CrackpotForeigner Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Ah well, if he really visited Iran there can be little doubt that it's a Mossad job, and a messy one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Well it's going to be interesting to see how it develops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshVilla Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 I think he was killed by aliens from another dimension He was designing a satellite for deep space transmission but accidently tore a hole in the fabric of space time The aliens on the other side were not pleased came through killed him then killed the cyclist because they had never seen a bicycle before and mistook it for a weapon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted September 7, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted September 7, 2012 I think he was killed by aliens from another dimension He was designing a satellite for deep space transmission but accidently tore a hole in the fabric of space time The aliens on the other side were not pleased came through killed him then killed the cyclist because they had never seen a bicycle before and mistook it for a weapon I agree, this seems the most likely explanation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 I'll say. Thousands of conspiricy nuts all rushing to read these obscure sites all at once. This appears to be a rather worrying line that to be skeptical about or even disbelieve the official media/government/establishment line on a topic is to be a 'conspiracy nut', that information that is not of the mainstream only belongs to 'obscure' sites and therefore, by implication, is ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 I'll say. Thousands of conspiricy nuts all rushing to read these obscure sites all at once. This appears to be a rather worrying line that to be skeptical about or even disbelieve the official media/government/establishment line on a topic is to be a 'conspiracy nut', that information that is not of the mainstream only belongs to 'obscure' sites and therefore, by implication, is ridiculous. Yep, the idea that Iran really is developing nuclear weapons and intending to use them on Israel is kindof a big deal. We should all be interested in the goings on, and equally, inevitably, there will be plenty of state cover-ups on all sides intended to make sure we all learn as little as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted September 7, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted September 7, 2012 I'll say. Thousands of conspiricy nuts all rushing to read these obscure sites all at once. This appears to be a rather worrying line that to be skeptical about or even disbelieve the official media/government/establishment line on a topic is to be a 'conspiracy nut', that information that is not of the mainstream only belongs to 'obscure' sites and therefore, by implication, is ridiculous. Agreed. This sort of thing is a very different scenario from hoax moon landings, Protocols of the Elders of Zion and Area 51 aliens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 I can't see there is any dispute about the fact that this was a professional job - for reasons that we will never know. The strage element to this is the overkill - not just killing the target, but his wife, mother-in-law and 2 kids in such a way. Just whacking the bloke would have been a far simpler, clinical job - long range rifle, jobs a good 'un. Spraying a car with automatic gunfire and blowing away a witness sugguests there is far more to the killing than simply removing an risk or tidying up an inconvenience. That was sending a message. Whoever/whatever the guy was involved with, the perpetrator (Mossad, CIA, MI6, The Moonies, whoever) has made it clear to anyone else involved that it is a poor idea to continue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted September 7, 2012 Author Share Posted September 7, 2012 This has all the hallmarks of a Mossad hit. I'm expecting a veil of silence now and very limited info coming out. After all the only witness is a 4 year old toddler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshVilla Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Could it have been Bourne? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Yep, the idea that Iran really is developing nuclear weapons and intending to use them on Israel is kindof a big deal. Yes. It's also a big deal that Israel already has nuclear weapons, and has made no secret that it intends to attack Iran. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Yep, the idea that Iran really is developing nuclear weapons and intending to use them on Israel is kindof a big deal. intending to use them ... says who ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Yep, the idea that Iran really is developing nuclear weapons and intending to use them on Israel is kindof a big deal. Yes. It's also a big deal that Israel already has nuclear weapons, and has made no secret that it intends to attack Iran.Sure. Although the fact that they haven't done so as yet is something, whereas for all we know Iran might fancy pushing the button as soon as it's wired up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted September 7, 2012 Author Share Posted September 7, 2012 "family row over money", how convenient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 "family row over money", how convenient. Indeed. I guess the brother or some such is being lined up to take the rap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted September 7, 2012 Author Share Posted September 7, 2012 Kind of de-glorifies the work of a Government Agent. Clubbing to death innocent toddlers. May vengeance have its day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 I'll say. Thousands of conspiricy nuts all rushing to read these obscure sites all at once. This appears to be a rather worrying line that to be skeptical about or even disbelieve the official media/government/establishment line on a topic is to be a 'conspiracy nut', that information that is not of the mainstream only belongs to 'obscure' sites and therefore, by implication, is ridiculous. This is not a case of people being sceptical of the government line. In this case there is no government line to be sceptical of yet, they have no idea what happened and the investigation is only just beginning. This is people with a preconceived agenda using hearsay, conjecture and tenuous links to match the story up to their already developed theory. Why not wait and see what develops before jumping to such flimsy and poorly supported conclusions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 I'll say. Thousands of conspiricy nuts all rushing to read these obscure sites all at once. This appears to be a rather worrying line that to be skeptical about or even disbelieve the official media/government/establishment line on a topic is to be a 'conspiracy nut', that information that is not of the mainstream only belongs to 'obscure' sites and therefore, by implication, is ridiculous. This is not a case of people being sceptical of the government line. In this case there is no government line to be sceptical of yet, they have no idea what happened and the investigation is only just beginning. This is people with a preconceived agenda using hearsay, conjecture and tenuous links to match the story up to their already developed theory. Why not wait and see what develops before jumping to such flimsy and poorly supported conclusions?But surely if, as has been suggested (and seems perfectly plausible) the government are able to issue directives to the press not to report certain aspects of a case, what we are left with IS effectively the government line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 I'll say. Thousands of conspiricy nuts all rushing to read these obscure sites all at once. This appears to be a rather worrying line that to be skeptical about or even disbelieve the official media/government/establishment line on a topic is to be a 'conspiracy nut', that information that is not of the mainstream only belongs to 'obscure' sites and therefore, by implication, is ridiculous. This is not a case of people being sceptical of the government line. In this case there is no government line to be sceptical of yet, they have no idea what happened and the investigation is only just beginning. This is people with a preconceived agenda using hearsay, conjecture and tenuous links to match the story up to their already developed theory. Why not wait and see what develops before jumping to such flimsy and poorly supported conclusions?But surely if, as has been suggested (and seems perfectly plausible) the government are able to issue directives to the press not to report certain aspects of a case, what we are left with IS effectively the government line. I'd have a few questions about that. Firstly, can you be sure that there is any truth that this directive was actually issued and is not just another internet rumour? If it does exist does it only cover British press or are the British (or is it meant to have come from the French?) government able to direct press world wide? And lastly, if there is a directive and it does apply worldwide is it designed to prevent the press from reporting aspects of the case or is it designed prevent them making dangerous speculation without any evidence to support it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts