Bomb in Boston

[aintforever]

From the Mail;

 

"Police today defended their response to the killing after eyewitnesses claimed they took up to 20 minutes to arrive at the scene.

Assistant Commissioner Simon Byrne, said: 'One point I would like to address is around some of the speculation as to how long it took the Met to respond yesterday as this incident started to unfold.

'We first received a 999 call from the public at 2.20pm stating a man was being attacked, further 999 calls stated that the attackers were in possession of a gun. We had officers at the scene within nine minutes of receiving that first 999 call.

'Once that information about a gun or guns being present was known firearms officers were assigned at 2.24pm. Firearms officers were there and dealing with the incident 10 minutes after they were assigned, 14 minutes after the first call to the Met."

 

Nine minutes doesn't seem too bad, not sure what the Mets poor response time has got anything to do with a conspiracy though.

 

Where does this fit into the jigsaw Pap? Surely if it was one big inside job the the police would be there in seconds making sure no one got sight of anything?

 

F*cking nutjob

[benjii]

No doubt, and it's the usual suspects on every thread when such subjects are discussed. This thread has generated a massive amount of interest and covered a lot of interesting material. I'm sure a few posters'll be floored by the polysyllabic prowess of our resident refusenik, but my hope is that a lot see straight through it.

 

I'm honestly not sure what Verbal is, whether he's a genuine poster or someone paid to promote ideas. I'm leaning toward the latter. Like you said, the sole purpose was to close the thread down. I wonder how many times his buzzwords would crop up if ran through some simple language analysis tools. Since his return, he's followed my input on threads obsessively and despite the lack of foul language, is one of the most consistently abusive and dishonest posters I've ever encountered.

 

Like yourself, I'm not fooled by the simplistic over-use of taboos and misdirection to close a discussion down. Others won't be, either.

 

Lol. ****ing hell. You have problems.

[pap]

Now we are getting somewhere. Do you know how completely barmy your idea is?

 

Actually a lot less barmy than your interpretation of it, as we'll see.

 

So your in your version of events Rigby was already dead and the person 'beheaded' was a corpse of someone else that was dragged out from somewhere to take part in a mock car crash. OK.

 

Er, no. I'd imagine that if the victim were already dead, they would not drag a corpse of someone else into the street.

 

A far easier plan would involve using a live actor to play the role of the victim..

 

So if Rigby died some other way and it was all kept hush hush that means all his fellow soldiers at the barracks were in on the plot. The kebab shop worker who spoke to him the evening before is also in on it. CCTV footage of him from the shop would have had to been faked.

 

Another consequence of your chosen interpretation. First, all you suggest might be true. Various people in the barracks could by lying, CCTV could have been faked, etc. Second, if Rigby had died at an earlier point in the day, then none of the various co-conspirators you list are required. Even what you're suggesting isn't impossible, and certainly wouldn't require the assent of the whole barracks, just one or two people ( or even an official log ) could corroborate a person's appearance.

 

A corpse would have had to have been dragged through a London street in broad daylight, then two known extremists would have to play a key role in running him over and committing the pretend crime then allow themselves to be shot, then still comply later on whilst locked in jail, probably for the rest of their lives.

 

Again, no. You don't have to do what you suggest. A live actor is playing the role of victim under my theory, so it makes no sense to drag a corpse anywhere. Far easier to have it ready to go in a separate vehicle ready for a switch.

 

The ambulance workers who took the body away plus whoever confirmed the death and the coroner who dealt with the autopsy must also be in on it. Rigby's family member who ID'd the body must also be in on it, unless they managed to mutilate Rigby's body in a similar way and somehow swap them in between.

 

Well, you're at least thinking along the right lines here.

 

A body switch removes all your objections about conspiratorial ambulance workers, coroners and the like. Not so sure on the mutilation part though.

 

 

The Met Police obviously had to be in on it, as you say they were stood around doing nothing, plus there are the witnesses who saw it as it happened - maybe they are crisis actors?

 

Earlier you were telling me that the OB did nowt because they were waiting for an Armed Response Unit. Apart from recording the film, the terrorists did nowt until the unit arrived either. When the Armed Response Unit did arrive, the attackers obligingly ran into its gunfire.

 

My take on the regular OB is that they didn't know it was a serious incident.

 

All of this had to happen in a busy London street, in broad daylight. What exactly are the Met's or the Army's motivation?

 

As indicated above, don't think entire Met or Army is involved. Perfectly conceivable that a limited number of people are embedded to facilitation purposes, but met-wide or Army-wide conspiracies are something you're suggesting, not me.

