7/7 bombers 'used charity cash'

[Dravinian]

I recall hearing Craig Murray, the former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan pouring scorn over MI5 claim that there were 2,000 terrorists in the UK. He suspected that the claim had more to do with politics than intelligence.

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2007/11/frank_goebbels.html

I don't understand your logic of debate.

Some argue that Charitable cash was used, by known terrorists, possibly in furthering their terorist agenda.

You argue it is an Islmophobic Smear.

Others point out that they were there, the cash was there, and there is a witness claiming that they were extremist at the time and may have used the money to create pamphlets.

You leap to talking about the Governments bullshit stance on Terror?



How we get here?

Or is it simply the case that if ANYONE makes ANY comment to suggest that YOUR interpretation of what is Islmaphobia is suspect, then they must believe everything ever said by government or spooks?

Well thanks for the Tarring, but I don't think just because I am concerned that money was given from a charity and used to fund terrorism this means that I believe every word that Government says.

Just because you think it is Islmaphobia, should I post up some long Cut & Paste job pointing out what nutters the 9/11 Conspriloons are? Cause obviously you must agree with them on everything...right?

 

[Udo Erasmus]

This is not an antisemitic smear and the fact that Cliff was a secular Jew is besides the point. The Swaps seem to campaign for the rights of every living group apart from one - now why would that be and there is no prize for guessing which one.

Oh dear, actually the socialist movement has been on the frontline of campaign against racism and anti-semitism which is why there have been so many Jewish people involved with the far left. One wonders whether for Zachor campaigning for the rights of Jews might mean . . . support for the State of Israel?

 

[Zachor]

'I recall hearing Craig Murray, the former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan pouring scorn over MI5 claim that there were 2,000 terrorists in the UK. He suspected that the claim had more to do with politics than intelligence.'

Quoted by Udo


I also disagree with the figure of 2k terrorists in the UK. I think that when you add in the amount of covert sympathisers and those supplying the terrorists with intellegence it is probably double that.

If the govt and the muslim community doesn't get to grips with the fact that there is a significant pool of terrorist sympathisers then the backlash from other groups against the muslim community will do more damage that the anti terrorist acts are alleged to have done.

All groups who settle in the UK should 'seek the peace of the city because if the city is at peace then so shall you be'. Sadly there is a significant minority of the Muslim community who have failed to do this and it is affecting all of us.

 

[Zachor]

Oh dear, actually the socialist movement has been on the frontline of campaign against racism and anti-semitism which is why there have been so many Jewish people involved with the far left. One wonders whether for Zachor campaigning for the rights of Jews might mean . . . support for the State of Israel?

First of all I support the existence of the State of Israel. It was right to re establish it. However, that does not mean that I support all what the Israeli govt does which is an adult political position to take. You can support something but you don't have to agree with everything said and done. Besides that Israeli's are normally the first to criticise their own govts actions. Thats one of the benefits of living in a dynamic democracy - a diversity of opinions.

I've not got an issue with individuals of whatever religion working against racism.

What concerns me is that within SWP that such a gross mistake in a public leaflet speaks volumes about what the internal culture of the swaps is with regards to Jews/Israel and the swaps relationship with some of their more extremist muslim supporters.

 

[Dravinian]

Is this a new record?

A post entirely unrelated to the SWP desceneds into fighting about the SWP within just 34 posts.

Doesn't anyone else feel that the SWP is an entirely irrelevent group that seems to get far more attention on internet forums then they do anywhere else. If we could only turns words written about the SWP on Internet Forums into votes, the SWP would in fact be ruling every democratic country in the world.

As it is, hardly anyone listens to what they have to say outside of Internet Forums. If you ONLY ever existed in this forum you would think the SWP was a competitive party in our country with a loud voice, instead of being the marginal minority group that they are with no voice at all.

 

[editor]

Why do you believe that the police are 'impartial'?
Do you really think that the police don't get involved in politics.

You are pretty naive.

These are the guys who framed up the Cardiff 3, tried to cover up over the murder of Jean Charles De Menezes on the London tube, remember the Birmingham 6?

Wow. That giant slab o'twisting and wilful misrepresentation surely hits the Olympic Gold standard.

 

[Udo Erasmus]

Editor, get a life and stop being so precious. You said that you couldn't take seriously the testimony of people involved in the anti-war movement in the Beeston area of Leeds, but apparently the police can be regarded as impartial.

Your sole facts consist of -

1) That two of the London bombers worked at a community bookshop on the premises of a mainstream Muslim School several years before they committed any acts of terrorism.
2) Children in Need donated £20,000 to the School

There is a possibility that a tiny part of that cash might have been used by the two men who worked there for whatever.

