Look, I know this is probably a waste of time, but

[mr blur]

can we please not have a load of threads ranting about how the intended bombs in my country yesterday and today were either a CIA plot, a MIHOP from Brown, Bush or Blair or any combination of the three, or a set-up by our own police force to keep us all trembling in our homes in fear?

It doesn't help at all, it makes all the UK DUers really pissed off and it makes all the people willing to make such wild comments seem incredibly dumb.

You co-operation would be be appreciated.

[Maat]

1. You've got my cooperation!

Not that I trust anything our respective governments say anymore; but, somehow, the truth comes out somehow.

Peace on Earth (I'm focusing on that peace consciousness right now).

[Olney Blue]

2. I agree with you. Investigations and data are needed at this time.

[Throwing Stones]

3. I'm not of the MIHOP camp

but how, exactly, does it make one "seem incredibly dumb" to question the motives behind the bombing?

Do you know something that you should share?

The * misadministration has proven over and over again ad infinitum that it deserves zero credulity, so why shouldn't there be both questions and speculation?

[kimmerspixelated]

4. I respect your wishes, but

you must understand that BUSHITS are capable of anything! And the corporate media will do ANYTHING to cover up his massive turds he flings out in the world!

[cloudbase]

5. You're right, M.B.

It was a waste of time.

[Octafish]

8. How can anyone trust Bush and Cheney?

The same fucks who let Osama bin Laden's family fly out of the country when they were grounding the rest of the nation's air traffic, including medical emergency flights?

Yes. They should be cleared of suspicion. And don't mention anything negative because it will give DU a bad name with the people at Free Republic.

[TZ]

16. What does a bomb in Britain have to do with Bush +Cheney?

Seriously I can't seem to see any connection. The only thing I see is some dumb ass home grown wanna be terrorists who fortunately have no clue what they are doing.

[EFerrari]

23. Well, our black ops have yet to respect a national border.

I don't blame anyone who is speculating about this incident. They'd be remiss if they didn't. :shrug:

[Octafish]

24. The original poster implied there were many on DU making a connection between CIA and the event.

My point was Bush (when Cheney says it's 'OK') heads the executive branch of the Government of the United States and based on what we know, does not deserve to be cleared of suspicion.

From the OP:

...can we please not have a load of threads ranting about how the intended bombs in my country yesterday and today were either a CIA plot, a MIHOP from Brown, Bush or Blair or any combination of the three, or a set-up by our own police force to keep us all trembling in our homes in fear?...

Here's a bit of background on what Bush missed regarding warnings of another terrorist attack, from the summer of 2001:

Plot to assassinate Bush – reports

Ashcroft Flying High

Why would Osama bin Laden want to kill Dubya, his former business partner?

Genoa braces for G8 summit

So, if these turds didn't lift a finger to stop something they knew about back in July 2001, what makes you think they're worthy to be cleared of suspicion now?

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

29. SHUSH, YOU!!! Do not tie intentional psy-ops (media) against Americans to the possibility that,...

,..."THOSE PEOPLE" are willing to "create" fear in order to control and manipulate people.

SHUSH!!!

:P

[Octafish]

31. Sorry. Thanks for reminding me. The Big Shots IGNORED Tenet when his hair was on fire...

What does one have to do to cut through the propaganda?



Tenet briefed Condescenda regarding Al Quaeda on July 10, 2001.

Rice More Sordid Than Foley

On her recommendation, Tenet briefed Ashcroft and Rumsfeld (not Powell, though).

Rumsfeld, Ashcroft said to have received warning of attack

An exasperated Tenet then ordered an underling to brief Monkey in Crawford in August.

While Bush vacationed, 9/11 warnings went unheard.

Thanks for keeping me in line, sicksicksick_N_tired.

I promise to be good and not ask any questions that may pose a problem for our sensibilities.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

33. *pat pat* GOOOD Octafish! Good boy,...

,...uh, or girl. :7

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

28. You have asked the wrong question. The question is:

Why is coverage of a nominal event SO WIDESPREAD,..e-s-p-e-c-i-a-l-l-y in the US of A that had widespread LIVE coverage BEFORE THE UK?

DOES THAT COVERAGE HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS COUNTRY'S LEADERSHIP?

Does it?

It's not about "events",...this is about intentional manipulation of our people.

Whose FAULT is that?

Who is FEEDING our media with all this "news"?

In case you missed it, we've been talking about the issue on point: government-sponsored propaganda.

[Usrename]

49. no clue what they are doing...

now honestly, who does that sound like?

[Turbineguy]

26. On the other hand...

the apparent lack of success of the attack gives rise to the suspicion the perpetrators might very well be Bush appointees.

