even though they have never committed or been charged with any offence.

    You might think this is O.K. – but I think this is totally outrageous. The EU court of human rights has demanded that the Government remove my daughter’s details including her DNA from their database – together with hundreds of thousands if not millions other children.

    The Government refuses.

    I want to see all these Bastards in Court. I will be on the side of the Prosecution.

    Tony

  56. Jon

    4 Jun, 2009 - 3:13 pm

    @MJ – I don’t know much about justforeignpolicy.org – I believe the 1 million figure comes from the Lancet. I have posted (June 4, 2009 3:01 PM) more on this on another thread, where this has been raised also:

    http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2009/06/when_ministers.html#comments

  57. eddie

    4 Jun, 2009 - 3:19 pm

    Chris “what about the fact that it is an offence to protest outside Parliament?” – er, so why has Brian Haws been there for several years? I can assure you that any other country in Europe would have swept him away years ago. We are too tolerant of such people. Your rant says more about you than it does about the Labour Party. If people abuse me I will respond I am afraid, especially as the abuse is tenfold on your side of the equation.

    MJ, you make a sweeping statement as usual but no facts. I have made reference to the European Convention on Human Rights signed by a Labour Government. Have you read it? Do you understand it? All of the petty instances of supposed infringements of liberty that you quote are as nothing in comparison to the rights enshrined in that legislation.

    eddie the questioner – whoever you are – you should know by now that Monbiot is a polemicist and not a journalist. He refers to a single incident that says more about cockup than conspiracy, and the list of legislation includes those relating to anti social behaviour (don’t you support it? – millions do, I can assure you asbos are very popular where I live), human right and domestic violence, so to say that the evidence is against me is bollocks I am afraid. Next.

  58. eddie

    4 Jun, 2009 - 3:21 pm

    http://www.iraqbodycount.org/

    MJ Iraq body count link. 100,000 and most of them are muslims killed by other muslims. I think they have a bit more expertise on the subject than you, don’t you think? Your figure of i million plus is in your head.

    Next.

  59. eddie questioner

    4 Jun, 2009 - 3:46 pm

    response to “eddie”:

    “eddie the questioner – whoever you are”

    - I ask the same question of you?

    “- you should know by now that Monbiot is a polemicist and not a journalist.”

    - Are you not a polemicist? Is that a crime or a deceit?

    “He refers to a single incident that says more about cockup than conspiracy,”

    -I haven’t mentioned conspiracy. How many defendants have been found guilty of Terrorist offences against numbers being arrested using anti terrorist legislation? Find out.

    ” and the list of legislation includes those relating to anti social behaviour (don’t you support it? – millions do, I can assure you asbos are very popular where I live),”

    -What has that to do with freedom to peaceably demonstate against government policy?

    “human right and domestic violence, so to say that the evidence is against me is bollocks I am afraid.”

    - Vacuous

    “Next.”

    -Indeed.

    Again, I challenge you to take up one of your own causes, mentioned above, print leaflets and hand them out in Parliament Square.

    Good luck and thanks for the entertainment.

  60. MJ

    4 Jun, 2009 - 4:01 pm

    “I have made reference to the European Convention on Human Rights signed by a Labour Government”. Congratulations. Your point being?

    “All of the petty instances of supposed infringements of liberty”

    I don’t think a law providing for 42 days detention without charge can be described as petty. This is the stuff of Amin’s Uganda, apartheid S Africa, Hitler’s Germany and Stalin’s Russia. History has never smiled on regimes that brought in this kind of legislation, whatever the pretext.

    I take it the European Convention on Human Rights has little to say on the matter?

  61. Chris

    4 Jun, 2009 - 4:01 pm

    Eddie you lack grace and that is a shame. I always thought that two wrongs don’t make a right….

    Brian Haws is there because they couldn’t apply the legislation retrospectively – although they did try.

    I would have thought that you would know that… In fact I believe that you do and are simply being awkward for the sake of it.

    You asked for examples: I gave you two and you managed to, incorrectly, deal with one of them. I presume then that you will now back down?

  62. eddie

    4 Jun, 2009 - 4:05 pm

    eddie the questioner – I refer you to Brian Haws as above. Any response?

    Monbiot is a public figure with an agenda, I am not.

    Lots of people are arrested and not charged or convicted. Hold the front page. What’s new? It’s been happening since the first laws were passed. I think you will find it is only in countries like China and Norht Korea that everyone arrested is convicted.

    In any society there has to be a balance between peaceful protest and making a bloody nuisance of yourselves and affecting those who want to go about their business. Look at the Metropolitan police website. I think the balance is about right and we are as liberal as any country in Europe – I have already said that I oppose kettling and the general police tactics at the g20 and those are under review.

    So you still haven’t provided any evidence that our freedoms and liberties have been eroded. I quote Human Right legislation and you quote a dodgy list from Monbiot. Next.

  63. Chris

    4 Jun, 2009 - 4:08 pm

    I also think it very sad that Eddie can play semantics with the deaths of Iraqis. The ‘I quote one source, you quote another source’ really is rather irrelevant. Whether the death toll is 100,000 (very doubtful) or in excess of 1 million (a figure accepted by our own government as likely) is really quite awful. Either way we are talking about deaths to which we have directly contributed. If the number stood at one then it would be one too many.

  64. Anonymous

    4 Jun, 2009 - 4:09 pm

    tony_opmoc, sorry to read about your daughter’s misfortune. You might be interested in this short article by Mark Thomas, about how he had his dna removed from the database:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/mar/19/dna-database-comment

  65. KevinB

    4 Jun, 2009 - 4:25 pm

    eddie,

    Quote:”KevinB I agree with your first sentence. The rest is bilge. It’s hard to know where to start with your stupid “facts”. Your thesis is basically this: dark forces control the world; I am an intelligent person who can uncover the evidence of these dark forces via the internet;…”

    I’ll tell you where to start with the “stupid facts”.

    Start with explaining how multi-storey steel-framed buildings also containing hundreds of thousands of tons of structural concrete can collapse through the path of greatest resistance at free-fall speeds.

    When bodies fall without resistance ALL of the potential energy due to the body’s height is converted into kinetic energy of motion…..there is NO WASTED ENERGY. So, where did the energy come from to completely demolish the building, turning hundreds of thousands of tons of concrete into microscopic dust particles? There had to be an another source of energy at work here and there was. Explosive demolition charges and thermitic steel cutters….and there were such chemicals in the building. If you can’t understand the physics, then the chemical evidence exists as I’ve said. Professors of Physics and Chemistry have carried out the investigations and produced the proof.

    One other proof of controlled demolition is the violation of the Law of conservation of momentum that took place under the official narrative. Everybody knows that if they start running and bump into something then the collision MUST slow them down. The floor-on-floor impacts of the collapsing towers caused no such decelleration. This cannot happen naturally. Each successive floor’s supports must have been systematically and simultaneously destroyed as the buildings fell for this to happen.

