Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Riots In London- Martial Law Imminent
Pilots For 9/11 Truth Forum > General > Latest News
A few days ago, an incident took place involving a man called Mark Duggan.
The official story initially stated that there was an ongoing operation against gun-crime, and that Mr. Duggan- who had been travelling in a mini-taxi-- had fired at police and was subsequently shot.

His family had to wait for hours before they were even informed as to Mark Duggan's fate.

The eventual result was rioting breaking out in London, which quickly escalated: Mark Duggan happened to be black, and the black community have had problems with racist police-officers on more than one occasion.

By now, it has turned out that the bullet which hit the radio of the injured police-officer was actually hit by a police-bullet.

For the past three nights, there has been rioting on a massive scale.

This is the same Metropolitain police which was involved in the Charles de Menezes-shooting after the London bombings (which, according to the subsequent inquiry, was not an 'unlawful killing'), and which has been compromised by the connections between senior police officers and Rupert Murdoch's media which has resulted in both the chief and deputy chief "leaving their office": Corruption on a massive scale.

All of this has by now developed to the point were Prime Minister Cameron has convened a meeting of 'COBRA' (...and I had to look up what the hell it is: "Cabinet Office Briefing Room A")
There is now a very real possibilty that British troops may be deployed to get the situation under control-- and that martial law may be declared.

Anyone who has seen the footage of massive fires in London may think "Well- if it's neccessary--it's neccessary..."

But the question is "How the hell can something like this develope in the first place". People in London may well only see the immediate threat posed by gangs of violent youths setting buildings on fire.

They do not look far enough into the future...
Lots of people are calling for it (Martial law) They want the army to come in and deal with it too. Last night fires were left to burn, not just shops, but homes too. How nobody died in one of the fires is a miracle. Tonight there are 16,000 police on duty, all around London, they are ready and have said tonight will be different. Shops in many towns have been closed since 3pm, everybody is waiting for it too kick off.
Londons not a nice place be right now.
Yes...I saw the footage; "miracle" sums it up.

This is stage-managed. Police keep emphasizing how "spontaneous" all this is.

On sunday, a British journalist gave an interview to RTE; he said that there were small groups of 20 to 30 people who co-ordinated their actions by mobile phone; they simply identify the locations were riot police are concentrated and then go someplace else...

An incident which sparks all this which looks increasingly like a major blunder-- at the very best; and which looks like a pre-meditated attempt to kick loose a riot at the very worst.
And then...

Teenagers who have the tactical abilities of military officers...?
Police just standing by letting it happen...?
Major fires being started all over the place, with the firebrigade being pushed to the outer limits...?

And THEN...

The ideal solution: MARTIAL LAW.

There have been suggestions that this "...could easily happen in the US as well": Race riots...

At this point, I wouldn't trust the Metropolitain police as far as I could throw them-- they are owned by Rupert Murdoch. And some of the questions asked about the phone hacking scandal lately have been touching on contacts between different media empires...

I just hope to god that martial law will be averted; otherwise it will set a precedent which would have extremely serious consequences.
I just took a look at that Australian TV-station from the youtube-video above:

They are a division of Ten Network Holdings:

Key people Nick Falloon (Chairman)
Lachlan Murdoch (acting CEO)

And Lachlan Murdoch happenes to be...

the eldest son of Australian-American media mogul Rupert Murdoch and his former wife Anna Torv.

Reality is that Home Secretary Theresa May has not ruled out "new tactics":

Speaking to the BBC, May declined to rule out a host of options, including the use of water cannon, military support for the police, or a curfew.

It seems that the main proponent of martial law in Britain happens to be-- the Murdoch-clan...
According to an account provided by the IPCC, Duggan was a passenger in a minicab when the cab was stopped Thursday evening by submachine gun-toting officers from Scotland Yard's Operation Trident -- a special operation "dealing with gun crime among black communities, in particular drug-related shootings."

What happened next is unclear due to conflicting reports by the IPCC and London-based media, which only have basic facts in common: multiple shots were fired, at least one bullet was lodged in a police radio worn by one of the officers and when it was over, Duggan was dead.