 

Why would two Muslim Extremists throw their lives away on some minor political cause?

 

One of your best questions so far.

 

There is no way in a million years the Met or the army would be complicit in a plot like this. there is no way the government would do

anything like this just to aid a pretty insignificant piece of legislation.

 

While I'm happy to entertain different motives, I can't accept the lack of capability or political will. First, we've had recent governments exposed for lying to the British public and facilitating 1,000,000. The chief weapons inspector reportedly committed suicide at around the same time. Norman Baker MP believes that Dr David Kelly was murdered, and I don't think you'll have too many people calling that assertion far-fetched. So let's not pretend our governments are fluffy, innocent and would never do something like that.

 

We're a mature civilisation that has been playing the Grand Old Game for centuries. If we didn't have it in our locker, we simply wouldn't be here.

 

FWIW, let me repeat my point of agreement that I don't believe that the entire Met or Army is involved. With the chain of command structure that operates in both institutions, they just don't need to be.

 

If they were to do something they would just plant some explosives in some asian bloke's car not hatch some elaborate plan involving corpses and fake murders on a London street.

 

You are completely nuts.

 

If this is the way you assess the feasibility of a potential conspiracy, then I'm unsurprised that you don't place much stock in them. After all, if the way you go about things involves inventing big obstacles in inventive ways.

 

I think it's be classless for me to call your plan completely nuts, but it does have a lot of crazy assumptions you've introduced to make it less plausible.

 

As for me being completely nuts? Well, possibly - but if your body-dragging plan is anything to go by, I'm in good company.

[pap]

Lol. ****ing hell. You have problems.

 

I work on an evidence-based approach, mucker

 

http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/search.php?searchid=637528

 

He's either paid to stalk me, or he's doing it for free.

 

Which camp do you think he's in?

[pap]

F*cking nutjob

 

Nice.

 

I'm sure that's really adding to the strength of your argument on each post

[aintforever]

Again, no. You don't have to do what you suggest. A live actor is playing the role of victim under my theory, so it makes no sense to drag a corpse anywhere. Far easier to have it ready to go in a separate vehicle ready for a switch.

 

So what you are saying is the guy on the floor is a live actor, and the muslim extremists are acting out a scene choreographed by the british secret service, some of the army, police, ambulance service and numerous actors/witnesses.

 

Rigby's body is lying in another ambulance somewhere else after dying of natural causes sometime between visiting the kebab shop the night before and that time of day. His body being squirrelled away by members of his own unit and put in a fridge or something after being mutilated to tie in with what has yet to be played out.

 

You're whole theory falls flat on it's face with the fact that the two muslims are alive and well in jail. If this was some huge, important government set up then they can both blow the whole thing wide open. The OB had a perfect chance to take them out and tie up any lose ends by killing them instead of shooting in their legs.

 

Also the fact that the police took 20mins to get there doesn't tie in with your theory - they would have been there the minute it happened if it had all been a big film set. If the guy on the floor was a live actor any passer by could easily have walked up to the 'body' and found out he not dead. Or was the whole street full of paid actors all in on it?

 

You seriously need help if you believe that theory.

[pap]

So what you are saying is the guy on the floor is a live actor, and the muslim extremists are acting out a scene choreographed by the british secret service, some of the army, police, ambulance service and numerous actors/witnesses.

 

Rigby's body is lying in another ambulance somewhere else after dying of natural causes sometime between visiting the kebab shop the night before and that time of day. His body being squirrelled away by members of his own unit and put in a fridge or something after being mutilated to tie in with what has yet to be played out.

 

You're whole theory falls flat on it's face with the fact that the two muslims are alive and well in jail. If this was some huge, important government set up then they can both blow the whole thing wide open. The OB had a perfect chance to take them out and tie up any lose ends by killing them instead of shooting in their legs.

 

Also the fact that the police took 20mins to get there doesn't tie in with your theory - they would have been there the minute it happened if it had all been a big film set. If the guy on the floor was a live actor any passer by could easily have walked up to the 'body' and found out he not dead. Or was the whole street full of paid actors all in on it?

 

You seriously need help if you believe that theory.

 

I'll continue to talk about plausiblity, something you're consistently trying to stretch through your re-interpretations. You seem to be arguing that these kind of things are impossible, and would require collaboration on a massive scale. It's simply not the case. The work of the intelligence services has always involved deception, psychological operations, murder and infiltration.