    The only answer people like yourself have to this hard evidence is name-calling…..”Bilge”, “fantasists” etc.

    All the internet has done is make available the original footage of the WTC collapses and allowed discourse on information while such discourse is forbidden elsewhere.

    Engage directly with these issues or slide away in shame.

    As it happens I do have an honours degree in Physics so being called a spouter of ‘bilge’ by someone who slides away from every difficult issue and fails to comprehend the significance (or lack of) of the few facts he can grasp is trying enough.

    I’m suspecting that the eddie/Eddie phenomenon on this site is a new kind of trolling…..of counteracting interesting material by generating voluminous quantities of the kind of nonsense that makes an alert person of average intelligence lose the will to live.

  66. Anonymous

    4 Jun, 2009 - 4:26 pm

    Response to Eddie:

    “eddie the questioner – I refer you to Brian Haws as above. Any response?”

    -Hand out leaflets for a day and if you still hold the same views after gaining a new experience of being on the receiving end of ‘public order’ enforcement, good for you.

    “Monbiot is a public figure with an agenda, I am not.”

    -You have an agenda. Public figure? Well you are cultivating a public persona on these pages. Go and demonstrate.

    “Lots of people are arrested and not charged or convicted. Hold the front page. What’s new? It’s been happening since the first laws were passed. I think you will find it is only in countries like China and Norht Korea that everyone arrested is convicted.”

    Doesn’t sound like you have the numbers. Find out. Be one of them and then be flippant.

    “In any society there has to be a balance between peaceful protest and making a bloody nuisance of yourselves and affecting those who want to go about their business. Look at the Metropolitan police website. I think the balance is about right and we are as liberal as any country in Europe – I have already said that I oppose kettling and the general police tactics at the g20 and those are under review.”

    -Go and demonstrate your views. If you still feel the same way, good for you.

    “So you still haven’t provided any evidence that our freedoms and liberties have been eroded. I quote Human Right legislation and you quote a dodgy list from Monbiot.”

    -Missed the quote on HR legislation. Sorry. Go and demonstrate and then use that legislation to defend yourself.

    ” Next.”

    -Indeed.

    All I’m saying, if you’ll forgive the repetition, is demonstrate as mentioned and come and tell us about your experience. I’m not arguing anything other than for you to pick up the challenge; or ignore me.

  67. KevinB

    4 Jun, 2009 - 4:29 pm

    tony_opmoc,

    i didn’t know about the database order from the EU. Is anybody challenging this legally do you know?

    I don’t want to abuse this board by using it for personal communications but I thought you said you’d email me? (blue link below)

  68. eddie

    4 Jun, 2009 - 4:30 pm

    MJ – it’s pointles arguing with you. It’s like a gorilla trying to speak to a chimp. We don’t speak the same language. Anyone who thinks that the UK is like Hitler’s Germany or Stalin’s USSR is a complete fool (apologies Chris) – all I can say is that you debase the english language when you make such silly claims.

    Chris – I will be gracious if people don’t abuse me, but when I get abuse I will respond. It’s the normal cut and thrust. You asked two questions. 1) Brian Haws – he could have been removed for any number of reasons. His site is an eyesore in my opinion. Any other government in Europe would have removed him long ago, the fact that he hasn’t been evicted shows how tolerant we are. 2) you referred to people reading out names at the cenotaph? Parliament has decreed that there should be no unauthorised demonstrations close to the House. I think this is reasonable. Look at the Met website and you will see how easy it is to apply to demonstrate. You will argue that reading out names is not a demo. SO what if the BNP wanted to read out names of white people killed by Asians? Would that be ok in your view? Sauce for the goose. Most people believe that this restriction is reasonable and prevents vexatious activity. I agree.

  69. eddie

    4 Jun, 2009 - 4:40 pm

    KevinB all I can say is ha bloody ha. You may be a physicist but you are a also a fantasist – I’ve seen tower blocks demolished and it takes a team of people. So how many people placed the charges, why did no one see them do it, and how is that not one of those people has come forward to tell the tale? Perhaps they were all knocked off by the CIA afterwards? Then explain to me how the demolition team were in cahoots with the people flying the planes and again why none of them has told the truth? Tell me that to begin with and then I will engage with your lurid imagination.

    eddie the questioner? Your name did not appear. If I want to demonstrate I will do so in accordance with the law. What other answer do you want? I try to obey the law. I try to observe speed limits. It’s a rational answer. If I weant to demonstrate I check the law first and I try to avoid being a pest to other citizens who are going about their lawful business.

  70. MJ

    4 Jun, 2009 - 4:46 pm

    “Anyone who thinks that the UK is like Hitler’s Germany or Stalin’s USSR is a complete fool”

    Here we go. My point was specifically about detention without charge. About how has history has never looked kindly on ANY regime that has introduced such legislation. Demonstrate that I am a fool by citing just one instance where I am wrong.

  71. eddie

    4 Jun, 2009 - 5:05 pm

    “Regime” – the word itself condemns you and shows that your use of langauge is defective. Since when did we live under a regime?

  72. eddie questioner

    4 Jun, 2009 - 5:10 pm

    Eddie,

    “eddie the questioner? Your name did not appear. ”

    -Apologies for the lack of name.

    “If I want to demonstrate I will do so in accordance with the law. What other answer do you want?”

    -I’m not after any answers. Just interested in what your experience would be and your take on it.

    ” I try to obey the law. I try to observe speed limits. It’s a rational answer.”

    -As every reasonable person should do. Have you ever disagreed with a law?

    “If I weant to demonstrate I check the law first and I try to avoid being a pest to other citizens who are going about their lawful business.”

    -This I think goes to the nub. The debate is about our right to make that demonstration. Laws have been passed that make it increasingly difficult to achieve. The laws passed are used in ways that were not debated. Research the use of the 1997 Protection from Harassment Act, amended by the 2005 Serious Organised Crime and Police Act as an example.

    Again, broken record time, I would be very interested in your views post leafleting.

  73. tony_opmoc

    4 Jun, 2009 - 5:48 pm

    Because Craig desn’t like any links – here is a cut and paste re DNA

    Richard’s Kingdom

    Privacy, security and politics in the digital world

    UK DNA abuse to continue despite EU ruling

    I’m disgusted by the Government’s new DNA database proposals being laid out as a “consultation” today. Jacqui Smith’s transparent attempts at spin are risible. So is any claim by this Government that it values freedom, civil liberties or the presumption of innocence.

    SIX TO TWELVE YEARS. That’s the length of time Smith wants to keep the DNA of the innocent. The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled that The UK’s National DNA database (NDNAD) is a violation of the rights to a private and family life after two innocent Sheffield people’s DNA was retained for seven years (including the time they spent fighting court actions to have their records expunged).

    Shami Chakrabarti of Liberty said: “This isn’t necessarily a complete two fingers to the ECHR but it comes pretty close.”