Based on the IPCC account, two shots were fired by a single officer. Later, after Duggan was pronounced dead at the scene, the IPCC said a post-mortem examination revealed he had been shot in the right arm but was felled by a single shot to the chest. A non-official handgun was recovered from the scene, but it did not appear that gun had been fired, the IPCC said.

Though the IPCC does not mention other shots being fired, it did confirm another bullet was recovered from the radio worn by one of the police officers. That bullet was consistent with those fired from the submachine guns carried by the officers.

Along with scouring the area for CCTV footage, the IPCC said it is taking statements from witnesses including the driver of the minicab who was not injured but "badly shaken by what he saw."

One witness, quoted in the London Evening Standard, said that police shot Duggan dead as he lay on the ground.

"About three or four police officers had both men pinned on the ground at gunpoint. They were really big guns and then I heard four loud shots. The police shot him on the floor," the witness said.

In an earlier IPCC statement, the commission pushed back against the idea Duggan had been executed.

"Speculation that Mark Duggan was 'assassinated' in an execution style [incident] involving a number of shots to the head are categorically untrue," the IPCC said.

The officers involved in the shooting reportedly described Duggan as having made a movement like he was drawing a gun before he was shot, according to The London Times.

Scotland Yard declined to comment on Duggan's alleged criminal history.

(Edit:) Evidently the supposed witness claimed that there were four shots, and that Duggan was shot on the ground.
As far as I could make out, no one mentioned "four shots to the head"; that concept seems to have originated with the IPCC.

This is the article which mentions the eyewitness directly:

However, a 20-year-old witness, who works nearby but did not want to be named, said: "I was coming home from work when I saw it all happening in front of my eyes.

"I came around the corner and saw about six unmarked police cars cornering a people carrier near a bus stop.

"I heard the police shout something like 'Don't move' and I saw them drag the driver out of the car. I don't know if they dragged the other guy out in the passenger seat. He was the one who got shot - the passenger.

"About three or four police officers had both men pinned on the ground at gunpoint. They were really big guns and then I heard four loud shots. The police shot him on the floor."

He said that there were small groups of 20 to 30 people who co-ordinated their actions by mobile phone.

Names and faces please. Funny how they rarely identify the perps because they are the perps.

'Names and faces'--- Good question.

What's strange is that the police keep emphasizing how 'spontaneous' this whole thing is.
Small groups of people who keep moving to areas were they are certain no police is deployed sounds anything but 'spontaneous'.

By now, as georgie 101 has pointed out, there are 16000 police deployed in London.

Result? It's now happening in several other British cities. Just 'angry youngsters', or 'criminal elements'...?

They are co-ordinating this on a nation-wide scale-- by using mobile phones...?

This is orchestrated-- and I highly doubt that it's orchestrated by the black community in Britain.
In some instances, police seem to have been standing there doing nothing at all-- while buildings got torched. I have even read about claims that police "...were apparently under orders not to arrest certain people", but that can't be substantiated right now.

There have been incidents in several other British cities, but police there seem to be on top of it-- strange that they couldn't get a grip in London, no?

A gang of boys and girls, most no older than 15, and some apparently as young as eight, broke into a row of shops in Bethnal Green, in Londonís East End. As they left carrying piles of clothes, a police car drove past. It did not stop.

Locals waited for 40 minutes after the first 999 calls were made for two police vans to arrive at the scene, already too late.

On a night of untold destruction that left businesses and homes across the city in flames, it counted as a small incident. But the detail said so much about how life in Britainís capital city has changed over the course of the past four days.


Riots flared in English cities and towns tonight as London waited anxiously to see if thousands of police deployed on its streets could head off the youths who had rampaged across the capital virtually unchecked for three nights.