 

Logic would suggest that the scene of any operation like this be as controlled as an environment as possible. The two or three passers-by you saw are likely to be part of the operation. Passers-by, incidentally, are one of the easiest things for actors to do

 

No-one is talking about belief, aintforever. We're talking about alternate explanations to an event, largely because much of it doesn't make any sense, to me at least.

 

I doubt you've ever met anyone who "seriously needs help", mate - and if you have, you'll know that your comparison here is unwarranted. We've got a few friends of the family who fell into this category and ended up in the DOP. There is a huge difference between someone who is mentally ill and someone who disagrees with an account of an event, and the collective attempt to ascribe such qualities to me says as much about your attitudes to mental illness as anything else.

 

Besides, attitudes shift massively depending on the cultural bubble you're in. Even in the West, there are a healthy number of people questioning official dogma. Further afield, those opinions are much more widespread. The Middle East must have one hell of a mental illness/cognitive deficiency problem.

[pap]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=0b4_1375922321

 

Good find, capitalsaint.

[aintforever]

I'll continue to talk about plausiblity, something you're consistently trying to stretch through your re-interpretations. You seem to be arguing that these kind of things are impossible, and would require collaboration on a massive scale. It's simply not the case. The work of the intelligence services has always involved deception, psychological operations, murder and infiltration.

 

Logic would suggest that the scene of any operation like this be as controlled as an environment as possible. The two or three passers-by you saw are likely to be part of the operation. Passers-by, incidentally, are one of the easiest things for actors to do

 

No-one is talking about belief, aintforever. We're talking about alternate explanations to an event, largely because much of it doesn't make any sense, to me at least.

 

I doubt you've ever met anyone who "seriously needs help", mate - and if you have, you'll know that your comparison here is unwarranted. We've got a few friends of the family who fell into this category and ended up in the DOP. There is a huge difference between someone who is mentally ill and someone who disagrees with an account of an event, and the collective attempt to ascribe such qualities to me says as much about your attitudes to mental illness as anything else.

 

Besides, attitudes shift massively depending on the cultural bubble you're in. Even in the West, there are a healthy number of people questioning official dogma. Further afield, those opinions are much more widespread. The Middle East must have one hell of a mental illness/cognitive deficiency problem.

 

It's pointless arguing with you because you refuse to see what is obvious and accept any sort of common sense. As soon as you analyse the theory you suggest in any sort of detail it becomes a complete farce.

 

I don't just accept what the government say, I look at the evidence and make up my own mind. You take no notice of the evidence and just invent a story to fit your own paranoid, warped agenda.

 

I read enough about the intelligence services to know that your theory is way too complex, fantastical and way way too risky to even be considered as a plan. Actors pretending to be headless corpses on a busy London street, servicemen mutilating and swapping bodies of dead colleges, muslim extremists acting alongside the met and intelligence services left alive to tell the story. Your plan makes operation Mincemeat of WW2 seem straight forward.

 

You say having actors as passers by is easy - of course that is true. What is impossible though is making sure there are no other passers by, off duty coppers, service men etc, who could stop the whole plan in it's tracks.

 

If there was some sort of government conspiracy the only plausible scenario that fits the evidence would be a few spooks working on the two muslims psychologically until he flipped. That is plausible but there is still no evidence of it happening.

 

The problem with these situations, as in 9/11, is that opportunistic politicians and the media use them for their own agendas and it's easy for people who lack intelligence to see the thing as a big conspiracy when all it is is people taking advantage of a bad situation.

Edited 10 August, 2013 by aintforever

[pap]

It's pointless arguing with you because you refuse to see what is obvious and accept any sort of common sense. As soon as you analyse the theory you suggest in any sort of detail it becomes a complete farce.

 

You're half-right on one of your points.

 

I've played fair in this thread. Everything you asked for, you got - whether it was my opinion on the wider conspiracy, or the more granular details of how I think it can be plausibly achieved.

 

Without exception, you're rebuttals have been in two camps.

 

1) I don't believe it because I personally consider it implausible

2) I'm "fairly sure"* that x can't work like y.

 

Special K was absolutely right to pull me up on vague boll*cks like "fairly sure". He knew that the implicit uncertainty of the term meant that I hadn't done my research on standard armed response unit operational procedure, and I'll concede this; I know bugger all on the subject; my observations on the photo were that of a layman, asking the same questions as before.

 

I'd like you to qualify what you feel is "enough" when it comes to your experience in reading about the security services. You arrived on this thread with some false assumptions, so I'm wondering how the lack of general knowledge (talking about decapitation in August 2013) reconciles itself with your claim of specific knowledge of the security services.

 

There's an inherent contradiction here. You say you're clued up about security matters, but you were unaware of the basic facts of the incident until informed otherwise.

