Let's play 7/7 Conspiracy Files Bullshit Bingo!!

Monday, 29 June 2009

Let's play 7/7 Conspiracy Files Bullshit Bingo!!

courtesy of The Antagonist

edit: and the scores on the doors are...

14 comments:

paul said...: No room for 'the shayler effect'?; 30 June 2009 at 03:57
jon doy™ said...: this is far too good for something you weren't paid to do

as for the pogrom, i missed it

was it a full house ?; 30 June 2009 at 14:23
paul said...: I have to admire the nam june paik style of video sculpture to present the core of the programme, '7/7 ripple effect', the presentation of the four suspects in what resembles a crime scene and the selection of participants that most closely resemble the projections of the counterloons.
Tony Gosling must have had hours in make up getting his specs that squint.

Conclusion, if rather rushed, was good too:

Any outstanding questions have been found to be untrue by the government; 1 July 2009 at 00:13
Conrad Turner said...: Could the 'Loon admin reproduce El Antagonistas email from Ian Henshall as a 'loon blog post?I can't remember where I read it,but it was spot on.; 2 July 2009 at 11:16
General Zod said...: would that be this email?

BBC'S CONSPIRACY FILES A REBUTTAL

From Ian Henshall, author "911 The New Evidence"

2 July 2009

It's all too possible to use slick video tricks, crafty edits, a
plausible narrator, and a skewed set of questions to fool gullible
viewers into believing nonsense. This was the theme of the latest of
the BBC's "Conspiracy Files" as they deconstructed the internet movie
7/7: The Ripple Effect.

They were right. But how true too of The Conspiracy Files.

You could add quite a few more ugly propaganda techniques too. Choose
a soft target: a guy who thinks he is the Messiah. Base your position
on ad hominem logic and guilt by association: feature a 7/7
"researcher" who has never been to Germany but thinks the Holocaust
is a myth. These were the BBC's leading villains. They could not get
any footage of anyone normal: reputable 7/7 researchers either
refused to talk to the Beeb, after its earlier travesties of reality
in the Conspiracy Files series, or insisted that like any
establishment figure they should be given the final sign-off, no good
when your business is to lure useful idiots into convicting
themselves out of their own mouths.

Ignore or skate over the key issues, keep the graphics moving fast.
Use weird camera angles for the sceptics. Give soft interviews to the
key pro-establishment people, and portray them as victims of internet
hatemongers. Whip up hate against the hate mongers and then project
it onto anyone who disbelieves the BBC's version of reality, a world
where the government never lies, and where the police never frame
anyone and never fabricate or plant evidence.

Sinister and threatening? Internet bloggers or the BBC broadcasters'
advocacy of jailing them and blocking their internet sites?

Who sent the hate mail? We were not told. The main thrust of the
programme was not this hate mail, punishable already, this was just
an emotional hook for the broadcasters main thrust: bloggers are
inciting Muslims to carry out terror attacks. Yes, at the heart of
this pro-Bush, pro-Blair, pro-Likud rant was a glaring non sequitur.
The internet conspiracy theorists who blame the CIA and Mossad for
organising fake terror campaigns, who say that Al Qaeda is a CIA
front, are by doing this somehow inciting Muslims to join Al Qaeda.
As the legendary Private Eye editor might comment: shomething wrong
here, shurely?

Believe it or not this was the message from Washington, London and
Tel Aviv, oops, sorry the BBC, the sort of idiocy that only paid
propagandists living in a media bubble could come up with. Let's just
look at it again, it's mind bogglingly stupid. The bombers and
insurgents are not motivated by the bloody, illegal invasion of Iraq,
described as a "triumph" by venerable intellectual and BBC political
editor, Andrew Marr, and based on the weapons of mass destruction
that never existed, a whopper of a conspiracy theory, by the way,
that somehow has never made it onto the Conspiracy Files. Not by
Israel's atrocities in Gaza and Lebanon. Not by the scenes from Abu
Ghraib too horrible to show in the land of the free and strangely
missed by the BBC's embedded reporters in Iraq. No, the terrorists
are motivated by internet bloggers who say Al Qaeda is run by the CIA...; 2 July 2009 at 14:58
General Zod said...: ...Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story, the saying goes,
and The Conspiracy Files certainly did not. Here are just some of the
vital questions about 7/7 the BBC abysmally failed to answer.

Why did the official story change from military grade explosives to
home made explosives in one news cycle on the say so of anonymous
security sources? Why did the suicide bombers buy return tickets? Why
did Haroon Aswat, named as ringleader and who reportedly received
calls from the MSK's mobile phone shortly before the attacks, vanish
from the story after US law enforcement sources said he was linked to
MI6? Why is the UK government supporting his extradition to the US on
lesser charges rather than pursuing him for 7/7? Did the bombs blow
up under the trains as the only named witness implies, or from within
the carriages as unnamed witnesses were reported to have said (and
the official story requires)? Why not release pictures of the damaged
trains and settle the issue?

Why did the Home Secretary at the time tell an outright falsehood,
that alleged ringleader Mohammed Siddique Khan was unknown, when MI5
had him on their list for years. If this man was a full-on terrorist
and not a double agent or patsy why (according to a recent official
report) was he not followed when other associates were? The BBC's
trump card was the confession videos, normally released by a dodgy
Western security company who charge fees to use "their" material. Did
none of the BBC experts let them know videos like this can be forged
nowadays? Or that double agents can be duped?

