yes okay with taht but Bush and blair dont give a fuck about the public opinion, why do you think blair went on war? he went on war against the majority public opinion, excuse my french!

Of course – although a lot of people agreed with him then as well - however the climate is very different now.



Cracker?

ok ok so this is good news.

Ha ha! Possibly.

Or maybe just the start of something even worse.

Wow. Blowing up planes. How original. These AQ fuckheads should get a ne schtick.

Which is leading me to believe, IF this is legitely happening, that these guys are mere copycats.

There is a passage in "Reasons To Be Cheerful" by Mark Steel where he talks about the Loyalist violence in Northern Ireland (when it surpassed Republican violence). The media had been so sucessful in playing up the IRA et al that people automatically assumed that all violence was from the IRA.

"Fookin' IRA bastards" they'd say.
"But it was the UVF!"
"No it wasn't, it was the IRA."

It's the same here. The 7/7 bombers were not Al-Queda. Neither, from what we know, are any of those involved in the plot.

Where did anyone say it was AQ in the first place?

__________________
We are sorry, the mind you have reached is not a working mind.
Please hang up and die again.
Please hang up,
And die again.

My news has been saying, "early reports are that it is an AQ operation". But "AQ" is always used by the media to generalise anti-Western terroist groups. They should just say "islamic terroists". That captures the nature of all these infidel slayers farly well.

Well I don't attribute it to mass delusion so much... but i think while such draconian measures are being proposed, while there clearly is political capital accumulating around this issue, public scrutiny is great. The vast majority of conspiracist voices are audibly nuts anyway. I mean, you can read the madness. It's a matter of tone. The 9-11 sites I've read sound like they were written by dialectics droputs on meth.

I remember in English class at school, we were to give solo talks on a subject of our choice. One of the guys in my class did a solo talk on explosives, and explosive substances. He brought in a glass Irn Bru bottle that he had filled with some liquid of some sort. Around the rim of the bottle was a different substance. The substances were separate when the bottle was intact. But if the bottle were to be smashed and the substances were to mix, it would become explosive. He explained how this would happen but I sadly don't remember the details. If he had accidentally dropped the bottle in the classroom, we would all probably have been either burnt or injured.

It wouldn't be enough to blow up an airliner, of course (and the school would have been seriously on his ass if he was bringing in something that could; he was lucky he didn't get into trouble over the small explosive he had). But if some teenage guy can chuck together an explosive in an Irn Bru bottle with just a few bits and pieces, I'm pretty sure some would-be terrorists, with the resources and the knowledge, could orchestrate an attack involving explosives that could take down an airplane, or at least the pilots.

That's not to say that this terrorism plot isn't all serving the interests of the UK and US governments wonderfully at this point in time. But if you think you can't blow shit up with a simple bottle of liquid, you are actually wrong. It sounds ludicrous, yes, but I'm fairly certain it's possible.

__________________
Deux hommes font une promenade amicale. L'un des deux porte un parapluie à son bras.
Il se met à pleuvoir. L'homme n'ouvre pas son parapluie et l'autre lui demande pourquoi.
- Parce que ça ne servirait à rien, lui répond son ami. Il est plein de trous.
- Alors, pourquoi l'as-tu pris?
- Parce que je ne pensais pas qu'il pleuvrait.

Fox News does this here in the US.

Oh, I wish I were kidding, but I'm not.