[cloudbase]

34. Maybe they got some of the guys from

the Interlake deal.

(private joke between Turbine guy and myself)

[DeepModem Mom]

6. K&R. I lived in Britain a while. Good police work has thwarted some actual terror there. nt

[baldguy]

7. And dumbass Bushies on this side of the pond

have thwarted said good police work to keep people afraid.

[marions ghost]

9. You've got to understand that many Americans

are increasingly paranoid about what has happened over here, mr blur sir. We have been repeatedly shocked and scared by the actions of our own govt. We have learned to trust nothing and question everything. Maybe things aren't that bad in Britain, but until you experience it I wouldn't be so judgmental. The problem is...so far the 'conspiracy theorists' have been rather correct.

Until such time as you experience such spectacular abuses at the hands of your own govt, you'll just have to see us as dumb twits. And don't bother getting pissed off at people you consider dumb. It's a waste of time. But of course thanks so very much for the feedback. :toast:

[uppityperson]

11. Thank you for writing that so concisely and politely. Seriously. nt

[cui bono]

19. Agreed. Thank you. nt

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[marions ghost]

35. oh dear

my lack of cooperation is not appreciated. Ah, if only all we had to worry about over here was the usual govt stupidity and obvious lies. Then we could all cluck and pontificate & go on our merry way.

With all due respect mr blur, I'm not sure that you can really understand the nature of the tyranny we are dealing with here. If you could, I think you would be MORE understanding of the speculation you label as 'wild,' instead of annoyed by it. If you have ever experienced a tyrannical govt and watched all your "freedoms" dwindle, I imagine you would better understand. Paranoia often arises from a situation of repeated abuse and profound distrust. Your reaction tells me you have not truly lived this kind of nightmare.

If I am wrong about this, feel free to correct me--if the British are equally abused by the govt in your opinion, enlighten me. But what is happening here now is more Orwellian than you can likely imagine. I'm not talking physical terrorism so much as fear-mongering and mind control. Perhaps Germans might understand the situation better than you. At any rate I don't think your comparison with the Irish conflict really compares. For one thing AT LEAST you knew what the fight was about re. Ireland. Our soldiers in Iraq can't always figure that basic question out. And neither can many US citizens at this point.

[LeftishBrit]

36. As far as I can see...

Mr Blur was ONLY asking for restraint in producing conspiracy theories about things that are happening in the UK. He was not commenting on American reactions to their own government.

[marions ghost]

37. When something happens that looks like terrorism

you are going to get speculation. Sometimes it's off base, sometimes it's correct. However mr blur called such people 'dumb' and called for restraint (ie. muzzling, self-censorship, etc). Just how is airing a variety of opinions on a message board hurting anyone? I am merely asking mr blur to consider that there MAY be reasons he hasn't thought of--as to why shell-shocked Americans would wonder if there is a connection to the US in this, which is not an impossibility, right? We are still affected by Tony's long slow dance with Little Boots you may be sure. Do I have to argue how economic globalism now homogenizes us all as never before. Yes, maybe there is too much imagination. But we have suffered by having too little imagination. We have found our worst imaginings to be true.

If you or mr blur had ever experienced what we have gone through in this country, I imagine that you might be a little more tolerant of what appears to you interference in your business. I'm saying I don't think it comes out of arrogance or insult whatsoever.

We should be able to discuss this without hostility.

[TZ]

41. Look at it this way.....

The idea that a car bombing incident in England MUST be linked to something with Bush/Cheney and the US is the same kind of unthinking unquestioning rush to judgement that led everyone to believe at first that the Oklahoma City bombing *MUST* have been the work of Middle Eastern Terrorists because everybody "knew" only Arabs blew things up.
I think that this whole attempt at linking what seems to be a homegrown British issue with American politics with NO evidence IS both americancentric and arrogant.
I have some international friends and they often complain about just such assumptions. And I assure you, this "just asking questions" nonsense is insulting to our UK friends.

[marions ghost]

42. I know Europeans too

and I think we are all more alike in "rushing to judgment" about these incidents than we are different.

We in America may be guilty of jumping to conclusions, to be sure. But there is also a quickness to judge our immediate responses on a US-based discussion board --in a superficial way. I can easily see how some of us might appear to be "Americancentric and arrogant" to Europeans. They are entitled to that assumption as there are plenty of examples of it, esp with the 'America Uber Alles' posture of the Bush administration. It's true in some cases, absolutely true. But among more aware and informed Americans there is more likely to be guilt rather than arrogance-- guilt about how our govt manipulates and exploits other countries, which also drives the idea that if there's a disturbing incident, we must be involved.