    In Scotland most DNA samples and resulting profiles must be destroyed if the individual is not convicted or is granted an absolute discharge. For certain sexual or violent offences DNA can be retained for up to five years however a Chief Constable must apply to the courts for any extension beyond three years. Why are the Scots’ human rights being respected while those of 850,000 other UK subjects are being violated?

    The Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties have both called on the Government to adopt the Scottish system nationwide but Labour seem determined to comply with the letter of the ECHR ruling while keeping the number of NDNAD records as high as possible. Such data kleptomania is a grave threat to our human rights. We must force the Government to acknowledge this fact and take action to reverse these illiberal proposals.

    Write to your MP now and express your outrage!

  74. Chris

    4 Jun, 2009 - 5:56 pm

    Eddie,

    I would indeed uphold the rights of all, not just one group or another. That’s the thing about freedom and freedom of speech: You either believe in it or you don’t.

    To badly quote Noam Chomsky: If I don’t believe in free speech for those I despise (not you, I hasten to add!) then I don’t believe in it at all.

    The thing that strikes me is that the offences that have been outlined above, by various people, are all new. This in itself is indicative of an increasing level of social control which many of us find disturbing. The issue is not one of whether we have a ‘police state’ or whatever; it is of maintaining scrutiny of the state to ensure that such a development never takes place. In many previous cases the introduction of such a state is a gradual process and vigilance is the price we pay for freedom.

  75. tony_opmoc

    4 Jun, 2009 - 6:07 pm

    Incidentally my daughter who is now 18 years old and claims to have no interest in politics was right on the frontline of the G20 protests and took some literally amazing photographs.

    She didn’t do it for political reasons.

    Despite 3 years earlier she was simply walking home with a group of teenagers – and a meat wagon turned up – and all her friends ran for it – she just kept on walking – she had done nothing wrong – she didn’t try to run – and some cunt in a uniform – threw her to the ground – put his knee in her back – and cuffed her – and slung her into the back of the meat wagon – and threw her in a police cell – and they wouldn’t even let me see her for 5 hours until 3:00 am in the morning

    No she doesn’t hate the police – and isn’t the slightest bit intimidated by them

    When a kid got shot dead and ended up in a pool of blood at Streatham ice rink a few months later – she travelled there by herself – to see her (gay) boyfriend dance on ice – the moment it re-opened (no she is not gay)

    No she went to the G20 protests to take photographs (she is a brilliant photographer) for her art & photography “A” Level

    She was given the theme discord

    If she was given the theme beauty – she would probably have taken some photographs of flowers

    She ain’t taking any fucking shit off anyone. The police action empowered her to stand up for her rights as a Free Human Being.

    Tony

  76. KevinB

    4 Jun, 2009 - 6:48 pm

    You’ve got no answers at all, eddie. Even your only vaguely related questions are so dopey they’re not worth answering

    You just fill threads up with shit and I know why.

  77. tony_opmoc

    4 Jun, 2009 - 7:25 pm

    I have tried my best to try and get my kids to vote.

    They have both said I do not want to vote for any of these people.

    And so I said – well – just go along to experience the process. The polling booth is where you both went to school.

    The electoral form in itself takes 5 minutes to read.

    You have a choice of about 14 different political parties as well as about 5 candidates who have just put their names down as independents.

    Don’t you want to use your democratic right to vote for the first time in your life?

    NO – it won’t make any difference.

    We Have NO Democratic Rights.

    It won’t make ANY Difference.

    Tony

  78. tony_opmoc

    4 Jun, 2009 - 7:54 pm

    After we came back from our cycle ride my wife went for a check up with the dentist.

    She had to fill out a long detailed form in order to get a slight reduction on the charge of £195

    The Question was

    How many times a month do you have Anal Sex?

    She said – what the fuck has that got to do with my teeth?

    And the answer was FUCK OFF

    Tony

  79. MJ

    4 Jun, 2009 - 7:59 pm

    “Since when did we live under a regime?”

    When have we not? Honestly eddie, this squirming away from the issue is pathetic. I’m sure you understood my point perfectly well. However, let me rephrase it: name a single instance when a “”government”" [of any degree of cuddliness] has introduced extended detention without charge and has not subsequently been shown to be a repressive, authoritarian regime?

    Just one example eddie, then I will accept your original charge of being a fool.

  80. Chris

    4 Jun, 2009 - 8:25 pm

    Just for Eddie

    “In politics, a regime is the form of government: the set of rules, cultural or social norms, etc. that regulate the operation of government and its interactions with society. For instance, the United States has one of the oldest regimes still active in the world, dating to the ratification of its Constitution in 1789. Although modern usage often gives the term a negative connotation, Webster’s definition clearly states that the word “regime” refers simply to a form of government.”

    There you go…. we do live inder a regime after all.

  81. Chris

    4 Jun, 2009 - 8:27 pm

    That one’s for you MJ :-)

  82. MJ

    4 Jun, 2009 - 10:37 pm

    Thank you Chris. Much appreciated.

  83. eddie

    4 Jun, 2009 - 11:50 pm

    Perhaps you would enlighten me. Has the 42 detention rule been brought in?

    KevinB – we all know you are a racist and an onanistic fantasisti so go back under your stone.

    Once again, I return to the point. None of you has persuaded me that we are less free, have fewer liberties now than we did 30 or 40 years ago. I have repeatedly referred to the Human Rights Act, and you have balanced that against… very little in response. So I rest my case.

    Chris – nice try but everyone knows that “regime” is commonly used to refer to a totalitarian form of government. Do we have a totalitarian form of government in this country? Answers on a postcard to Warner Brothers cartoon department.

  84. null

    4 Jun, 2009 - 11:56 pm

    Eddie…

    The 1,000,000 figure comes/came from a study published in The Lancet – maybe you have heard of it. I appreciate you are probably way smarter than those idiots, but still.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/10/AR2006101001442.html

  85. eddie

    5 Jun, 2009 - 8:11 am

    I know all about the Lancet study but a) the methodology has been discredited and b) its results are way out of kilter with every other investigation, producing around 10x the number of deaths as other studies. SO on the basis of reasonable doubt I think it has to be treated with scepticism don’t you?

  86. KevinB

    5 Jun, 2009 - 8:38 am

    eddie,

    So it’s ‘wanker’ now as well?

    I present facts, physics and chemistry. You have no answers and no arguments. You ignore the issues and come back with nothing but cowardly abuse.

    If you weren’t a fantasist yourself you’d at least respond with something vaguely coherent.

    The more inadequate you feel, the more vile your abuse. You seem to like to imagine that those that disagree with your worldview ‘live under stones’, that those who criticise the banking system, or Freemasonry or Talmudic Judaism are racists.

    Maybe they’re just serious Christians eddie……inheritors and propagators of the deepest, most reliable, centuries old foundation of what used to be our culture.

    It makes me sad that we are now ruled by a ‘government’ who seem to think and argue like you do. Without vision, without love, without respect for history, without any discernable integrity, intellectual or moral…..and without the courage to directly face any issue that doesn’t serve and affirm their own empty agenda.