Police said they might consider using baton rounds - non-lethal rubber or plastic bullets. "That's a tactic that will be used by the Metropolitan Police if deemed necessary," Deputy Assistant Commissioner Stephen Kavanagh told reporters. However, he ruled out calling the army onto the streets.
last protest march i attended landed me in the middle of two hundred thousand rather diverse people. young, old, black, white etc etc etc. sometimes we find common cause regardless of who orchestrated it.
unfortunately, most lash out at the wrong targets. the authorities count on that.

when 'austerity' starts to hit your locale...mobs will form and calls for more government intervention follow, for safety's sake don't you know. problem - reaction- solution. tptb hegelian dialectic at work.

my 2 cents...
This is what I don't understand here:
A spokesman for the police said that " the past, they would have reacted with water-cannon and teargas...But these days our reponse is more measured".

You should think that a "measured response" depends on the situation at hand. If that would be the case-- then there should have been a response the moment residential buildings were set on fire.
RTE showed footage last night which showed an entire street on fire- dozens of buildings.
The place looks like a warzone.

This is from the previous night:

They have been extremely fortunate up to now that they haven't had dozens of dead bodies on their hands.

There are no water-cannon, and apparently no tear-gas; police have been standing idly by watching, police have been completely overpowered, police have been inept.
But there are 15-year-olds who can organise something this size and direct it like a military operation...?

tptb hegelian dialectic at work.

You said it... But: Who are 'TPTB' at this moment? The British government-- or certain people cooking their own broth?
firstly, according to a retired london metro police officer high up in that entity before his retirement, he related that the uk decided years ago to not acquire water cannons. unlike all the other european countries. even more to the point, he related that the ipcc[sic] personnel had completely punted after the shooting. from the tone and content of his commentary, his assessment aired as the uk police being engaged in a thoroughgoing "cock-up".

i think that you can find/hear all this on one of today's bebe broadcast. i heard it in houston on kuhf 88.7 between 15:00-16:00hrs.

it is possible that is the entirety of the truth.

but there may be other perspectives. one, that the police decided to provoke this rioting as a payback for the resignations of the murdoch vassals running the london metro police[aka bobbies].

two, the promotion of the programs[pogroms] intended to accelerate the british police state. some of you may recall posts i made concerning my volunteer role as an aclu observer during the anti-war demonstrations in metro-boston during the vietnam war era. there remains no question in my mind that the fomentors of the demonstrations, especially those that exploded into some levels of violence, were undercover us military. as i think i may have written long ago, before a major demonstration at harvard in 1967-1968, i observed military changing from uniforms into mufti in the parking lot of the building that harvard granted rotc.

agents provocateurs are long time players in the theater of repression. the theater of imposing totalitarianism[aka tyranny]. and the british monarchy and its subalterns have employed this tactic for decades. in fact, it was the theme of one of joseph conrad's earliest novels, the secret agent. this novel is often considered the first literary examination of the duplicity of a nominally fair-minded state. the purpose of that agent provocateurism: to lame all those opposed to the aristocracy and the monarchy. all those seeking social justice.

I think there may be some truth in both the points you're making...

Just came across this video:

According to some people from the neighbourhood were Duggan was shot, police were monitoring the area for days beforehand-- and the taxi was taken away and returned before being 'examined'.

The Jean de Menezes-case was declared to be a cockup as well back when it unfolded-- but only after the official version could absolutely no longer be 'sold'. The similarities are striking.
In the meantime, some rightwing yobbos have been trying to capitalise on the whole thing-- judging from some of the comments underneath the youtube-videos.

It looks very much as if Cameron is not willing to to Murdoch the favour of declaring martial law-- which is a blessing.
But it remains to be seen if the subsequent inquiries lead anywhere. This entire thing is more than a bit strange...

QUOTE (Devilsadvocate @ Aug 8 2011, 01:13 AM) *
The Jean de Menezes-case....

was an execution, mob style hit, if you will. 7 shots to the head?

if it's true that 300+ have been killed in police custody since '98, w/o a single cop being prosecuted, what is one to make of that? tptb give tacit approval to the enforcer tier of the nwo pyramid.
An account of the LA Rodney King riots by a survivor who was caught up in it...