So I am suggesting that there might be factors other than arrogance & insensitivity driving this particular form of speculation. Living in fear makes people strange. An abused population will tend to respond to threats less objectively. We are a population suffering from abuse and some would call it verging on tyranny. We have suffered from being too trusting of our govt and from not acknowledging our worst fears. Our most outlandish imaginings have turned out to contain truth. I would rather see people expressing their worst fears rather than stifling them at this point, even out of politeness to our European friends.

As far as whether terrorists are home-grown or not, well obviously you have to consider both. There is not a neat and tidy division in most of our minds at this point. The possibility of "home grown" meaning an insider job which appears to come from outside is not so remote. Take the Kennedy assassination story, where the "home grown" aspect no longer means a lone deranged gunman. And as someone else said here--we live in a post-911 world. The unthinkable happened. And we still don't have all the answers. 'The Truth' about anything is very slippery these days...

I could be wrong, but my perception is that Europeans still have more faith in their govts than do many Americans. I'm not sure that they account for this difference when they judge us. There is both Eurocentrism and Ameri-centrism, I'm sure you are aware. I seek understanding.

[TZ]

46. You make some very good points

And I think one of the biggest destructive things of the last 6 years of Bush+Cheney and Co is the creeping paranoia about EVERYTHING and anything. Now, don't get me wrong, I understand where the paranoia is coming from and some of it is no doubt justified but it is damaging and dangerous to walk around distrusting everything, remember as well that there are people who have unhealthy paranoid tendencies that are untreated and undiagnosed and the tin foil hat talk plays into those unhealthy people's fears which is why I dislike irrational speculation based on fear and paranoia and not fact.

On the american-centrism thing...in the last year I have gotten to be friends with several people from other contries including Britain but in particular from Australia. I realized that I am very ignorant of the Australian culture, yet all my friends seem to know quite a bit about America and its culture. That never felt right to me. Plus one of my friends was trying to "learn" to pronounce words in the American way, and that made me feel bad that in order to fit in he and his wife felt that they needed to talk more like us. So I have become much more aware of the global american-centrism....

[tammywammy]

10. too late

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x162182

[RB TexLa]

But don't you know Karl Rove just pushes a button on his fax machine and causes

things like this to happen. Of course there will be a claim that has been indicted for it and will be arrested in 48 hours. And of course anyone who after two or three months of no indictment or arrest questions the claim is receiving a check from CNN, personally delivered by Tom DeLay to hide the truth.

[tammywammy]

13. :)

[NoPasaran]

44. No, silly, Rove uses the fax machine to control the weather!

Everyone knows he makes things blow up by shuffling the tunes on his iPod.

[Jacobin]

12. It amazes me

that so many people don't think that some muslims are pissed off enough at the west to retaliate.
The hype on cable channels is ridiculous, but yes, many are pissed off enough to attack us. I know I would be if my country were attacked.

[DeepModem Mom]

25. Exactly. Can't have it both ways. Can't say that Iraq is breeding terrorists...

which I believe it is -- and then dismiss every incident that might be the work of terrorists. Can't have it both ways.

[TZ]

14. Sounds very sensible and rational

so likely it won't happen.;-)
However its so arrogant and americancentric to assume that EVERY FRICKING THING that happens in the world has to do with Bush. I always wondered how a largely incompetant administration can be thought to manipulate world events so well. Sheesh.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

15. Well, we live in a post 9-11 world, where our governments have done everything to manipulate,...

,...the facts.

I am sensitive to FACTS.

We have a media that regurgitates OPINIONS and SPECULATIONS,...not FACTS.

So, all I am left to do is question, question and question the information WAR AGAINST CITIZENS,...IN SEEK OF FACTS. Unfortunately, those questions requirea lot of speculation (as fact-finders do)about what has/is happening.

It's not my fault that the corporacrats FORCE-FEED anything other than, FACTS.

[whistle]

17. No problemo...

[cui bono]

18. Question everything.

How many things that BushCo has done that have come out as fact would you have said the same thing about?

[LeftishBrit]

39. None.

I can't think of anything they've been proved to have done that I wouldn't have deemed possible (e.g. election fraud; war based on lies).

But all these things had a motivation, and were not just evil for evil's sake. What would be the motivation here? To make the British support the war on terra? But it does not have that effect. You must understand that the British have a very different attitude to the war and terrorism than was prevalent in the USA. Most people here opposed the Iraq war from the beginning; and even the minority who supported it mostly did so because they believed the lies about WMD, not because they thought this would make us safer from terrorism. In fact many of us thought, especially after the Madrid bomb, that our involvement in the war was making us more of a target for terrorists, and 7/7 confirmed this view, and made us even more anti-war than before.