    The even sadder thing is that NuLabour activists can support a bunch of people who have started an illegal war that has killed over a million Iraqis, ignore 9/11 evidence, invade another country on the basis of 9/11 lies, build a fascistic surveillance state, oversee the continued demise of the Unions, and act exactly like Tories for the last decade…..and seriously claim that these betrayers of their own history having been doing an honest and even a good job.

    It’s gone way beyond sad actually.

    This is a dark, dark thing.

  87. Chris

    5 Jun, 2009 - 8:40 am

    Eddie

    “I think it has to be treated with scepticism don’t you?”

    Er no.

    The methodology was not discredited. One aspect was challenged but proved baseless.

    The British Gov (or regime if you prefer) admitted that the mehtodology involved was best practice. However, I return to my point above: Is it okay in your book that 100,000 civilians are killed as a direct result of the actions of your government?

  88. Stuart

    5 Jun, 2009 - 8:48 am

    eddie

    The more I read your comments the more I realise you are a clone of the nu labour idiots that chant the mantra on TV today. “The government is OK we know best”, “the people want “us” to get on with running the country and fixing the expenses scandal and the economy”.

    The pricks have forgotten they allowed and profitted from the first and caused the second. Wake up you morons the people want a change of government and the people on this blog want you to stop telling us we are wrong and cant see the evidence under are noses, and for you to take off your nu labour issue rose tinted specs and see what a mess labour is making of this country….

  89. eddie questioner

    5 Jun, 2009 - 10:13 am

    Eddie,

    Are you going to exercise your right to demonstrate against your bete noir of G20 policing policies?

    Please do and tell us about your experience.

  90. Eddie

    5 Jun, 2009 - 11:17 am

    No

  91. eddie questioner

    5 Jun, 2009 - 11:22 am

    Shame on you. All that rage and no courage.

  92. anticant

    5 Jun, 2009 - 12:39 pm

    The denizens of the Westminster Bubble – politicians and journalists alike – are in a more unrealistic state of mind than I can ever remember. I am bored silly with their endless chatter about how to best to save “this great party of ours” and keep the New Labour ‘project’ rolling forward.

    As Stuart says, they suffer from the double delusion that this country not only needs them but wants them. We need them like a hole in the head.

    Twelve years ago, Blair’s New Labour had the political ball at its feet. I was one of those who – though not a habitual Labour voter – shared the delusional euphoria of May 1997 ["Things Can Only Get Better"]. Now, after 12 years of massive parliamentary majority, they have lost their way, their authority and their credibility. Most voters are sick to death of them.

    The danger to democracy is that things have reached such a pass that people no longer care who replaces New Labour as long as they go, and the quicker the better. Until they have gone, there is no realistic political process to engage with.

  93. George Dutton

    5 Jun, 2009 - 12:53 pm

    “The propaganda is coming at us from all directions. It is extremely important that Americans begin to do their own research to validate anything and everything they hear in media, or on forums, such as below. Relying (only) on mainstream media, is no longer a reliable source of truth, because they are all controlled by the Obama administration, as are the “Fusion Centers” located in a every state in America. If you would like to give “Mike” your two cents, you can log-on the Benton County Issues.Com without signing-in. Just pick a name and post under “National/Political” section where “Mike” likes to wait patiently for you.”…

    http://tinyurl.com/c3kjyq

    Sounds like eddie.

  94. Leo Davidson

    5 Jun, 2009 - 2:10 pm

    @eddie:

    “Brian Haws – he could have been removed for any number of reasons. His site is an eyesore in my opinion. Any other government in Europe would have removed him long ago, the fact that he hasn’t been evicted shows how tolerant we are.”

    What a load of ignorant rubbish.

    Labour passed the law about protests outside parliament specifically targeting it at Haw because he had become an embarrassment.

    Haw is still there because Labour screwed up and failed to make the law apply to protests which started before the law was passed.

    It has nothing to do with tolerance. If they were tolerant of protest in general then why would they have passed the law in the first place?

    (One does wonder, however, why the law isn’t being applied to the people protesting about Sri Lanka now. Seems the law is only used to stifle protest against our government’s actions and not protest about things happening in other parts of the world. Laws should be like trademarks: Enforce them fairly and consistently or lose them!)

  95. eddie

    5 Jun, 2009 - 2:39 pm

    Leo the governement makes the laws with parliament’s consent. Are you seriously telling me that they could not have amended the law to remove him? Come off it.

    Eddie is not me. I am eddie. Just so that you know. I don’t need to demonstrate, I can find other ways to make my point, thanks.

    Chris – go and look at Wikipedia – there have been numerous studies on deaths in Iraq and the Lancet one is way out of line with the rest of them. Am I happy that 100,000 have died? No. Am I happy that so many muslims have killed other muslims? No. Am I happy that the Kurds and other minorities in Iraq can now live in peace and that Iraq is a functioning democracy? Yes. Am I happy that hundreds and hundreds of thousands have died in Darfur, China, Korea, Zimbabwe and Rwanda (to name but a few)? No. do I wish the west had done more about it ? Yes. Do I wish that people like you would do less bleating about Iraq and Gaza and do more to protest against atrocities in other countries? Yes.

    KevinB – I do apologise for the abuse, but you remain a fool. But at least you know what onanism is, to give you credit. You still haven’t responded to my question about the demolition of the WTC. I ask you questions and you come back with abuse. Have you, or any of you, seen “Man on Wire”? The technical difficulties of getting wire-walking equipment into the WTC was difficult enough, let alone a demolition package – and that was thirty years ago when security was a lot slacker – unless of course the owners and managers of the WTC were in on the act, which stretches credulity to the nth degree.

  96. MJ

    5 Jun, 2009 - 3:23 pm

    eddie: allow to answer your trifling concerns about controlled demolition.

    Yes, it requires a big team to set up. We know however that it was done, because the recent study demonstrates that thermite particles are present in the dust.

    The charges were probably placed when the WTC underwent a major overhaul of its elevators some six months prior to 9/11. Unlikely therefore to be many witnesses. The final touches were probably carried out on the weekend before 9/11 when there was at total power down at WTC to enable “recabling”. Witnesses have testified that the buildings were without electricity and were swarming with workmen who had not gone through the normal electronic ID checks.

    The company responsible was most likely Controlled Demolition Inc (love the name!) which has a history of sensitive government work. Most likely a CIA front.

    The planes that hit the buildings were most likely not those that left Logan. They were probably remotely controlled and had no-one on board. The whole operation was run from WTC7 (its top floors were a CIA station) which is why it too had to be demolished once the operation was completed.

    All quite simple stuff really. Hope it answers your concerns. You can’t hold up your own lack of imagination as evidence I’m afraid. If your can’t take it however, a far more terrifying question should should be troubling your mind: how the hell did all that thermite get into the dust?

    Incidentally the owner of WTC, Larry Silverstein, most probably was involved. A few months before 9/11 he amended the WTC insurance policy to include cover for acts of terrorism. Coincidence or what?

