XPost: uk.politics.misc, alt.politics.british, alt.conspiracy
XPost: uk.local.london
From: nyeplm@trashmail.net
banana wrote:
> 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...
>
I'm afraid my attitude to such matters is pretty well summed up in a
recent article in the excellent 'The Friday Project', 'False Flag'
Fundamentalism: Tilting at Tube Trains', about a book launch:
'Milan Rai wasn't sure if he'd make it to his own book launch. He's been
in court this morning, charged with organising an unauthorised
demonstration in the vicinity of Parliament - this was when he and Maya
Evans read out the names of dead soldiers by the Cenotaph last year.
However, he's here (having been fined, although he's refusing to pay)
for the launch of his measured, analytical book '7/7: The London
Bombings, Islam and the Iraq War' and a public meeting at a Friends
Meeting House in central London. Evans, a member of the group Justice
not Vengeance, is the chair, and the speakers are Iraqi activist
academic Nadje al-Ali, 7/7 survivor and writer Rachel North and 'radical
historian' Mark Curtis. The room is filled with thoughtful people who
want to listen and discuss the issues, and as it transpires, some who
are convinced that a lack of CCTV footage proves that Tony Blair
personally Sellotaped exploding wombats to the underground tracks.'
This concludes
'Conspiracy theorists are still fundamentalists of a kind, and it's too
late to convince them they're wrong, but thankfully it is safe in their
case to ignore them. Still, they're fascinating, with their obsessive
attention to superfluous detail, their misplaced paranoia and twisting
of the words of witnesses to fit their agenda. It's sad when they
actually want many of the things the rest of us do, as was pointed out.
The problem they create is that they give questioning officialdom a bad
name, making it easy to write everyone off who raises a hand and says,
'No, I don't think that's a good enough explanation.'
'Then again, as we walked to the tube full of Quaker tea and flapjacks,
it did occur to us that there never *has* been any official explanation
as to why the bombed number 30 bus carried an advertisement for the
horror film 'The Descent', including the review quote 'OUTRIGHT
TERROR... BOLD AND BRILLIANT'. Perhaps we should be told?'
http://www.thefridayproject.co.uk/hi/tft/politics/002015.php
Steve
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