If the terrorist threats have influenced some of British public opinion in a seriously negative way, it has been in quite a different way: making some people, mostly those already inclined to racism, more prejudiced against British Moslems of Asian descent. But this is not something that would benefit Bush or Blair or Brown - if anything it would be to the disadvantage of the latter two, as racist preoccupations tend to lead to an anti-Labour vote. If one wanted to be tinfoilish, one might therefore suggest that the BNP or Norman Tebbit had been responsible for the bombs! I hasten to add that I don't think so for a moment, but the idea would make as much or more sense than suspecting Bush.

[NoPasaran]

20. Some would say

There are even some things that happen in this country (the US of A) that are not the doing of the CIA, Bush, Karl Rove, or even the MSM.

[welshTerrier2]

21. what can we truly know?

the whole tin-foil thing presents us with some difficult choices.

to be sure, the US has a very, very long history of lying to the American people and people all over the world about exactly what we've done to manipulate both domestic and foreign opinion. we have planted false stories in the press, assassinated foreign leaders, prepared and disseminated false documents, paid off foreign agents and much, much more.

what standard of proof should we require before we are free to cast doubts and raise speculations about any given event?

if a car bomb plot is discovered, are we required to know "the real story and have adequate proof" before we raise doubts about the possible involvement of our own government? it seems to me to make any assertion about these events, either accepting the "official line" or raising conspiracy theories, must operate without knowing the truth. it seems to me we are consigned to run on our gut feel for the reporters on the scene, the quality of the media, the history of those in positions of power, and so on. the system of belief should be "agnosticism"; not assertion. we cannot know the truth in the near-term.

so, you assert that promoting such conspiracy theories sounds "incredibly dumb". is there more basis for such an assertion than a conspiracy point of view? it's truly hard to see why. to argue that "oh, come on, that's crazy" might sound all "common sensey" or rational but, in the end, it remains pure speculation.

the history that we do know should certainly raise very serious doubts about that which is "so obvious" but not actually true. the CIA itself is in the process of releasing miles and miles of information about the insane things they've done. why should this situation or any situation receive "hands off" treatment from the public?

this is not to argue this incident was a conspiracy; nor is it to argue otherwise ...

[EFerrari]

22. It's not a waste of time and I'll do my best to respect your wish

but what you are witnessing is a bunch of people that have been lied to and repeatedly victimized by the White House.

Sorry!

[conspirator]

27. Yes, but the police should not advertise that these are Islamic terrorists. Instead

they should be called british or homegrown terrorists.

[Igel]

32. They say all politics is local.

Many Americans take this to heart, and fervently believe that since America is so important, so exceptional, so unique ... that all politics everywhere in the world (and, indeed, potentially the universe) is local *only* wrt America. Wapakoneta, if the truth be told.

Bomb goes off in Bangladesh, it's because of America, done by America, or relevant to American politics; it has no local (to Bangladesh, that is) origin or consequence because, well, surely nobody cares about their own local politics (as if such a thing could exist) or their own values or goals. Only America matters. Same for a killing in Sudan, a case of diarrhea in China, or a pimple on a poor person in Uruguay. All because of America and caused by/due to/relevant to ... America.

So, of course, we *must* find the connection to American politics in the Glasgowing Cherokee. There is one, we just have to find it. A warning from * to Brown? A veiled threat at the US? Done by the CIA? NSA? FDA? Perhaps a PETA objection to *'s fishing expedition. Who knows? But it's there, and we will monomaniacally locate it, reveal it, expose it.

American Exceptionalism, redux. The same kind of insanity as old fashioned American exceptionalism, just chocolate-flavored instead of strawberry.

[LeftishBrit]

38. Great post and thanks!

[marions ghost]

45. this simplistic hyperbole about Americans

--ie. that we all have self-absorbed blinders on--is what some believe, with good reason...
but it's not the whole story IMO.

Fact is, if a bomb goes off somewhere it's NOT crazy to think there may be an American connection. Unfortunately. Some of what we call craziness these days is situationally induced.

'Wild speculation' is another way of expressing the angst of not knowing (and maybe never knowing) the exact truth about terrorist attacks. It's the response of a population kept perpetually in the dark and denied information and proper investigations.

But it's easier just to otherize a segment of the population as bananas. Then you can return to a comfortably rational zone where everything is either/or.

[LeftishBrit]

47. I certainly don't think ALL Americans have self-absorbed blinders about other countries

But some do, some of the time, and terrorism-related situations tend to bring it out on ALL sides.