  97. eddie

    5 Jun, 2009 - 3:52 pm

    MJ – I thought you were more sensible than that. Honestly, do you really believe that guff? Yes it is simple. Simple-minded. Come on think about it. All those dozens of operatives setting charges and not one of them has spilled the beans to family or friends? It is simply unbelievable. Can you tell me of a similar conspiracy shared by so many people that has been kept a secret? No. Even where two people commit a crime it usually ends up with one testifying against the other. I repeat, you believe it because you want to believe it and for no other reason. You are wasting your time on this stuff.

  98. eddie

    5 Jun, 2009 - 4:02 pm

    …and if the planes were remote controlled what happened to the ones containing passengers that took off? Where did they go? We know one of them landed in Pennsylvania. What about the others, did they go through the back of the wardrobe? I live in Cambridge. Read what Professors of Engineering at the university say on the subject. I would rather listen to them than stuff peddled by fantasists on the interent. Sorry, I won’t waste my time on this nonsense.

  99. MJ

    5 Jun, 2009 - 4:19 pm

    eddie: no I’m not saying I necessarily believe it. There’s not enough information in the public domain to get a reliable handle on what really happened. I’m just pointing out that it’s feasible. In your earlier post you were holding up your own ignorance and lack of imagination as proof that there could not have been a controlled demolition. I fact there’s enough information around to show that there could. And the presence of thermite in the dust suggests that there most probably was.

    There are several theories around to account for the missing passengers; take your pick.

    I believe the study done by the University of Copenhagen chemistry department was the first of its kind. Not sure that a professor from Cambridge would be best placed to comment unless he was part of the team.

    If you can’t be bothered to waste your time on this stuff may I suggest you refrain from asking others to do so, then get all triumphal when they don’t?

  100. KevinB

    5 Jun, 2009 - 4:22 pm

    eddie,

    regarding we who point out impossibilties and absurdities in the official 9/11 narrative.

    It is not our job to explain how the criminals did it. No one has to explain this at this stage. There are many detailed and interesting theories out there but that is not the point.

    It is, however, incumbent on the proponents of the official conspiracy theory to ANSWER THE DETAILED QUESTIONS AND CONVINCINGLY CONTRADICT THE OBVIOUS IMPLICATIONS OF THE LATEST ASTOUNDING SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH and explain to the public at large why anyone should continue believing such an obvious pack of lies.

    Of course, they do not do this.

    They do not even allow the evidence collected by highly qualified academics (and the evidence of many witnesses who heard and saw the explosions) into the public domain.

    I know you will continue with your silly trolling rubbish but other parties will have to read the thread and decide for themselves whose ‘questions’ are serious and whose are not.

  101. eddie

    5 Jun, 2009 - 4:32 pm

    I am not ignorant and I do not lack imagination. I know that no serious engineer believes your crackpot theiries. I can imagine that Mars may have little green men living on it. All the facts I know of tell me that it ain’t so. And I didn’t raise it in the first place, you did. I wouldn’t raise it because it is NOT INTERESTING. Even Craig thinks your theories are cranky.

  102. MJ

    5 Jun, 2009 - 4:54 pm

    If you’re not ignorant and don’t lack imagination then you’ll be the first to concede that the objections you raised were spurious.

    Plenty of serious engineers have very serious questions about 9/11. That’s why engineering forums still hotly debate the matter. It doesn’t help that there is no precedent for a steel building falling the way WTC did that wasn’t a controlled demolition.

  103. eddie

    5 Jun, 2009 - 5:16 pm

    As I said, I’m not wasting my time on this. You haven’t answered the question about how so many people can be in on a conspiracy and for there to be no leaks. Until you do that your fantasies remain fantasies.

  104. KevinB

    5 Jun, 2009 - 5:40 pm

    People,

    eddie is a troll, pure and simple. If I thought he was simply stupid or uninformed I would continue to engage with him…..

    …..but…..he is simply dishonest. He has ZERO INTEREST in verifiably disturbing facts.

    As another matter of fact there are 700 fully qualified engineers and architects who are part of an organisation called “Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth”.

    These professionals are declaring to the world that 9/11 was an ‘inside job’. Cover your ears if you like….if you don’t care what kind of world you are going to leave to your children…..but this is serious stuff that will, one day, be fully acknowledged (and accepted as truth) in the public domain.

    See, Richard Gage, the leader of this organisation, being interviewed by Fox TV (of all people)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO2yT0uBQbM

    (by the way, Craig has never had anything to say about my 9/11 posts directly, other than connecting this with banking and globalisation is a step too far for him).

    Another mistake by eddie the troll.

  105. Chris

    5 Jun, 2009 - 5:53 pm

    Eddie,

    you ask for an example of secrecy on a grand scale with no leaks….. Try the Manhattan Project. 100′s of 1000′s of people and not a squeak from any of them.

  106. MJ

    5 Jun, 2009 - 5:56 pm

    “You haven’t answered the question about how so many people can be in on a conspiracy and for there to be no leaks”.

    The number is probably not that high and, since most are in the pay of the CIA, secrecy is their duty.

    You haven’t answered the question about how that thermite got into the dust. Until you do that your fantasies remain fantasies.

  107. Chris

    5 Jun, 2009 - 6:17 pm

    Although I have to profess not knowing what happened on 9/11 the fact that the science is peer reviewed seems very, very persuasive, especially as it reveals un-ignited thermite as well as the chemical fingerprint of spent thermite.

    The question for the eddie’s of this world would have to be: where did it come from and how could the science achieve peer reviewed status if it is merely the ramblings of lunatics as he would suggest?

  108. chunthead

    5 Jun, 2009 - 7:22 pm

    ed die,

    some of your comments are legendary. I am amazed.

  109. eddie

    5 Jun, 2009 - 8:52 pm

    Chris

    er, so how do we know about the Manhattan prohject if it is such a secret conspiracy? Doh.

    KevinB – more abuse, no answers. Your usual style. Craig castigated you on these boards for your flights of fantasy. If you want me to find the exact quote I will. Shall I?

    MJ – tell me what thermite is and what its exact chemical properties are and I will then answer your question. I hope you realise that the WTC contained thousands of PCs? Then answer my question about all the “demolition experts” who planted the charges and how come none of their secrets have been leaked.

  110. Chris

    5 Jun, 2009 - 9:19 pm

    Eddie,

    you know quite well that the Manhattan Project was revealed by Government when it suited…. During the whole project itself it remained secret. Stop being obtuse just for the sake of it. It does you no credit.

    Some of the thermite was found in its original form: ergo it didn’t come form a PC or anything else. Sheesh…

  111. eddie

    5 Jun, 2009 - 9:52 pm

    You still haven’t answered the question about the credibility of a whole demolition team keeping a secret for so long. It isn’t credible. Tell me how many people would be involved in demolishing an 18 storey tower block. And then tell me how many would be required to do the twin towers, 110 floors in each. Then tell me where the missing planes went with all their passengers. I bet arsenic and cyanide and all sorts of stuff could have been found at the site. What does it prove? The smoking gun proves nothing. Unless you can answer the fundamental questions your fantasies are meaningless.

