XPost: uk.politics.misc, alt.politics.british, alt.conspiracy
XPost: uk.local.london
From: banana@REMOVE_THIS.borve.demon.co.uk
In article <4b68ebFvtg7sU1@individual.net>, Stephen Glynn
writes
>banana wrote:
>> In article <4b4t9fFvub30U1@individual.net>, Stephen Glynn
>> writes
>>
>>> banana wrote:
>>
>>>> Three weeks ago, I posted about a newspaper article which may have
contained
>>>> an assassination threat against Ken Livingstone (see below).
>>>>
>>>> Well whaddayaknow, a second article has appeared, in which Maureen Lipman
>>>> asks "Will no one rid us of this troublesome beast?"
>>>> QUOTE
>>>>>>> It is not immediately clear that Ken Livingstone [...]
>>>>>>> is dodging a hitman's bullet
>>>> UNQUOTE
>Alternatively, of course, you might just be seeing the hand of the
>security services everywhere,
I haven't said anything about what occurs 'everywhere'.
I may of course be wrong about this specific case. But then I did say
let's wait and see whether there's a third article.
'Once, accident. Twice, coincidence. Three times, enemy action.'
>in rather the way that Mike Corley does; I
>know the Easter Rising was announced beforehand in the newspapers but I
>really don't think it's normal practice to announce assassinations
>beforehand by getting tame journalists to make veiled references to them
>in their newspaper columns.
Not announcements, so much as warnings.
Newspapers are used for all sorts of veiled references, from hints to
occasional coded messages.
>I take Guy Debord's point that you *could*
> use your desktop publishing programme to publish a novel in order to
>arrange an assassination
That's not what he said. Bear in mind that the book industry is
extremely centralised. I'm no Debordologist but I imagine he had
specific cases in mind.
>but I rather wonder *why* on earth you'd want
>to under normal circumstances and *whether* anyone has ever, in fact,
>chosen such a convoluted way of going about things.
You could also ask the question, how common is it for such references to
assassination to appear, within a short space of just a few weeks, with
regard to a specific person, and relating to things that person has done
that have upset certain interests?
It isn't common at all...
Alan Clark's 'Spectator' article, ending with the statement about how
media editors were trying to cause the "sudden death" of Princess Diana
"'unexplained circumstances'", comes to mind. That was three weeks
before the crash.
>Certainly, in my (admittedly limited) experience of such matters, when
>the spooks want to put the frighteners on people they choose rather more
>direct ways of so doing.
But what about their *customers?* :-)
I remember a story in the 'Sunday Times' about Peter Mandelson's window
being shot out.
Nearer the more 'direct' end of the scale, there was the taking captive
of 'Lord Levy' (and the assault against his right hand), which certainly
cannot have been done by 'Derek the local burglar who saw an open window
and thought he'd have a go'.
Also, remember the 'disappearance, believed possibly dead' of Linda St
Clair?
High politics is an ugly world...
I'm sure Livingstone has got the message...
--
banana "The thing I hate about you, Rowntree, is the way you
give Coca-Cola to your scum, and your best teddy-bear to
Oxfam, and expect us to lick your frigid fingers for the
rest of your frigid life." (Mick Travis, 'If...', 1968)
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
