[Intelforum] Sources: August terror plot is a "fiction"
IntelForum Mailing List
intelforum at lists101.his.com
Thu Nov 16 00:04:20 EST 2006
From: "David Guyatt" <hammer at firenet.uk.com>
To: intelforum at lists101.his.com
Subject: Re: Sources: August terror plot is a "fiction"
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 15:10:43 -0000
There are, as an able British member of this list once said, conspiracy
theories and conspiracy facts (sorry if I mangled what you said RR).
Accusing someone of being a conspiracist, or conspiracy theorist, is very
often used as a cheap and lazy form of rhetoric, partly intended to divert
attention away from presented hard-to-argue facts and partly intended to
avoid the effort of conducting due diligence. I would argue that this
thread has been subjected to a sufficient dose of this intellectually lazy
In any event, the tenor of the term "conspiracist" implies that government
always tell the truth, that organised conspiracies don't happen and that
anyone doubting the official version of events is slightly dotty and
therefore open for a spot of witch dunking.
However, when we get down to it, it becomes self evident that governments
don't tell the truth. There are so many instances of this that it would
take an encyclopaedia to enumerate just some of them. The trip would take
us back in history past Roman occupied Jerusalem and further back to ancient
Egypt and beyond still further. The facts are that politicians are known
for their ability to lie, twist, spin and betray. What they are not known
for is telling the truth. It is hardly surprising, therefore, that
conspiracies and government are made for one another.
History is littered with actual conspiracies simply because the act of
conspiracy is to mankind what icy precipitation is to Antarctica. It is
something most of us indulge in at one time or another. As a former
international banker I can speak with personal conviction on this subject.
Likewise as a journalist.
In any event, the point I wish to make is that everything I stated in this
thread was based on factual evidence that was meticulously collected (which
is why Mr. Farmer was unable to refute it). I know this to be the case, as
I know the journalist who collected it and also the assisting researcher is
a dear friend of mine -- and I followed some of the knocks and bumps they
encountered along the way.
I will close by saying - again - that my posts on this subject have been
primarily focused on Atta's narcotics connections before 911. I keep
labouring this point because Messrs Farmer and Chambers seem to be wilfully
blind to it, preferring the ease of use of rhetoric to buttress their
It should also be glaringly obvious to all but one-eyed kings why my
attention is thus focused.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the IntelForum