The thread is quite long, however the contribution by user "Texas Arcane" is the interesting part (Starts at post #6)

That's when I began to comprehend what had happened. The arsonists had destroyed an entire city and brought it to it's knees with empty beer bottles and a few dollars worth of lamp oil available anywhere. Probably less than thirty human beings had ravaged the city of Los Angeles worse than a nuclear weapon might have for less money than what most people spend on lunch. They simply ran away in the time it took for police to respond.

If this were the case, it meant the entire facade of civilization was a complete sham, a brittle fake painted monolith made out of candy glass. If any city could be destroyed by thirty guys on foot with ten dollars worth of kerosene, everything I'd ever been induced to believe in my life about civilization was hollow, false, a lie. We were never more than fifteen minutes away from absolute anarchy in any large metropolitan city.

That was back in '92 when humans still out numbered phones - it would not be hard to stage a riot today!

anarchy != chaos
The majority of the people involved are petty thugs looking to make a "quick buck", not at the expense of big businesses on the high street but off of family run businesses in many cases. Last night a young guy and two brothers were mown down and killed by somebody because they were defending their store.

The first night they almost incinerated a complex of apartments occupied by ordinary working class families. 20-30 of them! A miracle that they escaped. As long as they stay in their own area robbing and destroying, the cops don't give a shit. Just as in L.A. or Belfast.

Fear, propaganda, more rights taken away. They're talking of bringing in plastic bullet guns (an intel favourite for stirring the pot - 17 murders of mainly kids and middle aged women in Belfast and Derry are testament to that).

"Northern Ireland" is a model around which the US and UK are being built around at this moment in time.
If those families had been killed, it would have een a major coup for tptb.

Meanwhile another murder by cops is being buried and distracted from. Now who does all of this suit?

The villains and thugs in any poor area of the world are always, but always, heavily infiltrated by cops/intel for whatever purposes.

just to keep things in perspective:

the embedded max keiser vid link is worth watching.
Mark Kennedy (born 7 July 1969, Camberwell, South London) (also known as Mark Stone and Flash) is a former Metropolitan Police officer who, whilst attached to the police service's National Public Order Intelligence Unit, infiltrated many protest groups between 2003 and 2010 before he was unmasked by political activists as an undercover policeman.

On January 15, 2011 Kennedy told The Mail on Sunday that he was not a rogue cop, and was in daily contact with his bosses: "My superiors knew where I was at all times Ė my BlackBerry was fitted with a tracking device Ė and they sanctioned every move I made. I didnít sneeze without them knowing about it. I feel Iíve been hung out to dry." He also claimed that the police withheld from the defence covert recordings which would have shown that the defendants were not guilty.

German MP Andrej Hunko raised questions in the German Bundestag concerning what the German authorities knew about Kennedy's activities amongst the Berlin protest movement. Kennedy had been arrested in Berlin for attempted arson, but was never brought to trial. Hunko also asked: "How does the federal government justify the fact that [Mark Kennedy], as part of his operation in Germany, did not only initiate long-term meaningful friendships but also sexual relationships, clearly under false pretenses?". The Bundesregierung refused to answer any questions concerning PC Kennedy for operational reasons.
I was of course referring to these "thugs":

Not, the media label of anybody who is pissed off and takes their streets back (even if it is momentarily).

Look what the Met/thug/media ploy has accomplished:

Divide and rule.
It's certainly a volatile situation right now, but I think it could go either way...
Cameron MUST get a grip on those riots-- preferably before anyone manages to push these people into believing that it's time for the army to take over the role of the police.

If they can contain it from now on, it will depend on wether they can get themselves to be honest for a change-- and ask some serious questions about the role of the police in all this.

If Cameron is the Prime Minister of Britain, then he and parliament are supposed to be in control of the executive.
If he's not-- then the executive is allowed to take on a life of its own (or rather be controlled by someone outside the system) and determine the actions of the government and of parliament.