  112. Jaded

    5 Jun, 2009 - 10:29 pm

    Jessy you just try too hard. It makes everything so much more obvious. You must have earned a lot of overtime today. Everyone is laughing at your feeble efforts. Keep it up you spook moron! Ha ha. :-0

  113. MJ

    5 Jun, 2009 - 10:37 pm

    eddie: thermite is a synthetic amalgam of superfine particles of magnesium and iron oxide which, when ignited, burns at such a high temperature it can cut through steel. Thankfully it is not present in PCs. As a synthetic compound it has its own distintive chemical fingerprint, which is why particles can be reliably identified.

    Rigging the three WTC buildings in question would require a very large team working over several days. Very few companies have the expertise to bring down a building using thermite but Controlled Demolition Inc is one of them.

    I am not privy to the actual details of the event and do not know what happened to the original planes and their passengers, if indeed they were substituted and did not hit the buildings. As I’ve said before there are several theories kicking around but these are pure speculation.

    Note however that little or no aircraft debris survived the crashes and not a single body recovered.

  114. Jaded

    5 Jun, 2009 - 10:48 pm

    ‘I bet arsenic and cyanide and all sorts of stuff could have been found at the site. What does it prove?’

    This is just too funny to ignore. Please, what sort of dumb question is that? You try so hard and then let slip with a really dumb question. You must have been feeling jaded after all your hard work. If arsenic and cyanide were ‘found’ it would prove cyanide and arsenic were ‘there’. If thermite was ‘found’ it would prove thermite was ‘there’. What do you expect it to prove? Your mask is slipping buddy…

  115. KevinB

    6 Jun, 2009 - 12:35 am

    **** eddie people. Ignore this troll. He/she is playing a game. He/she is a degenerate dishonest human being.

  116. KevinB

    6 Jun, 2009 - 12:40 am

    eddie is a troll, pure and simple. If I thought he was simply stupid or uninformed I would continue to engage with him…..

    …..but…..he is simply dishonest. He has ZERO INTEREST in verifiably disturbing facts.

    As another matter of fact there are 700 fully qualified engineers and architects who are part of an organisation called “Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth”.

    These professionals are declaring to the world that 9/11 was an ‘inside job’. Cover your ears if you like….if you don’t care what kind of world you are going to leave to your children…..but this is serious stuff that will, one day, be fully acknowledged (and accepted as truth) in the public domain.

    See, Richard Gage, the leader of this organisation, being interviewed by Fox TV (of all people)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO2yT0uBQbM

    (by the way, Craig has never had anything to say about my 9/11 posts directly, other than connecting this with banking and globalisation is a step too far for him).

    Another mistake by eddie the troll.

  117. MJ

    6 Jun, 2009 - 2:18 am

    I don’t think eddie is either degenerate or dishonest. He simply comes up with the stuff that the average bloke down the pub would say.

    I used to think like eddie on this matter until I actually started sifting methodically through all the available evidence.

    eddie’s main problem is that he is guided solely by his own world-view. If he is faced with evidence that challenges that world-view he simply dismisses it and denigrates the person who brought it to his attention.

    Because he does not allow his world-view to be shaped by evidence of which he does not approve – irrespective of its strength or validity – he is essentially a fantasist. It is not an uncommon phenomenon.

  118. eddie

    6 Jun, 2009 - 9:33 am

    ah, the old troll response. It’s the norm when you can’t argue your case, accuse the other person of being a troll. Splendid, I can see I am hitting a nerve. None of you has answered my simple question. How is it possible for a huge team of people to demolish the twin towers and yet NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THEM has spilled the beans since. You must accept that you people are in a tiny minority who believe this garbage. As I said, you believe it because you want to, because it fits with your twisted view of the world. Cock up beats conspiracy ever time in my book. You want it both ways – in your view governments are corrupt and incompetent and yet they can organise these amazingly complex operations. Pull the other one. It’s a sign of mental deficiency.

  119. Anonymous

    6 Jun, 2009 - 10:22 am

    Is it me or did Obama just admit USA terroist acts on Iran in 1953, which are even continuing today and didn’t Clinton admit to USA suporting terroists in Guatamala who killed about 200,000 civilians……

  120. Chris

    6 Jun, 2009 - 10:58 am

    Eddie,

    it is not our role to tell you how something was achieved it is merely to highlight the science that renders the conventional thoery impossible.

    If – as seems rather likely given the peer reviewed science here – a particular explosive has been found and that fits perfectly with the observable evidence of the nature of collapse then only the most closed of minds could dismiss it without investigation. I presume that you think that Newton’s Laws can be suspended for one day because they clash with your world view. I’m sorry, but there is no intellectual rigour in your position here and that disappoints me because I do not regard you as a fool.

  121. MJ

    6 Jun, 2009 - 11:01 am

    “How is it possible for a huge team of people to demolish the twin towers and yet NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THEM has spilled the beans”

    Not quite sure why you’re clinging on to this point. Thousands of people are flown out to work at Area 51 every day but none of them ‘spills the beans’ on what they’re doing. Does this mean Area 51 doesn’t exist and secret projects are not developed there?

    “You must accept that you people are in a tiny minority”

    Around 40% of the US public no longer believes the official account of 9/11 and the number is growing. A large minority therefore, not a tiny one.

    As I said, I used to share your views on this matter – for almost a year in fact. Then I actually looked carefully at all the available evidence. My opinion changed as a result. My world-view changed accordingly, because it had to.

  122. George Dutton

    6 Jun, 2009 - 11:26 am

    “As I said, I’m not wasting my time on this. You haven’t answered the question about how so many people can be in on a conspiracy and for there to be no leaks. Until you do that your fantasies remain fantasies.”

    eddie

    http://tinyurl.com/yuv62m

  123. KevinB

    6 Jun, 2009 - 12:56 pm

    MJ

    “I don’t think eddie is either degenerate or dishonest. He simply comes up with the stuff that the average bloke down the pub would say.”

    The ‘average person down the pub’ will not continue to talk drivel if he is presented with evidence and argument that contradicts his position. The ‘average person down the pub’ has ears and a brain as well as a big stupid gob.

    eddie is a despicable troll.

    Excellent Powerpoint on 9/11

    http://www.powerpointparadise.com/ppoint.html

    Ditto the media

    http://www.powerpointparadise.com/whodid911.pps

  124. Nikolay Kotev

    6 Jun, 2009 - 1:19 pm

    Dear Friend!

    I have a new blog for modern and contemporary world history – “Nikolaykotev’s Blog” with URL: http://nikolaykotev.wordpress.com/ .If you want, you can see it on this adress!