The programme explained apparent inconsistencies with a point that is
quietly whispered by security experts when faced with tricky issues.
It is allegedly a technique of Al Qaeda to leave clues to prove that
they were the culprits. Hence the confession videos, hence the
discovery of vital ID's from the 7/7 blasts. The personal documents
that proved the suspected suicide bombers were on the scene of the
explosions were not planted but dropped by the skilled terrorists a
distance from their bodies so they would be found intact. Al Qaeda,
if you believe the official story, thinks of everything. Others would
say this is the catch all logic typical of simple minded conspiracy theorists.

Oh yes, and after two years research, paid for by us, how did the BBC
team manage to make the elementary mistake of mixing up the photo of
Jarrah from Flight 93 on 9/11 (which incidentally does not look at
all like the real Ziad Jarrah) with Al Suqami from Flight 11? What
other mistakes did they make? The pictures were flashing past to fast to tell.

Behind these details lies a greater and more sinister flaw which was
made clear in the opening seconds of the programme. Were the 7/7
suspects suicide bombers or were they framed, asked the broadcasters.
Bertrand Russell, philosopher and peace campaigner, must be turning
in his grave and so should any sixth former conversant with
elementary logic. It's the fallacy of the excluded middle. The French
noticed it at once when George Bush said the world had to be either
for us or against us. It's the refrain of warmongers and idiots and
manipulative psychopaths throughout history: press the fear button,
close down the logic centre and bring out the animal in us. Video is
good for that.

Perhaps the 7/7 suspects were not simple suicide bombers and not
total innocents but something else. Apart from the more detailed
questions, here is a big one: who really controls Al Qaeda?
Throughout history wise people who wished to get to the bottom of
conspiracies have asked (and everyone agrees that 7/7 was a
conspiracy of one sort or another): who benefits? Ask the people of
Iraq, Afghanistan and Gaza. If that's too emotive, then ask any
taxpayer who funds the bloated military budgets of US UK and Isreal -
and the propagandists at the BBC.; 2 July 2009 at 15:02
Kneel before Zod!! said...: linky for the above; 2 July 2009 at 15:04
The Antagonist said...: @paul: Both Shayler and 9/11 featured on the original version, bit miffed that it changed as we would have been two steps closer to a full house.

Also, Jihadi / Wahabi / Salafi / Conspiracy Mindset could also be checked.; 2 July 2009 at 16:30
Anonymous said...: I would like to point out to Prole from J7 that I think his/her link to the indiemedia article on daniel "Obachike" in goslings truth forum has been changed to point at the 'terror on the tube' website.
..at least I'm assuming you linked to indiemedia..I am basing that assumption on the comment Stephan made after you uncovered dannys alternative name -
"I noted on the indymedia page you linked to a comment from someone claiming to be a 7/7 survivor saying he has never been to a 7/7 survivors group meeting and almost all survivors consider him to be a con man."
Is danny just an opportunist conman, or an elaborate gov strawman?what are the ramifications if he wasn't there?
Whats Goslings real agenda?
The bbc turd might have stunk,but at least it caused that thread to exist.A big thanks to prole and stephan for showing up goslings pathetic/suspect attitude.I'll never read that place in the same light ever again.; 7 July 2009 at 19:28
Stef said...: "I'll never read that place in the same light ever again."

It makes for cracking comedy though

In the right hands there's plenty of high grade material that could be shaped into the new Father Ted

working title - 'Is that a Weirding Module in your pocket or are you just pleased to see me?'; 8 July 2009 at 00:57
prole said...: @ Anonymous re: Gosling et al

This is the Indymedia link that was posted on a different thread and referred to by Stefan.

The Terror on The Tube website link was pointing out the Kollerstrom/Obachike collaboration in this effort, no doubt with Gosling's support.; 8 July 2009 at 03:10
Anonymous said...: Ah..I was wrong sorry .But the way Gosling censored that thread was even wronger.I just wonder how many threads I've read are actually incomplete because they carry on in the firepit.
I wish somebody could honestly investigate D.O.His story dominates the bus bomb.His behaviour doesn't strike me as being very honest.
Poor old Dune..a giant slobbering snail of a saga.The film is embarassing.What a waste of talent.Its a pity that an earlier script for dune died a death.Chris Foss was the art designer.
I'm bracing myself to endure Fetzer blowing smoke up Paul Atrides spice hole.Fetzers name is Mud in JFK cirlces.I've read somewhere that he made a lot of money out of building 7 coming down.I think it was David Hawkins,so given his involvement in the surreal "captain sherlock solves 911" you have to take his opinion with a pinch of salt.I'd like to see the Alliance dissect Hawkins claims sometime.I think it would be right up stefs alley,once he's eventually sorted down in Sealand.
Sealand prompted me to think about "the kraken wakes".I find it curious that nobody has made a hollywood version.Alien jellyfish melting the polar ice caps so they can drag the victims of flooding into the sea and eat them..I heard Al gore has Tipper read it to him dressed like a 20 dollar whore./taggertblog; 8 July 2009 at 07:30
Stef said...: Uncle Fetzer blowing smoke up Paul Atreides' spice hole; 8 July 2009 at 16:18
Stef said...: The Kraken Wakes scared the shit out of me when I read it as a kid

kudos to John Wyndham; 8 July 2009 at 16:20