Some people on the left have been suggesting that it must all be linked to Bush-related conspiracies; and Giuliani has been using it to advance his campaign and his own conspiracy theories about illegal immigrants.

The British also often have self-absorbed blinders about other countries, and for example often assume that it's everybody else's job to learn to speak English, and that we don't need to learn any other languages. I think this ethnocentrism is pretty well universal across different countries. So we're not making an anti-American statement.

I do feel that, perhaps because terrorism in America is a much more recent phenomenon than in Britain, and first expressed itself in a far more drastic way, that Americans are more inclined than British people to react to terrorism in terms of their feelings about the state and its leaders - either "Our strong leaders are all that we have to protect us against the terrorists" or "Our bad leaders must in some way be directly responsible for this". For us, though we recognize that government policies and (in)competence can affect the risk of terrorism, we do not link the terrorist threat so closely to our reactions to our leaders, whether for or against. That may be just my perception, but I think there is a bit of a cultural difference here which may lead to some misunderstandings.

We would not blame Americans for making wrong or partly wrong assumptions about our situation, as we do the same with others, all the time. However, what does irritate us is when our perspective and experiences, especially on things that affect us directly, are disregarded in favour of fitting in with American (or any country's) existing political agendas; and when we are treated as naive or wrong when we point out the facts with which we live.

To give an example which won't be controversial on this board: Giuliani used the car bomb, together with a piece of incompetence by a Shropshire bank which misidentified a living woman as dead(!), as indicating that we don't have enough ability to keep accurate track of people's records, and used this to justify increased record-keeping and tougher policies on illegal immigrants in America. The point is - incompetence in record-keeping by banks (a well-known phenomenon here!) has absolutely nothing to do with anti-terrorist security or with the current attempted outrage; and neither has anything to do with the illegal immigration problem in the USA. Giuliani was linking all sorts of things which are not connected, because it fitted in with his existing political agenda.

I don't think anyone will disagree with me on the above; but I do feel that some on the left make similar links between unconnected issues, and also exaggerate rumours. For example, there are reports, perhaps originating in our own right-wing press, that technology has been used to create machinery that not only spies on us, but gives us 'Big Brother'- type orders and scoldings. Well, maybe a few people and organizations have used such technology; but I have never been scolded by a Big Brother voice from an inanimate object in my life, and it irritates me when this is treated as typical of Britain and as indicating that we're a 'police state'. Similarly, there is no doubt that Tony has collaborated too much with Bush, but this does not mean that everything bad that goes on here is somehow linked to Bush. Assuming links where there are no links, and patterns where there are no patterns, is a universal human characteristic, and we Brits don't blame Americans or others for making such links, but we do get a bit annoyed when we point out the lack of such links and are still disbelieved.

[marions ghost]

51. OK fair enough

thanks for your insightful reply. I think we can agree that assumptions need to be grounded in facts.
And I can understand how it rankles British and Europeans when Americans assume links where there are no links, without waiting for the full story. And we certainly agree that Rudy Giuliani is a lying opportunist with no moral compass whatsover, having oozed from the same corner of Hell as Darth Cheney IMO. Where they and their ilk are involved anywhere in the world, you may be sure there's a sinister American connection. Yes, Americans see these individual "leaders" as controlling things directly, because they so often do these days.

We are living in a time when the truth about anything is very hard to pin down, and especially in our country with the incredible corruption, media control, and loss of the usual checks and balances found in a democracy. I'm just saying that people who are abused, dehumanized, and kept in a state of anxiety --will have a visceral & perhaps illogical reactions to anything that appears to be a threat. There's a psychological as well as a political component in any group response. I'm not sure that you on the other side of the pond quite understand what has occurred here in the last few years.

[DFW]

40. I sincerely hope your post was NOT a waste of time

For the sakes of us on both sides of the pond!

[MedleyMisty]

43. This doesn't apply to everyone, probably

But I think that at least some people aren't trying to suggest that Bush had anything to do with it.

I think they're upset at the way that our media is using it as they use pretty much everything else -as fear propaganda. So I don't think it has much of anything to do with Britain or who's behind the bombing or the British reaction to it or any of the facts, really. I think it's more about the news coverage of the event here in the US.

[LeftishBrit]

48. Yes...

and it does sound as though some of the American media are going over-the-top over this. I agree on that point completely!

[BornagainDUer]

50. I'll use Bushboy's standards of evidence to evaluate this

situation.

It was their doing until proven otherwise. That's the way they do they're thing. They attacked Iraq based on that principle. Fuck them if we fuck up in blaming them.

Those who deprive others of their rights without due process don't deserve due process for themselves.