Big deal, there's no story there, except a mainstream Muslim school once again being victimised.

Anyone with common sense knows that there is media hysteria and moral panic whipped up against Muslims, and that the mainstream media has even told stories that have been revealed to be complete fiction (there was a very good C4 documentary on this, for example, the story - widely reported - that Muslims had vandalised the lodgings of British soldiers turned out to be a complete fabrication)

Anyone with a brain would take treat this as a storm-in-a-teacup and of no significance.

 

[Dravinian]

Your sole facts consist of -

1) That two of the London bombers worked at a community bookshop on the premises of a mainstream Muslim School several years before they committed any acts of terrorism.
2) Children in Need donated £20,000 to the School.

Slightly missing the fact that they were working there at the same time and that some of the money went through the bookshop where they were working.

There is a possibility that a tiny part of that cash might have been used by the two men who worked there for whatever.

The fact that they did go on to not just talk about it, but to actually take part in a suicide bombing is rather a salient point that you seem to think is unrelated due to the 9 year time gap between events.

Big deal, there's no story there, except a mainstream Muslim school once again being victimised.

Where two terrorists worked. You seem to be somewhat dismissing the fact that two terrorists choose to work in an Islamic Bookstore, despite the huge amount of material found in some of the terrorists homes, which must have come from somewhere, must be created and distributed somehow.

A Bookstore seems a good place to do that.

Yet this seemingly logical thought line, is dismissed by you as speculative, well yes it is, because the guys are dead and it is really difficult to know what they did for certain. That doesn't mean that you cannot speculate, as long as you do so reasonably.

It IS reasonable to suspect that while at an Islamic Bookshop, they used that opportunity and the cash provided by Children In Need to further a terrorist agenda.

Anyone with common sense knows that there is media hysteria and moral panic whipped up against Muslims

Anyone with any common sense realises there are good and bad in all communities.

and that the mainstream media has even told stories that have been revealed to be complete fiction (there was a very good C4 documentary on this, for example, the story - widely reported - that Muslims had vandalised the lodgings of British soldiers turned out to be a complete fabrication)

What of the C4 documentary that was investigated by the police after complaints, yet at the end of it all was found to be entirely accurate in its portrayal of several mosques where Imans were preaching Hate.

Oh that documentary don't count?

Anyone with a brain would take treat this as a storm-in-a-teacup and of no significance.

I think it is of significance because it shows a weakness in the way in which charitable money is distributed and how it can be used.

Some people want to make this a big issue about Islam and Islamophobia, but realistically it is more a question of how charity is distributed and how Terrorists use 'mainstream' premises to possibly produce and distribute terrorist material.

It is your utter islamophilia that makes you think that anything bad said with the context of Muslims or Terrorists is somehow an attack on Islam and is a show of the wests hatred of Islam.

 

[Zachor]

It is your utter islamophilia that makes you think that anything bad said with the context of Muslims or Terrorists is somehow an attack on Islam and is a show of the wests hatred of Islam.

Agreed. Unless all communities including the Muslim community grow up and start to realise that attacking extremists is not the same as attacking a whole community then we are heading for a time of deep shit.

Christians and Jews have open or semi open debates about issues of religion and politics disagree at times but don't always scream antisemitism or antichristian whenever it is pointed out that a small proportion of the co religionists are nutters. This might be becuase Jews and Christians are familiar with the concept of living in a democratic society - something that is not found in the cultures where many UK muslims originate from.

All religions contain headcases. Its time we accepted that and dealt with it. I for example disagree with Michael Rosen on some issues but it doesn't mean that I treat all Left wing Jews as supporters of dictatorial and undemocratic organisations.

 

[Das Uberdog]

also disagree with the figure of 2k terrorists in the UK

Are you reading what you write you pituitary case? Are you actually medically incapacitated in the brain department? 'Covert sympathisers', 'supplying the terrorists with intelliegence', you should hear yourself. DO you have any evidence whatsoever that there is even a single active terrorist cell in the United Kingdom?

No you don't, and neither do they, and you deserve to have the shit kicked out of you for spouting your paranoid islamophobic babble. After all, I doubt you're one of the people who'll end up paying for the climate of hysteria you're helping to foster. This country is at no threat of terrorism in comparison to the threat posed at the height of the IRA's influence. The only "terrorists" from the Muslim community are poorly organised teenagers who can't tell their arse from their elbow and couldn't fix the wires in the right place for sugar.

Dipshit.