 

 

I don't just accept what the government say, I look at the evidence and make up my own mind. You take no notice of the evidence and just invent a story to fit your own paranoid, warped agenda.

 

You've invented just as much to dismiss where I think it could be plausible. You keep announcing individual points as game-changers, argument-enders, when they're really nothing of the sort. Great example; "the perps are in nick so it must be legit". There are a myriad of ways that could happen without it ending all discussion, ever, on the topic. You suggested one yourself; that the security services may have done a number on him. Equally, they could be in the nick and looked after. Yes, yes - I know that there are reports of one of them being attacked, but prison is an even more controlled environment than the streets of Woolwich. News only gets out if people want it out.

 

You're free to characterise my posts in whichever way you fancy, but you may want to question some of the inconsistencies in your own analysis.

 

Paranoia an interesting suggestion, but it's not something I feel is applicable. If I had to say what inspired me most, it'd be the essential decentness of most people you meet. As a Brit, those are the qualities I feel proudest about. Liberal tradition, a reputation for being fair and polite - at least, that's how we display our decentness. It's my default setting for new people; I assume all those things and adjust according to experience. Any sense of hope I've got in the world rests on the principle that the common man is a more decent chap than those who direct international affairs. Constrain a little, and I'd definitely fess to being distrustful of authority. Indeed, it's not something I can easily deny given my posting pedigree.

 

 

You don't want to be as specific or surgical. Indeed, the entire term "conspiracy theorist" covers a whole range of things, mostly of a pejorative nature, from JFK to UFO. It's never positive, hence those with legitimate questions about a single issue are lumped in with people that think we're ruled by Icke-flavoured Silurians in addition to all the tropes that Verbal trots out.

 

I read enough about the intelligence services to know that your theory is way too complex, fantastical and way way too risky to even be considered as a plan.

 

Not good enough, skip. It's as p!ss-poor as "fairly sure".

 

Actors pretending to be headless corpses on a busy London street, servicemen mutilating and swapping bodies of dead colleges, muslim extremists acting alongside the met and intelligence services left alive to tell the story. Your plan makes operation Mincemeat of WW2 seem straight forward.

 

Not headless. Never decapitated. Photo from top of bus shows blurry head. Video of woman shows her comforting and talking to prone figure.

 

How many times?

 

You say having actors as passers by is easy - of course that is true. What is impossible though is making sure there are no other passers by, off duty coppers, service men etc, who could stop the whole plan in it's tracks.

 

No it isn't. You just have a couple of big blokes telling people they can't go through, a couple of large vehicles and you're sorted. All these things were present.

 

If there was some sort of government conspiracy the only plausible scenario that fits the evidence would be a few spooks working on the two muslims psychologically until he flipped. That is plausible but there is still no evidence of it happening.

 

Well I'm glad you're finally theorising in support of the theory here. I've seen that mentioned as a possibility, and like other theories, does fit the facts.

 

We're left with a question more philosophical than legal on the question of evidence, the ol' "if a tree fell in a forest and no-one mentioned it, did it happen" argument. No evidence of something happening doesn't mean that it didn't happen. There was no evidence of Savile's activities for decades, but it happened regardless.

 

 

The problem with these situations, as in 9/11, is that opportunistic politicians and the media use them for their own agendas and it's easy for people who lack intelligence to see the thing as a big conspiracy when all it is is people taking advantage of a bad situation.

 

Again, you're half right. Of course politicians use major events in an opportunistic way. A more interesting question is what happens when opportunity doesn't knock and you have a pre-existing plan.

 

As for your repeated assumptions about my intelligence, I'll defer to other people to that assessment, I'd like to know how you feel qualified to make that assessment, when despite all the stuff that has been posted in this thread, and when even CB Fry acknowledges that Rigby was not beheaded, you continue to employ it in your arguments as if it happened.

 

I said you were half-right on your original point.

 

I keep saying that something could have happened in a certain way, yet you retort "AIN'T". Forever.

 

There is no point in arguing.

[aintforever]

Pap, like all fantasists, when backed into a corner you just come out with complete waffle. What difference does it make if he was actually decapitated or just hacked to death? - none.

 

Fact is that the crime scene was for 20mins or so a complete free for all until the OB turned up. Look at the video and pictures, there were scores of people stood around and a whole bus full watching, some people even going up and inspecting the body. That one single fact proves beyond any doubt that the body on the floor was not an actor.

 

Your theory doesn't explain why two young muslims would choose to get shot and spend the rest of their lives in jail to help a conservative government force through a policy.