His choice to make.
lamentably, though one might want to see the people targeting the real thieves, the real gangsters[the aristrocrats, the politicrats, the plutocrats], i think that the populace is too ignorant to identify their real enemies.

i was in LA when south central went up after the rodney king verdict. my family lived in brentwood. did the disenfranchised go after their real enemies? no, they did not. could they have? yes, they could have.

so, instead of molotov cocktails in hollywood, bel-air, beverly hills, brentwood, the burning and loots was confined to those only a little bit better off in south central. as i recall, the major victims were koreans and their bodegas.

oddly, the same apolitical, amoral behavior has appeared in the uk. instead of going after kensington, knightsbridge, st john's wood, mayfair, the city[the residences of the real thieves], the homes and businesses of the real economic victims of the upper classes were attacked.

which might make one conclude that this was agents provocateurism on the cheap. as i think it was in LA.

because i can assure you that if any group of the disenfranchised wanted to seriously repudiate the upper class controllers, it would have been way to easy.

apparently, the recognition that we are in a class war continues to go nowhere. that is the saddest conclusion. no one seems to understand that they have adversaries. in the class war which is enveloping the world, the victim classes seem not to notice that the ruling class are intent on exterminating them.

i got an idea for a chain store that sells only pitchforks and torches,
of course, they would have to be made of bricks with bars on the shatter-proof windows...
open 24/7!

Yes, i think that it would be a good idea to get out of the city centers.
This was all talked about years ago as the "upcoming riots".
So they were obviously planned.

The thing is that moves, on the "grand chess board" are always a threat and create a new situation, that requires an attack or defensive response.
Seeing the moves in advance, as reported by unelected, NGO's, think-tanks and "royal" affiliated institutes, show us the orchestrated future that is being imposed upon us.

Call me cynical but I'm thinking that if the mobs actually did start to attack the real areas of wealth and power, the police response would have been swift and ruthless.
QUOTE (KP50 @ Aug 10 2011, 12:47 AM) *
Call me cynical but I'm thinking that if the mobs actually did start to attack the real areas of wealth and power, the police response would have been swift and ruthless.

bing, bing, bing

we have a winner!!
Tamborine man

Just to reinforce the immense hypocricy we are witnessing, please have a little read here:


QUOTE (Tamborine man @ Aug 10 2011, 11:12 AM) *

worthy of a read.
QUOTE (Tamborine man @ Aug 10 2011, 10:12 AM) *
Just to reinforce the immense hypocricy we are witnessing, please have a little read here:

...and not to forget the inhabitants of Diego Garcia that where left homeless thanks to the thuggery of Queen Lizard-too* and her gang!

* Does not indicate support for David Icke theories beyond the metaphorical sense :-)
Tamborine man
QUOTE (mrodway @ Aug 10 2011, 11:35 AM) *
...and not to forget the inhabitants of Diego Garcia that where left homeless thanks to the thuggery of Queen Lizard-too* and her gang!

* Does not indicate support for David Icke theories beyond the metaphorical sense :-)

Actually, i read about 'Diego Garcia' long time ago.

It's really quite strange how "atrocities", one after the other, fade from one's memory!

Think that we humans got an inbuilt mechanism to only remember the "good times" -

whether it be about family affairs, or world events.

Nevertheless, thanks for bringing this episode up again. There's so many things some

so-called human beings do, and completely for the wrong, devious, evil reasons, that

should never ever be forgotten .......
Carl Bank
And again: Voices that try to tell a different pov to this will be only shown once on MSM.
After being stopped, the man was also asked "You are not a stranger to riots, are you?"
to discredit him.

BBC at its best (once again):

"Darcus Howe, a West Indian Writer and Broadcaster with a voice about the riots.
Speaking about the mistreatment of youths by police leading to an up-roar and the ignorance of
both police and the governement. Intelligent black male."

"A riot is the language of the unheard." ~ Martin Luther King


"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ John F. Kennedy
They got a grip on the situation: That was neccessary.

And then... Well, Cameron has chosen to pursue the old "pushing-the-envelope"-principle.

There won't be troops in the streets, and there won't be martial law.