 

[Das Uberdog]

It IS reasonable to suspect that while at an Islamic Bookshop, they used that opportunity and the cash provided by Children In Need to further a terrorist agenda.

Give evidence you fucking dildo, or stfu.

Edit; You seriously are a fucking whiny fuckwit. Do you actually believe what you're saying or are you conscious of your perverse agenda, arsehole?

 

[Zachor]

Are you reading what you write you pituitary case? Are you actually medically incapacitated in the brain department? 'Covert sympathisers', 'supplying the terrorists with intelliegence', you should hear yourself. DO you have any evidence whatsoever that there is even a single active terrorist cell in the United Kingdom?

Although there may be only 2k active terrorists or those brainwashed enough to undertake murder at some point these people must have some form of support network. During the years of IRA terror there were many who although they didn't actively kill turned a blind eye for the sake of 'the cause' and I would suggestthat a similar situation exists re Islamist terror.

No you don't, and neither do they, and you deserve to have the shit kicked out of you for spouting your paranoid islamophobic babble.

Have I ever said anything 'Islamophbic' I've criticised the doctrine of Islamism there isa huge difference.

After all, I doubt you're one of the people who'll end up paying for the climate of hysteria you're helping to foster.

We all pay the price of terrorism whether it be directly as a result of an attack or through curtailment of our rights in order to deal with a terrorist threat.

This country is at no threat of terrorism in comparison to the threat posed at the height of the IRA's influence.

I would go so far as to suggest that the reason we are not overrun with Islamist (not the word dickshit) terrorists is because action has been taken against them and also the majority of ordinary decent muslims have distanced them selves from the nutters. Maybe just maybe you would like to consider the fact that in the years following the IRA atrocities on the mainland policing methods have improved.

The only "terrorists" from the Muslim community are poorly organised teenagers who can't tell their arse from their elbow and couldn't fix the wires in the right place for sugar.

So the murderers of 7/7 were poorly organised teenagers yeah right.
If you don't recognise a problem then you can't effectively deal with it.

Dipshit.

Naive wanker

PS I've noticed like many of you extremist loons you fall back on the word 'Islamophobic' or 'racist' whenever it looks like you are losing an argument. You must try harder cos that bollocks don't wash with me nor with anyone else with more than two functioning braincells.

 

[free spirit]

It was reported the money was used by Siddique Khan and Tanweer to produce hundreds of propaganda videos glorifying armed Islamic resistance and to pay for outward bound trips.

translation...

1 - some of the children in need funding was spent on video equipment and computer equipment for use by the local community, and among the hundreds of people who probably used this equipment for entirely legitimate purposes, 2 of them (who as volunteers probably had access to the equipment unsupervised) possibly used it to make copies / edit and distribute videos of Islamic fighters etc. that's probably freely available on the internet anyway.

2 - some of the money was also used to fund outward bound trips for local young people, 2 of whom were Siddique Khan, and Tanweer. These trips would have been targeted at local disenfranchised kids, so it's entirely right that these 2 should have gone on these funded trips.

if any money had been mispent then the trustees of the charity would be being prosecuted for fraud (or something similar), this is a total non story, and basically part of a blindingly obvious smear campaign - unless of course you think that the solution to this countries (imo pretty low level) islamic terrorism problem is to deny all charitable funding to any islamic related projects aiming to work with disadvantaged / disenfranchised young muslims.

if anything, IMO the fact that these 2 kids were part of these projects shows that the charity was doing it's job in reaching out to the most pissed off kids in the community, and possibly had the charity had more funding then it might have been able to do some more positive long term work with them, and could possibly have helped them down another less damaging life path.

 

[Dravinian]

Give evidence you fucking dildo, or stfu.

Edit; You seriously are a fucking whiny fuckwit. Do you actually believe what you're saying or are you conscious of your perverse agenda, arsehole?

And you have added nothing except the knowledge that you are an unpleasant person.

Why do I need evidence to ask questions? I have said it is speculation, but it is reasonable speculation and it is speculation that I would expect to see investigated.

As I said you see any bad reporting as an attack, which is no different to that which you complain about most, agendas.

 

[Das Uberdog]

Edit; to Zachor

You're a moron - you stake random claims and refuse to provide any evidence or reasoning whatsoever behind your ludicrous notions, all I ask is that you act like someone less of a twat and try to justify your absurdities. I know in advance you can't because not even the fucking State are able to back up their insane theories with any concrete facts.