 

There is obviously no point discussing this further, I expect the court case will be soon and it will make you look even dumber than you already do when all the evidence is laid out.

[pap]

Pap, like all fantasists, when backed into a corner you just come out with complete waffle. What difference does it make if he was actually decapitated or just hacked to death? - none.

 

It makes a huge difference. How many times do you hear of a London stabbing on national news? Do we talk of allocating 3bn from the welfare budget every time it happens? What about the reliability of the witnesses who claim they saw things that, as it turned out, didn't actually happen? For me, it's not even an either-or proposition. Both descriptions go some way to achieving their desired effect, demonstrating the apparent barbarism of the Islamic world.

 

Fact is that the crime scene was for 20mins or so a complete free for all until the OB turned up. Look at the video and pictures, there were scores of people stood around and a whole bus full watching, some people even going up and inspecting the body.

 

The whole full bus you mention is the same bus containing the kids referring to it as a film "set". Road was blocked off at both ends. I acknowledge seeing scores of people, but only one or two got close. No-one was "inspecting" the body, btw. The one person who did spend a bit of time there spent her time stroking, talking to and comforting the prone figure.

 

 

That one single fact proves beyond any doubt that the body on the floor was not an actor.

 

Closedown attempt #68? I'm losing count.

 

Please explain why someone was talking to, stroking and comforting a dead body.

 

 

Your theory doesn't explain why two young muslims would choose to get shot and spend the rest of their lives in jail to help a conservative government force through a policy.

 

Were they shot? There's no blood in the picture I linked earlier. Your evidence is a video of some people getting shot, right?

 

Besides, if they were assets to start with, they're not young muslims. They're people pretending to be.

 

 

There is obviously no point discussing this further,

 

Yeah, you keep saying that, but return anyway to discuss it further.

 

I expect the court case will be soon and it will make you look even dumber than you already do when all the evidence is laid out.

 

We'll all be looking forward to that day.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

This dismal thread has long since passed beyond the whelm of the merely distasteful and become a truly gruesome spectacle. A young man has been brutally murdered, parents have lost their much loved son, a little boy will grow up without his father .... all I can say is that thank Christ none of them are ever likely to read this thread.

 

Yes I know - pot/kettle/black - but my (unsolicited) advice is that all parties to this atrocity would do well to drop it now before both their dignity, and their mental health, are called even further into question.

[aintforever]

I

The whole full bus you mention is the same bus containing the kids referring to it as a film "set". Road was blocked off at both ends. I acknowledge seeing scores of people, but only one or two got close. No-one was "inspecting" the body, btw. The one person who did spend a bit of time there spent her time stroking, talking to and comforting the prone figure.

 

you are just making stuff up now, there is pictures showing 8 people stood around the body before the Met got there and moved people away. Lee Rigby had to be identified using dental records so the actor on the floor must have been very convincing or maybe everyone in the immediate area were actors, even the cub scout leader?

 

Maybe the whole of south London were replaced by actors for the day, there are no limits to what fruit-loops like you believe.

[pap]

you are just making stuff up now, there is pictures showing 8 people stood around the body before the Met got there and moved people away. Lee Rigby had to be identified using dental records so the actor on the floor must have been very convincing or maybe everyone in the immediate area were actors, even the cub scout leader?

 

Maybe the whole of south London were replaced by actors for the day, there are no limits to what fruit-loops like you believe.

 

Wheel them out and I'll happily concede the point.

[JackFrost]

 

There was a time I was convinced that this guy from GTA: San Andreas was a fictional character.

 

I'm not so sure now. . .

[pap]

 

There was a time I was convinced that this guy from GTA: San Andreas was a fictional character.

 

I'm not so sure now. . .

 

I don't have his weed fields, JackFrost.

[aintforever]

Wheel them out and I'll happily concede the point.

 

http://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/10436107.Woolwich_police_incident__One_dead_and_two_seriously_injured___live_updates/

 

3.27pm Picture: KingAdeIV on Twitter.

Edited 11 August, 2013 by aintforever

[Alain Perrin]

Every good conspiracy theory has a plausibility that can be argued for. However, as with most, it's about risk/reward.

 

The proposed 'actor' approach is possible but would have to involve so many complicit people that the risk of getting exposed would outweigh any reward.

 

As in most cases, the simplest explanation is the most likely (i.e. It happened pretty much as publically described).

 

That doesn't stop politicians and newspapers spinning it or using it to bury bad news, but that's a consequence rather than a cause.

 

However the beauty of tin foil hats is they can be shaped to fit almost anything.