But there will be 'tougher measures':

This round-up of Friday's main media stories focuses on David Cameron's statement that the government is looking at banning people from using social networking sites such as Twitter and Facebook if they are thought to be plotting criminal activity.

Whatever about 'Twitter' or 'Facebook'-- if implemented this will set a precedent.

"...If they are thought to be plotting criminal activity..."

Nice. And who does the "thinking"...? Cameron?? The police???

The politicians have helped to create a climate in which people are told that they have to accept ever so harsher "austerity-measures":
While the bankers and the speculators are rewarded for their acts of treason, the young are effectively faced with a future which consists of footing the bill.
From some point on, all it takes is the right kind of spark-- and we can introduce "tougher measures".

Isn't it strange to think that the police had water-cannon and teargas all along-- but they needed authorisation to make use of them...?
They stated "...these days we have a more measured approach".

Well-- a measured approach is when people hold a peaceful protest and there is no such thing as water-cannon and teargas: Above all, there is no such thing as an undercover-operative starting a riot...
But a measured approach is also that when groups of people setting whole streets on fire, the police will do the job they get paid for-- which is to uphold the law and prevent loss of life.

They have been using water-cannon and teargas for years-- in Northern Ireland. Occasionally they were using theose measures for far lesser things; and that is even without mentioning batton-rounds (which are by far not as 'harmless' and 'non-lethal' as they would like to make out; in the North, quite a few people got killed by the damn things).
But-- in a situation like the one which developed here, they first needed Cameron to authorise the use of this stuff...?

What has developed now is a situation in which the police can happily use a 'tougher approach'- and they will be able to do so with the support of the general public.
It may well generate an even worse climate.
And those calls for 'martial law' will be back one day: In a year. Or in two. Five...

Meanwhile, they'll get a foot in the door for ever increasing censorship if people don't watch it.

Well, Mr. Cameron... You made your choice.

Once a puppet- always a puppet.

(Edit:) Deleted double post.
Carl Bank
dejavu, anyone?
Doesn't come as a surprise, perhaps.

When the Murdoch phone scandal turned up, the tip of an iceberg made of corruption became visible.
The police were in it up to their eyeballs-- they even provided those NOTW-journalists with the neccessary information (like phone-numbers, for example) which allowed them to tap people's phones to start with.

It won't take Albert Einstein to figure out that the political aristocracy are in it up to their eyeballs as well.
If they allow proper investigations, people will loose all confidence in the police, in the judiciary and in the political system.
That means they would loose control altogether-- with unforeseeable consequences.

So, they keep playing along. With unforeseeable consequences...

When the 'Titanic' sank in 1912, 1500 people died-- but not merely because the 'Titanic' did not have enough lifeboats aboard.
According to the regulations back then, there were even more boats than were required by law:
They stated that any ship above 10000 tons had to have 16 lifeboats aboard.
'Titanic' had 14 boats with a capacity of 65, two emergency-cutters, four collapsible boats and two small work-boats: Total 22 boats...

But those regulations had been drawn up at a time when most ships were smaller; there might be the occasional one with 12000 or 14000 tons, with a capacity for 1000 0r 1200 people.
Titanic had 46000 tons- and a capacity for over 3000.
The regulations had stayed unchanged-- and that in all certanty was due to the shipping-magnates and the influence they had over the law-makers.
Those regulations were introduced at a time when Samuel Plimsoll was still alive:
He had fought tooth and claw for years to have shipping owners compelled by law to have ships fitted with loading-marks (Plimsoll-markings) to prevent tragedies fuelled by greed.

When those markings finally were introduced, the law had been watered down so much that it didn't specify exactly where on the ship's hull the markings had to be displayed-- with the result that some shipping owners chose to have them painted unto the deck of the ship.

They kept fighting any kind of regulation, and they used their influence with the politicians to keep it that way: A sign of corruption in high places.

That was the reason why 1500 people went down with the 'Titanic'...

