Bounce Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 If I had a highly negative opinion of the part of the world I lived in I would pack up and move to what I consider a better place. Nothing like sticking with your principles you're confusing highly negative opinion of foreign policy of a country with highly negative opinion of the country in general. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vResistance Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 Assuming some website turned out to be fake, what about the 4 perpetrators of 7/7. The men blamed existed. Where are they now? Pretending to be dead? Killed by the state to make them seem responsible while state security secretly detonated the bombs? I consider myself to have a genuinely open mind yet all I see are shadows and whispers. Yes,- " Killed by the state to make them seem responsible while state security secretly detonated the bombs" There is (even following a five month enquiry ) no evidence to prove they(four muslims) planned and carried out the attacks. The film '7/7 Ripple Effect' still stands up better than the official story. I don't know if you missed the visit to SF from Professor Rory Ridley Duff recently (see below) Quote: Originally Posted by Norbert So what if some Business Studies lecturer at Sheffield Poly has written something in the style of an academic paper about 7/7. I bet his employers don't support his conclusions or methodology. Searching the net finds posts written by Ridley-Duff supporting John Hill, or as he calls him MaudDib. It suggests to me that Ridley-Duff is an acolyte of Hill, and quite possibly one of the 'truthers' on SF.. Quote: RRD "I don't know what SF is, so I can't be one of them. (Is it Sheffield Forum?) I had to register to contribute to this thread so that is evidence enough to counter the above claim. The article mentioned is used as teaching materials in the research training for doctoral researchers so there is confidence in its methodology. It is challenging for students (which is why we use it). The paper is known to my employer, and many researchers have read it. None have objected to it, but there is always a diversity of opinion about its conclusions. Nobody has ever questioned the integrity of the methodology. The value of the paper (to the students) is that they learn how difficult it is to establish the truth. Even if my 'employer' disagreed with the conclusions, it does not alter the value of the paper in showing how different approaches to research reveal different things about the claims surrounding events at Canary Wharf on 7/7. As I play a leading role in research training at the highest level, it would be fair to say my employer does have confidence in my ability to design research, and I have received bursaries for Research Excellence every year I've been at the university. I also won a national competition for a PhD bursary in 2002. This paper was written only for student consumption. I cannot help that many people have taken it from my website and circulated it (and uploaded it) to many other websites. It has become a much talked about paper (much more so that all my other papers - of which there are now about 40). However, I am happy to add a sane voice to the hysteria surrounding 7/7. To correct some misconceptions: 1. The article refers to "John Hill" throughout, whilst acknowledging at one point that he calls himself Muad'Dib. 2. I do not believe you will find statements anywhere on the internet that I support John Hill (in the sense that you imply), but I do engage in debate about the quality of the evidence in his documentary, and the attempt by the BBC to challenge it. I support pursuit of the truth, not John Hill. If John Hill's work takes us closer to the truth, I support his work, not him. 3. I utterly reject the idea that I am doing anything other than exercising my own judgement in a case where a person has been prosecuted for nothing more than trying to see justice done (as they see it). I have never met John Hill, and did not correspond with him until he contacted me to clarify issues in the first draft of the paper. I corresponded also with the BBC and J7 to clarify issues in the paper. He's not been favoured, or excluded, from discussions to improve the paper. Both he, and the BBC, are challenged in the paper over their political motives. This said, I have no problem supporting any person who intelligently follows the evidence available and draws credible conclusions from it. If that means I 'support John Hill' then so be it." Rory Ridley-Duff Sheffield Hallam University Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 strapping explosives to themselves and all the stuff they enjoy. Oh right, so that's what Muslims do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeathAxe Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 Oh right, so that's what Muslims do? stop it with the knee-jerk reactions, ok? I never said it is what they do, and you should have gathered by my previous comment that it was all in jest. Go get a nice drink to calm you down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 stop it with the knee-jerk reactions, ok? I never said it is what they do, and you should have gathered by my previous comment that it was all in jest. Go get a nice drink to calm you down. LOLz at this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 When I saw the thread title I thought it was virgin media spouting propaganda on channel 72 on sky or freeview. Was a bit disappointed to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 true , could not agree however i think motivation lies in decades of oppression ( in middle east case ) and occupation in the other ( Taliban ) rather than the media telling us they do it for heavenly sex ,. Its always somebody elses fault for what attrodities muslim extremists commit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 Originally Posted by Lady Star Surely if you are suicidal following decades of personal oppression, it would be a kinder thing not to take others with you when you commit suicide? Suicide bombers are weak minded, and are easily turned by those who wish to abuse them and those who they will later come into contact with... Those who have made rash promises as to what will happen to someone in heaven who has not only taken their own life, but also murdered others, are not likely to take up their own offer... They are simply not stupid enough! If you know anything different about islam that the kids who kill others when they are commiting suicide don't know, why not connect with them, and draw them into your way of thinking... You'd be doing them and those around them a great service... A very well balanced post by "Lady Star" You fudged the answer as per usual by posting:- I realy could not go into detail why people decide to do these things i was merely pointing out the logical fact that oppression / occupation will have a greater bearing on the matter then the few whabbis who promote this propaganda and the media who also push it..... Why don't you answer with a straight answer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 I realy could not go into detail why people decide to do these things Why not you go into great detail with everything else but fudge the factual issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 ok lets try again... Very trying indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.