Sent from my RM-821_eu_euro1_276 using Board Express

[pap]

This dismal thread has long since passed beyond the whelm of the merely distasteful and become a truly gruesome spectacle. A young man has been brutally murdered, parents have lost their much loved son, a little boy will grow up without his father .... all I can say is that thank Christ none of them are ever likely to read this thread.

 

Yes I know - pot/kettle/black - but my (unsolicited) advice is that all parties to this atrocity would do well to drop it now before both their dignity, and their mental health, are called even further into question.

 

I've seen many flippant accounts of these events as viewed through the eyes of the questioner. I believe that approach to be ultimately counter-productive and unless quoting something directly back, have tried to moderate my language as much as possible.

 

I appreciate that the subject is highly charged. I've tried to debate it without too much gore, and without resorting to sensationalism. Again, I appreciate that the nature of the material might make that impossible, but at the same time, I don't think we should have any sacred cows when it comes to events of such potential importance.

 

The debate has been entirely diminished by the repeated memes, mental illness, Verbal's hard-on for anti-semites or neo-Nazis, etc - with many of these comments coming from people ignorant of the basic facts, the sort that likely fell for the hysteria that emerged after the event.

[pap]

http://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/10436107.Woolwich_police_incident__One_dead_and_two_seriously_injured___live_updates/

 

3.27pm Picture: KingAdeIV on Twitter.

 

Point conceded.

 

We're down from "scores" to 8.

 

Too many people?

[aintforever]

Point conceded.

 

We're down from "scores" to 8.

 

Too many people?

 

There are scores watching - check out the other pics, 8 around the body checking out if the victim is OK or not. I'm pretty sure they would have noticed if it was an actor with special effects. I'm not sure how an actor fakes not having a pulse.

 

Also the only police on the scene at that stage are dealing with the murderers, weird that considering their big plan could be blown apart at any moment if just one of those people noticed the actor breathing.

Edited 11 August, 2013 by aintforever

[pap]

There are scores watching - check out the other pics, 8 around the body checking out if the victim is OK or not. I'm pretty sure they would have noticed if it was an actor with special effects. I'm not sure how an actor fakes not having a pulse.

 

Also the only police on the scene at that stage are dealing with the murderers, weird that considering their big plan could be blown apart at any moment if just one of those people noticed the actor breathing.

 

Depends on how many of the people actually checked the pulse, I suppose.

 

So far, it's just the woman that was interviewed that has spoken about the pulse check. If the information relies on a single person, then no-one has to pretend not to have a pulse. As long as that's reported, who is going to argue. That's how an actor fakes a pulse.

 

As for your second point, it really depends on what those people have been told at that point. Is anyone going to check for breathing if death has been pronounced. How does that fit in with the woman leaning over the prone figure acting very much like it is alive?

 

The problem with each of the explanations you're offering up is that they're inconsistent with another part of the account.

 

Fair play to you though, aint - I finally feel like I'm having a discussion with someone rather than having to defend my character. More of the same, please.

[aintforever]

Depends on how many of the people actually checked the pulse, I suppose.

 

So far, it's just the woman that was interviewed that has spoken about the pulse check. If the information relies on a single person, then no-one has to pretend not to have a pulse. As long as that's reported, who is going to argue. That's how an actor fakes a pulse.

 

As for your second point, it really depends on what those people have been told at that point. Is anyone going to check for breathing if death has been pronounced. How does that fit in with the woman leaning over the prone figure acting very much like it is alive?

 

The problem with each of the explanations you're offering up is that they're inconsistent with another part of the account.

 

Fair play to you though, aint - I finally feel like I'm having a discussion with someone rather than having to defend my character. More of the same, please.

 

Oh come on it only takes one person to take a pulse. The 8 people crowding around the body obviously did so out of concern for whoever was lying in the street. If they didn't take a pulse or offer first aid it was because his injuries were so bad he was obviously dead - something no actor could fake. The person in the street just simply could not have been an actor.

 

I suppose the cub scout leader woman is in on it now? All she was doing was showing concern for someone who had been murdered, nothing in her actions suggested it was an actor holding his breath on the floor.

[pap]

Oh come on it only takes one person to take a pulse.

 

I agree. That person is therefore sole arbiter of the "has a pulse" decision. You were wondering how it was possible for an actor to fake a pulse. In collusion with another agent, it's straightforward.

 

The 8 people crowding around the body obviously did so out of concern for whoever was lying in the street.

 

That is an interesting shot. Reproduced here to save people the clicking and searching.