    Best wishes

    Nikolay Kotev

    NEWS: approximately 1000 photos from the Second World War

  125. eddie

    6 Jun, 2009 - 1:26 pm

    There is no evidence and you have not provided any and you cannot answer my question. As I said before, paranoia and fantasy. If it makes you feel superior to the rest of us mere mortals you carry on believing in it. Plenty of people still believe in father christmas. I hope you are happy being in the same company as people like David Shayler.

    Just a few seconds googling and this link appears which debunks your twaddle about thermite, and I would rather trust the University of Cambridge than your websites for weirdos.

    http://www.debunking911.com/paper.htm

  126. Jaded

    6 Jun, 2009 - 2:09 pm

    ‘The ‘average person down the pub’ will not continue to talk drivel if he is presented with evidence and argument that contradicts his position. The ‘average person down the pub’ has ears and a brain as well as a big stupid gob.

    eddie is a despicable troll.’

    Yes, it’s unnatural to say the least the way he carries on. He talsk crao like an expert. I reiterate, he is only here to stop undecided folk from thinking it through for themselves, the brainwashed don’t need much reassurance, and coming up with the only logical conclusion possible. Namely, that the official narrative is horseshit. He has to a motive to be here and do that. I am convinced there is an internet spook muppet squad that patrol blogs and forums with a certain level of traffic. Seriously, please mull it over people. I believe he was on here as Jessy a few weeks back. I am a very logical individual and certainly not crazy!

  127. eddie

    6 Jun, 2009 - 3:32 pm

    JAded – oh no, not another fantasist. So anyone who disagrees with you is a spoook or controlled by “dark forces” – I hope your medication is up to date. I am not Jessy and I am not Eddie (capital E)

  128. KevinB

    6 Jun, 2009 - 4:22 pm

  129. eddie

    6 Jun, 2009 - 6:12 pm

    Excellent powerpoint it may be but written by another fantasist with no qualifications to pontificate on zilch. Still waiting for a response to my questions.

  130. KevinB

    7 Jun, 2009 - 12:13 am

    Battling the troll……..got to give the satanists in Lego Central something to keep them occupied.

    Excellent Powerpoint on 9/11

    http://www.powerpointparadise.com/ppoint.html

    Ditto the media

    http://www.powerpointparadise.com/whodid911.pps

  131. eddie

    7 Jun, 2009 - 8:36 am

    ..and still waiting.

  132. KevinB

    7 Jun, 2009 - 9:43 am

    hey eddie,

    Here is a highly relevant question for you and if you don’t answer it then it will be clear for everyone to see that you have lost the argument.

    How many cheeks has your arse?

    Count them….carefully now….don’t get it wrong….

    …..then let us all know. We will interpret your data by reference to our own experience.

    If you fail in this simple challenge then all your credibility will be shot.

    You can get a friend to help you if needs be.

    Excellent Powerpoint on 9/11

    http://www.powerpointparadise.com/ppoint.html

    Ditto the media

    http://www.powerpointparadise.com/whodid911.pps

  133. Chris

    7 Jun, 2009 - 9:57 am

    eddie,

    since when was peer reviewed science not evidence?

    The Manhattan Project – by the statements of those overseeing it – was a huge and hidden conspiracy without a single leak on a scale dwarfing anything necessary for 9/11.

    Stop ignoring evidence or answers that fail to fit your world view and open those tired, cynical eyes.

  134. KevinB

    7 Jun, 2009 - 10:04 am

    Chris,

    You don’t get it yet. He ain’t trying to look. He’s doing a job. Working for liars.

  135. MJ

    7 Jun, 2009 - 11:07 am

    eddie, you’ve had very thorough answers to all your questions.

    I’m still waiting for your views on how you think all that thermite got into the dust.

  136. eddie

    7 Jun, 2009 - 12:02 pm

    Doh – the Manhattan project was penetrated by Soviet spies almost from the outset. Stalin knew about the atomic project in 1941. So I ask again, how can such a plot have been kept a secret?

    As for thermite, firstly you haven’t linked to any reputable body that confirms its presence and secondly you have not presented a credible link between it and the sequence of events that you believe in. A huge team of demolition engineers, not a single one of which has leaked news of the plot, plus the “disappearance” of the planes with all their passengers. It isn’t credible. And I have not “had very through answers to all my questions.” None in fact.

    But if you like being in the same company as nutters like David Icke and David Shayler that’s your business.

    Next question.

  137. MJ

    7 Jun, 2009 - 12:23 pm

    “you haven’t linked to any reputable body that confirms its presence”

    The link is http://tinyurl.com/de6448. The paper comes from the University of Copenhagen Chemistry Department.

    “you have not presented a credible link between it and the sequence of events that you believe in”

    The link is the presence of thermite in the dust and the fact that the buildings collapsed in a manner remarkably similar to buildings demolished using thermite. They also left vast pools of molten steel beneath the rubble, which remained molten for weeks. Again, this is fully consistent with thermite. It is totally inexplicable in terms of the official account. Your “reputable” and “serious” authorities deal with this key piece of evidence by simply ignoring it. Not a very serious or reputable thing to do when you think about it.

  138. eddie

    7 Jun, 2009 - 2:15 pm

    The University of Copenhagen Chemistry Department. What is that like the University of Basildon silly walks department? Really. I said reputable.

    “The link is the presence of thermite” – that is not a link at all. Planes disappear and a team of demolition experts plant charges and keep a secret for 8 years because thermite was found in the rubble. I don’t think so. It’s like saying that because a dead dog has bite marks on its neck it must have been killed by a Tasmanian Devil. No. Perhaps you don’t understand what I mean by link.

    So any more thoughts on the Manhattan Project. I demolish each point and there is no comeback.

  139. MJ

    7 Jun, 2009 - 2:41 pm

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Copenhagen_Department_of_Chemistry

    You haven’t demolished a single point. You have avoided every point. You have trotted out absurd non sequiters and ridiculous insults instead. All you have demolished is your own credibility.

  140. KevinB

    7 Jun, 2009 - 2:48 pm

    Why argue with this guy?

    He’s a troll.

    He’s happy smothering this thread in any old sh*t at all. He is a liar with a liar’s soul.

    Pity him and ignore him.

    Excellent Powerpoint on 9/11

    http://www.powerpointparadise.com/ppoint.html

    Ditto the media

    http://www.powerpointparadise.com/whodid911.pps

  141. Chris

    7 Jun, 2009 - 3:30 pm

    eddie,

    “The University of Copenhagen Chemistry Department. What is that like the University of Basildon silly walks department?” Now you’re just being juvenile.

    MJ is right, you haven’t actually dealt with a single point. A closed mind is an ignorant one. You really do yourself no credit. And, although you are entitled to your opinion, one day you are going to have to accept that others are also entitled to theirs. It’s called being a grown up.