Anyone up for a meal in the Ritz-Carlton...?
Don't worry about those rowdy steerage-passengers; the gates leading to the upper decks are firmly shut...
QUOTE (Devilsadvocate @ Aug 10 2011, 07:11 PM) *
When the 'Titanic' sank in 1912,

maybe it wasn't the titanic?

maybe...maybe not. if the jp morgue was involved, stranger stuff has happened. i mean really, why can't corruption be multi-generational? look at the bush family. their whole damn tree is corrupt.
QUOTE (GroundPounder @ Aug 12 2011, 09:45 PM) *
maybe...maybe not. if the jp morgue was involved, stranger stuff has happened. i mean really, why can't corruption be multi-generational? look at the bush family. their whole damn tree is corrupt.

Once corruption has got a foot in the door, it has a tendency to sustain itself.

Anyone going into politics will sooner or later be confronted by a simple choice:
Fight against it- and be shot down in flames the moment his actions have any real effect, or simply play along-- which is the moment he or she becomes corrupted as well.
Enter people like the Bush-clan-- and you have the seed for Emmanuel Goldstein's 'immortal collective'...
QUOTE (Devilsadvocate @ Aug 10 2011, 09:43 PM) *
Fight against it- and be shot down in flames the moment his actions have any real effect, or simply play along-- which is the moment he or she becomes corrupted as well.

so there it is..."the only winning move is not to play."


and DA, your postscript by Voltaire is in like flint.
Yes...I fear so.

There have been more than enough examples in the past-- for the corruption, and subsequently for Voltaire's principle.

Prime example would be the lone widow around 800 years ago who makes the mistake of rejecting the advances of her neighbour.
One night she can't sleep and goes outside, looks up and goes "Oh- would you look at the stars...!"

A few days later the good neighbour reports her to the authorities-- for witchcraft: "...I heard her mumbling magic spells...and I saw it with my own eyes-- there were THREE RAVENS CIRCLING ABOVE THE HOUSE! ...AND THEN MY COW DIED!!!"

So- she gets arrested, is "questioned" by an inquisitor, and makes the mistake not to confess to being in league with the devil.
Which naturally results in a "Divine judgement": She's put in a punctured barrel together with three rats, and the lid is nailed shut.
The barrel is then thrown into the river: If she manages to get out of the barrel, she must be in league with the devil, and so will regrettably have to be burned alive. But her soul may be saved- if she confesses.

If she drowns, she was innocent. Of course.

One way or another, people will breath a sigh of relief, of course:
Can't run the risk of having the devil around now, can we...Of course...

Mr. Cameron knows all this already, of course.

(Edit:) ...And so did his predecessors. Of course.
QUOTE (Devilsadvocate @ Aug 10 2011, 06:11 PM) *
Doesn't come as a surprise, perhaps.

When the Murdoch phone scandal turned up, the tip of an iceberg made of corruption became visible.

Didn't it just.

I think they had trouble selling Murdoch papers for awhile and were giving The Times away free one Saturday. My wife brought home a copy, I normally wouldn't give it house room, and I noted a headline; 'Coulson security clearance restricted' says Cameron.

Oh! Yeh! How does that work when he has had 'phones hacked? I thought. Quickly followed by pondering what Coulson could have had on Cameron for Cameron to take the risk of using him. Perhaps the old adage works here, 'keep your friends close and your enemies closer.'

Then during that parliament committee grilling of Rupert Murdoch as Rupert had been asked a rather penetrating question somebody pushed a plate full of foam into his face. This was taken to be a sign of outrage by an attendant (this from listening to Guardian reporters talking about it on a broadcast) but what if it was a contingency plan to deflect attention at an awkward moment I thought?

Poor Rupert now a victim, best not pursue any nasty questions.

And then these 'riots' broke out. How convenient I though, taking the spotlight off the Murdochs.

After all it is well know that 'agents of the state' or 'Thatcher's Boys' were at work discrediting the miners and their activist leaders in the 1980s.

These were not riots in the conventional sense, more like orchestrated and with silly follow up statements from the politicos.

PR and affairs of state do not mix well as Cameron is discovering for things happen, ' dear boy, events', as MacMillan once remarked.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2018 Invision Power Services, Inc.