 

 

None of the people in it are paying particularly close attention to the victim. Most of them seem to be having a barney amongst themselves.

 

My continual complaint from the start; no blood - is entirely upheld, despite the fact that we have the victim and both perpetrators in shot.

 

If they didn't take a pulse or offer first aid it was because his injuries were so bad he was obviously dead - something no actor could fake. The person in the street just simply could not have been an actor.

 

Or maybe, you've got a dozen or so spooks running an op.

 

I suppose the cub scout leader woman is in on it now? All she was doing was showing concern for someone who had been murdered, nothing in her actions suggested it was an actor holding his breath on the floor.

 

Ingrid Loyau-Kennett has been the subject of a bit of speculation in the conspiracy circles. One of her ancestors was in the security services, and much of her content in her interviews reads like PR for the powers that be. Check these out:-

 

Mrs Loyau-Kennett plans to move to London to be closer to her children. She also harbours hopes of a political career. “I love this country; I love its values and I love the Queen. But it makes me sad that everything is going downhill. If being a politician means saying what other people are afraid to say, then why not? I’d be quite good at that.”

 

For now, she cannot get over the fact that so many people, including the Prime Minister, know her name. “I can’t imagine him saying that,” she squeals, throwing her head back and laughing. “My name! I love David Cameron! He’s such a good guy.” Could an invitation to Downing Street be on the cards? “Oh yes, that would be amazing,” she grins. “In the meantime, though, I’d be happy if he just took me for a pint in the pub.”

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/10077409/Woolwich-attack-I-looked-him-in-the-eye.-I-was-sure-he-wasnt-going-to-kill-me.html

 

Ancestral connections and being a mouthpiece for the establishment proves nowt, I know. I do wonder why it was worth two paragraphs tho.

[aintforever]

Pap you just don't get it do you. It doesn't matter is all or none of them are taking a pulse, what matters is that ANYONE who happened to be in that area could have walked up and easily found out if the person on the floor is dead or not.

 

Considering your whole theory relies on people believing the actor is a dead soldier, why would the security services let people just wander around the 'body'?

[pap]

Pap you just don't get it do you. It doesn't matter is all or none of them are taking a pulse, what matters is that ANYONE who happened to be in that area could have walked up and easily found out if the person on the floor is dead or not.

 

Considering your whole theory relies on people believing the actor is a dead soldier, why would the security services let people just wander around the 'body'?

 

Could they? Would anyone have felt comfortable walking up to:-

 

a) a body on the floor

b) At least 6 out of 8 people having a barney, standing over a body

 

Most people wouldn't go for 1). Re: 2) There is a body on the floor and there are people arguing over it. You argue that anyone could have walked up to the body, but no-one in their right mind would approach a group of people kicking off around someone who appears to be at best, unconscious.

 

My theory doesn't rely on belief at all. It relies on compliance. Your theory relies on the notion that many, if not all of those people in the photo you reference are genuine passers-by. Do you have any idea of their identities?

[aintforever]

Pap, watch the other videos of the events, people were milling about freely, chatting, taking pics etc, some, in typical London fashion, walking past completely ignoring it.

 

If you believe that bunch of losers hanging around the body are Secret Service agents over the obvious official story then there really is no hope for you. MI5 must have really let themselves go if that chubby blond slapper and fat bald c*nt are our new James Bonds.

 

You might as well say aliens did it, there would be the same amount of evidence to back it up and no one could prove you wrong.

Edited 11 August, 2013 by aintforever

[Micky]

This dismal thread has long since passed beyond the whelm of the merely distasteful and become a truly gruesome spectacle. A young man has been brutally murdered, parents have lost their much loved son, a little boy will grow up without his father .... all I can say is that thank Christ none of them are ever likely to read this thread.

 

Yes I know - pot/kettle/black - but my (unsolicited) advice is that all parties to this atrocity would do well to drop it now before both their dignity, and their mental health, are called even further into question.

 

This - a thousand times over.

 

The crass insensitivity is totally and utterly beyond all belief - this site really has hit the depths of the gutter.

[holepuncture]

This - a thousand times over.

 

The crass insensitivity is totally and utterly beyond all belief - this site really has hit the depths of the gutter.

 

Its disgusting really, all though im sure this is part of this loons game, just trying to wind up normal people.

 

People like him, I dont even acknowledge in the street and to this effect, I will treat him with the same level of contempt here by no longer reading or replying to this fantasist stuff. If he were in any working environment with me I would have him promptly removed, people like this are unemployable, though the post history suggests he is another loser on the dole who cant afford to go out.

 

The suggestions another poster is being paid to joust with him?!

