Olympic Security

[lardy]

You're in great company Splotty, chris made the same prediction for the euros

[Splott Dave]

You're in great company Splotty, chris made the same prediction for the euros

I'm not doing any predictions. It would be an insult to the intelligence of the members on here to do that. I don't make the news, I'm just passing it on....

[Badly Ironed Shirt]

I'm not doing any predictions. It would be an insult to the intelligence of the members on here to do that. I don't make the news, I'm just passing it on....

No, to be fair you are not making the news. However, you have drawn a very odd link between "evidence" of Israeli's filming recent terrorist attacks, and the fact this security firm also comes from Israel. Not a logical link at all.

Let's see this evidence of filming.

[Splott Dave]

No, to be fair you are not making the news. However, you have drawn a very odd link between "evidence" of Israeli's filming recent terrorist attacks, and the fact this security firm also comes from Israel. Not a logical link at all.

Let's see this evidence of filming.

The first thing that I would have questioned is the link between 'Israeli filming' of two recent 'terrorist incidents' I may then have looked at why all the Israeli installed cameras magically failed to work on buses and tubes during 7/7. After that I might have questioned why Israeli operatives boasted on TV that the reason that they were caught filming the twin towers on 9/11 was because they were there to 'document the event', going back further in time I would have recalled that the same reason 'document the event' was carried out by another Israeli agent, (Abe Zapruder) in Dallas when President JFK parted company with his brains. Now call me the suspicious type if you like, but when something walks like a duck, looks like a duck and quacks like a duck it's a pretty reasonable assumption to think, that it's a duck...

[Badly Ironed Shirt]

The first thing that I would have questioned is the link between 'Israeli filming' of two recent 'terrorist incidents' I may then have looked at why all the Israeli installed cameras magically failed to work on buses and tubes during 7/7. After that I might have questioned why Israeli operatives boasted on TV that the reason that they were caught filming the twin towers on 9/11 was because they were there to 'document the event', going back further in time I would have recalled that the same reason 'document the event' was carried out by another Israeli agent, (Abe Zapruder) in Dallas when President JFK parted company with his brains. Now call me the suspicious type if you like, but when something walks like a duck, looks like a duck and quacks like a duck it's a pretty reasonable assumption to think, that it's a duck...

Not when the evidence is so heavily biased it forces people to come to the "logical" conclusion.

[Splott Dave]

Not when the evidence is so heavily biased it forces people to come to the "logical" conclusion.

I could have added the 'just happened to be passing' reason given by the Israeli TV crew who documented the Paris supermarket hostage incident, the former Israeli owned, Bataclan theatre massacre, or the Charlie Hebdo incident which was housed in a Rothschild owned building and financed by Israeli/French billionaire Xavier Neil, the owner of Golan telecommunications in Israel. but some may have thought that a bit too much like overkill....

[Splott Dave]

Not when the evidence is so heavily biased it forces people to come to the "logical" conclusion.

Everyone can own a different opinion, but they cannot own different facts.

[Badly Ironed Shirt]

Everyone can own a different opinion, but they cannot own different facts.

I try to base my opinions on facts. Something that is sadly lacking here.

[Splott Dave]

No, to be fair you are not making the news. However, you have drawn a very odd link between "evidence" of Israeli's filming recent terrorist attacks, and the fact this security firm also comes from Israel. Not a logical link at all.

Let's see this evidence of filming.

This sets the scene

http://www.debka.com/article/25551/N...ant-windshield

An Israeli (Mossad) news agency confirming that the rented ice cream truck was fitted with a "bullet resistant windshield". The reason? To create the impression that this was a well planned, well organised terrorist cell in France capable of stripping down a truck and retro-fitting bullet resistant windshields.

Then you have to have a cameraman who knows precisely what will happen and when it will happen.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/07/22/nice-munich/

With someone to feed him the information as to where these incidents will take place.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdSkFmqTrLY

[Badly Ironed Shirt]

This sets the scene

http://www.debka.com/article/25551/N...ant-windshield

An Israeli (Mossad) news agency confirming that the rented ice cream truck was fitted with a "bullet resistant windshield". The reason? To create the impression that this was a well planned, well organised terrorist cell in France capable of stripping down a truck and retro-fitting bullet resistant windshields.

Hang on. I am not speculating on whether or not the truck was fitted with a bullet resistant windshield. But, what evidence do you have that the article was written purely for the reason you stated? That is your opinion, it isn't a fact.

Then you have to have a cameraman who knows precisely what will happen and when it will happen.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/07/22/nice-munich/

This is a part of the Kevin Barrett show. Barrett is a conspiracy theorist who has made spurious claims about 9/11 with little evidence. The video backs up your claims - but that isn't saying much. It's a video where three people share opinions, but provide little evidence to back anything up.

With someone to feed him the information as to where these incidents will take place.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdSkFmqTrLY

1 + 1 + 1 = 338648294

Sorry, just the way I see these things.

[Splott Dave]

Hang on. I am not speculating on whether or not the truck was fitted with a bullet resistant windshield. But, what evidence do you have that the article was written purely for the reason you stated? That is your opinion, it isn't a fact.

I agree that I have opined. What is not in dispute is that Debka File released this as a news report. The date and time of release are clearly visible. What is also not in dispute is that at no time have they issued a retraction to their claim that an ice cream truck was fitted with a 'bullet-resistant windshield'. From experience I know that such a thing is impossible, as the thickness of a bullet-resistant windshield simply would not fit into the original surrounding frame. The entire frame holding a windscreen would have to be re-engineered to accommodate the extra thickness and weight of a bullet-resistant windshield.

So we are left with two possible alternatives. Either Debka made a mistake in that bit of information in which case they would have issued a retraction or they made the claim deliberately knowing it to be false.

Which begs the question why?

This is a part of the Kevin Barrett show. Barrett is a conspiracy theorist who has made spurious claims about 9/11 with little evidence. The video backs up your claims - but that isn't saying much. It's a video where three people share opinions, but provide little evidence to back anything up.

I don't see any point in getting into a link fest but you can, within minutes, verify all sorts of alternative sources which do not copy or are not copies of Kevin Barret's article.


1 + 1 + 1 = 338648294

Sorry, just the way I see these things.[/QUOTE]

Deleting tweets which are cached anyway, showing the same person at two different locations, in two different countries, where a 'terrorist incident' takes place and then writing it off as just a coincidence is one possibility, but I don't know of any other such coincidence and I doubt that most people would swallow the possibility that it was coincidence when all the other information is taken into consideration.