    KevinB, you are right. Wasting time on this chap seems to be exactly what he wants. Some people seem to get their kicks from being obtuse and it seems that eddie is one of them. Anyone who can suggest the confirmed presence of a specific explosive at the scene of, what appears to be an explosion is, in any way, the same as finding a dead dog with bites and assuming it’s the work of a Tasmanian devil. Perhaps if the DNA within the bites was from a Tasmanian devil then the link could be made as it would provide a chemical fingerprint a bit like finding thermite…. ahhh, I see a flaw in your logic eddie….

    I do notice that you seem to have accepted that the thermite was there and are now arguing for a link between that and what you seem to think would be a small army of people planting it. Perhaps you could come up with a good reason why thermite would be present… On second thoughts, don’t bother…

  142. MJ

    7 Jun, 2009 - 4:00 pm

    I know what you mean KevinB but I think there is a point in arguing with eddie. The absurdity of eddie’s responses are just the absurdities of the official account.

    Lots of people still think like eddie about 9/11. They accept the official account without question because it is rarely, if ever, questioned in the MSM.

    Other people read these threads who don’t comment. If, with eddie’s gracious assistance, we can demonstrate how easily the official account crumbles into gibbering nonsense simply by setting out the evidence then that is probably rather useful.

  143. eddie

    7 Jun, 2009 - 4:05 pm

    All I accept is that you people have mental health problems. You haven’t answered any of my substantive points and all you come back with is abuse, which unfortunately prompts me to retaliate. KevinB you are a well know racist on this site and Craig has upbraided you for your flights of fantasy. AS I’ve said before we don’t speak the same language so “debate” is pointless. THese fantasies must make you feel oh so superior to the mass of the people and if it’s a way of managing you own inadequacies so be it. David Shayler, David Icke, MJ, Chris and KevinB – what a motley collection.

  144. MJ

    7 Jun, 2009 - 4:25 pm

    Not to mention Francesco Cossiga, former president of Italy; Michael Meacher MP; Gore Vidal; Col Ronald D Ray, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under Reagan; Capt Daniel Davis, US Army Air Defense Officer and NORAD Tac Director; Lt Col Jeff Latas, President of the US Air Force Accident Investigation Board; Lt Col Karen Kwiatkowski, Air Force Colonel.

    And they’re just a few who have gone public.

    A motley collection indeed.

  145. KevinB

    7 Jun, 2009 - 4:55 pm

    There are lies and there is truth.

    Truth is accessible to anyone who wants to make the effort.

    One does not seek truth in order to feel superior to anybody. One seeks it in order to feel at one with one’s self.

    Truth, also, is usually, on the personal as well as the public level a painful thing to discover. Engaging on any serious quest for truth will inevitably engender humility rather than pride.

    A Christian can identify and criticise wickedness but he should not feel too far removed from it. We have all sinned and we are all one in Christ also. When the rubbish is stripped away this is the great and ecstatic revelation. I have been helped through various circles of hell by people who often did not know the good they were doing. It is my responsibility, as a Christian, to deliver whatever truth I can in the hope of somehow returning the favour to society at large.

    We are here then we are gone.

    What for?

    To find truth?…..to learn to love?

    Sounds about right to me.

    MJ, you are right. Lots of people think about 9/11 like eddie….but that’s only because all they have been exposed to is mainstream media propaganda. I believed the official conspiracy theory myself until 2005…..then I was exposed to entirely new and undeniable information about the 9/11 attacks. It was the shock of my life.

    So, it is natural that most people have been deceived over 9/11.

    ‘eddie’ has no such excuse.

    He exhibits the qualities and behaviour of most of the trolls I have come across on 9/11 forums and elsewhere. He is simply not interested in real information, even if it is hard-core physics and chemical research. He is interested in name-calling, straw-manning and the like. There have been 9/11 trolls like ‘gravy’ (Mark Roberts), who spent years very intelligently, if falsely, working to undermine the detailed allegations of people like David Ray Griffin and ‘Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth’. He seems to have given up. Fox TV is now awarding these people respectful interviews. Times are changing.

    Another thing is that most of the American trolls post from places like Langley, Virginia and San Diego, California….in other words, big military/CIA centres.

    The point is that most of these people are paid to disable truth with lies. If you go to the trouble you can even find out the amount of money that the US congress pours into combating ‘cyber-terrorism’ which includes people who claim that 9/11 was an ‘inside job’.

    The reason 9/11 matters so much is not the scale of the crime, but what it tells us about financial power, government itself, the mainstream media and WHO THE REAL ENEMY IS.

    All the rest of politics pales into insignificance compared to this.

    The “War on Terror” is a complete fraud. Our government and the media are protecting the very same criminals that could easily (in pursuit of their globalist banking vision) start a world war and kill us all.

    No one is asking the tough questions.

    Paxman is protecting these people.

    John Humphries is protecting the.

    The Dimblebys are protecting them.

    God help us, even Robert Fisk is protecting them.

    As with our personal lives, the foremost enemy is WITHIN. It is here the battle must be won……with the oligarchs and elites that instigate and oversee such crimes.

    Most human beings genuinely seek the truth, although a great many shy away if they fear there might be a price to pay for speaking it.

    Truth is the matching of mind and reality. As a Christian minister I was listening to said this week:

    “There is truth in my mind when what is in my mind matches or corresponds to what is outside it, in reality.

    Let nobody pretend that any truth cannot be found when there is a way to find it. Such an individual merely demonstrates their lack of will to find it. There is a great lack of such will in what is still called “Western civilisation”.

    That is why it is Satanic” (Jn.VIII,44).

    I find it hard to argue with that.

  146. KevinB

    7 Jun, 2009 - 4:59 pm

  147. eddie

    7 Jun, 2009 - 8:45 pm

    Gore Vidal and Michael Meacher!

    I rest my case.

    keep taking the tablets

  148. KevinB

    7 Jun, 2009 - 10:53 pm

  149. Chris

    8 Jun, 2009 - 4:27 pm

    “Gore Vidal and Michael Meacher!

    I rest my case.”

    Yes, but the other side includes eddie, and I doubt the tablets will be enough for him…..

  150. Jaded

    10 Jun, 2009 - 12:35 am

    Ok, as eddie (Jessy) the spook internet muppet has conclusively lost this debate I hereby formally declare this thread closed. If anyone argues i’ll get Tony Blair to bugger them. I am guessing eddie has already been nicked by the men in white coats and is now in a cosy cell with soft walls. That is best for him, as I may have been forced to deal with him…

    RIP eddie. :-(

    (violin music)

    ‘I know what you mean KevinB but I think there is a point in arguing with eddie. The absurdity of eddie’s responses are just the absurdities of the official account.

    Lots of people still think like eddie about 9/11. They accept the official account without question because it is rarely, if ever, questioned in the MSM.

    Other people read these threads who don’t comment. If, with eddie’s gracious assistance, we can demonstrate how easily the official account crumbles into gibbering nonsense simply by setting out the evidence then that is probably rather useful.’

    Yes, good point MJ. Best kept as short and sweet as possible though.

Powered By Wordpress | Designed By Ridgey | Produced by Tim Ireland | Hosted by Expathos