 

Is the forum being radicalised? I think this member is.

 

Shame on you, PAP.

[Micky]

There are some quite sick people at large, this from todays news....

 

http://news.sky.com/story/1127571/man-charged-over-lee-rigby-terror-videos

[pap]

Chaps.

 

Appreciate that this can be a distressing topic. However, the direction of this thread has been clear for several days. While we can agree to differ about whether it is worthy of discussion, I think we can all agree that you've both said your piece on numerous occasions, and you're repeatedly saying the same thing.

 

Objections noted and I'll try even harder to discuss the topic sensitively, should the need arise. It's odd, but most of the macabre stuff has come from those arguing against me. I take on board your opinions. You have every right to hold them. I just don't see the utility in returning here for a discussion that clearly upsets you, only to repeat that you're still upset.

[hypochondriac]

Chaps.

 

Appreciate that this can be a distressing topic. However, the direction of this thread has been clear for several days. While we can agree to differ about whether it is worthy of discussion, I think we can all agree that you've both said your piece on numerous occasions, and you're repeatedly saying the same thing.

 

Objections noted and I'll try even harder to discuss the topic sensitively, should the need arise. It's odd, but most of the macabre stuff has come from those arguing against me. I take on board your opinions. You have every right to hold them. I just don't see the utility in returning here for a discussion that clearly upsets you, only to repeat that you're still upset.

 

Bit ironic isnt it?

[pap]

Bit ironic isnt it?

 

A fraction yes.

[Micky]

Chaps.

 

Appreciate that this can be a distressing topic. However, the direction of this thread has been clear for several days. While we can agree to differ about whether it is worthy of discussion, I think we can all agree that you've both said your piece on numerous occasions, and you're repeatedly saying the same thing.

 

Objections noted and I'll try even harder to discuss the topic sensitively, should the need arise. It's odd, but most of the macabre stuff has come from those arguing against me. I take on board your opinions. You have every right to hold them. I just don't see the utility in returning here for a discussion that clearly upsets you, only to repeat that you're still upset.

 

The subject does not upset me - not one iota - death is the only certainty in life.

 

Your twisted, warped and evil misrepresentations, lies and untruths of the events of that day, do. HTH.

[pap]

The subject does not upset me - not one iota - death is the only certainty in life.

 

Your twisted, warped and evil misrepresentations, lies and untruths of the events of that day, do. HTH.

 

Tried to bung you an olive branch, Micky.

 

You keep venting your spleen until the anger has gone.

[aintforever]

Could they? Would anyone have felt comfortable walking up to:-

 

a) a body on the floor

b) At least 6 out of 8 people having a barney, standing over a body

 

Most people wouldn't go for 1). Re: 2) There is a body on the floor and there are people arguing over it. You argue that anyone could have walked up to the body, but no-one in their right mind would approach a group of people kicking off around someone who appears to be at best, unconscious.

 

My theory doesn't rely on belief at all. It relies on compliance. Your theory relies on the notion that many, if not all of those people in the photo you reference are genuine passers-by. Do you have any idea of their identities?

 

Maybe now it's time for you to apologise for your pathetic conspiracy theories, or at least admit you were wrong?

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25153273

[bridge too far]

Conspiracy theorists in Canada too, it seems

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25370076

[pap]

Conspiracy theorists in Canada too, it seems

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25370076

 

Never knew Aspergers was contagious.

[Halo Stickman]

Fu cking hell! This is the first time I’ve read this thread. Before anyone decides to add to it, they should seriously ask themselves the following question:

 

If a rational man decides to debate with an irrational man, is this decision rational or irrational?

[CB Fry]

Fu cking hell! This is the first time I’ve read this thread. Before anyone decides to add to it, they should seriously ask themselves the following question:

 

If a rational man decides to debate with an irrational man, is this decision rational or irrational?

 

Careful. You'll have Pap onto you, dishing out life advice to you in a minute. From time to time he likes to make out he's not a total effing nutcase.

[pap]

Careful. You'll have Pap onto you, dishing out life advice to you in a minute. From time to time he likes to make out he's not a total effing nutcase.

 

There was me thinking you'd quit this thread out of decency. You should have got more for your "decency" money than this tired old quip*.

 

* S'alright. I never bought it at the time.

[Whitey Grandad]

Fu cking hell! This is the first time I’ve read this thread. Before anyone decides to add to it, they should seriously ask themselves the following question:

 

If a rational man decides to debate with an irrational man, is this decision rational or irrational?

 

Good question. I suppose it depends upon the outcome of the debate.