I never accused you of being a racist you rightwing tool - I said (and stand by) my claim you spout islamophobic drivvle, and that you're contributing to a completely irrational and unfounded climate of hysteria in which the Muslim community are victimised. Learn to read, perhaps read some Chomsky (he'd give you a good idea of what it means to provide evidence for your arguments) and come back when you can entertain a conversation on an academic level higher than that I'd expect from a toddler.

 

[Zachor]

And you have added nothing except the knowledge that you are an unpleasant person..

I'd already come to that conclusion. That posters comment that I 'deserved the shit kicked out of me' for disagreeing with him told me all that I need to know. I'm going to say no more about this matter unless pressed as I don't believe its right to mock the (politically) afflicted.

 

[Das Uberdog]

And you have added nothing except the knowledge that you are an unpleasant person.

Why do I need evidence to ask questions? I have said it is speculation, but it is reasonable speculation and it is speculation that I would expect to see investigated.

As I said you see any bad reporting as an attack, which is no different to that which you complain about most, agendas.

It's not reasonable speculation if you have no fucking evidence for what your spewing! Any single person in this country may well be a secret murderer, the world might be a computer fabrication generated by robot overlords to occupy us whilst they harvest our body heat, the Earth might orbit the moon - all possibilities, meaningless without some evidence on which to stake the claim!

 

[free spirit]

ah yes, here's the slightly telling statement from children in need that the editor missed from his quote...

A statement from Children In Need read: "No evidence has been produced that the money they received was used for terrorist activity. Clearly if there is an allegation of fraud, then it is a matter for the police."

 

[Das Uberdog]

I'd already come to that conclusion. That posters comment that I 'deserved the shit kicked out of me' for disagreeing with him told me all that I need to know. I'm going to say no more about this matter unless pressed as I don't believe its right to mock the (politically) afflicted.

You don't deserve to have the shit kicked out of you because you disagree with me, you deserve to have the shit kicked out of you because you're an arrogant fuckwit who has little understanding of what they blather about and absolutely zero acknowledgement of the consequences and those who must deal with them.

I doubt any Muslim kid beaten up as a result of the popular widespread Muslim bashing today would have any sympathy for your opposing views, and nor should they. They're the ones who have to deal with your ignorance.

 

[Zachor]

Edit; to Zachor

You're a moron - you stake random claims and refuse to provide any evidence or reasoning whatsoever behind your ludicrous notions, .

If you look back at my previous post I drew a comparison with the active terrorists and the supporters who turn a blind eye - do keep up.

I never accused you of being a racist you rightwing tool -.

You accused me of being an Islamophobe. This I am most definitely not. If you want to see me in court over this accusation then be my fucking guest. Becuase if you do I'll take you to the fucking cleaners. You will be hard pressed to find anyone of any credibility who would back up your assertion that I'm Islamophobic. Now as you seem to be hard of thinking I'll say it again 'I have an issue with Islamism and its attitude to womens and LGBT rights and religious freedom not with Muslims as a people'. I have theological differences and disagreements with Islam but then I have theological disagreements with Christianity, Orthodox Judaism, Neo Paganism and athiesm.

BTW I'm not right wing I'm a social democrat.

 

[Das Uberdog]

If you look back at my previous post I drew a comparison with the active terrorists and the supporters who turn a blind eye - do keep up.

No, you said there were over 2k 'supporters' of Islamic terrorism in the Uk today, and that this support didn't come in the form of 'turning a blind eye' but actually consisted of actively 'giving intelligence' and being 'covert sympathisers'. This 'blind eye' bollocks came later - regardless, you have no evidence for either claim, do you? Provide evidence, or stfu.

wrt your political position, 'Social Democrat' has been newspeak for 'neocon' for some time now - keep up.

As far as me calling you 'racist' or Islamophobic - why don't you quote me?

No evidence for that either?

Gutted dickhead.

 

[Zachor]

No, you said there were over 2k 'supporters' of Islamic terrorism in the Uk today,

The 2k figure comes from MI5. I would say that this figure would probably double when you take into account those who turn a blind eye and those who do stuff such as gathering intellegence.

Evidence or at least precedent comes from the period when the UK was subject to IRA. You had loads of people who for family and community loyalty reasons helped IRA terrrorists.

and that this support didn't come in the form of 'turning a blind eye' but actually consisted of actively 'giving intelligence' and being 'covert sympathisers'. This 'blind eye' bollocks came later - regardless, you have no evidence for either claim, do you? Provide evidence, or stfu.

Again I would mention the precedent of the situation with the IRA. By its nature terrorism and terrorist groups don't publish figures on membership and sympathisers so one of the few ways to gain some idea of the problem is by looking at precedents from similar situations in the past.

wrt your political position, 'Social Democrat' has been newspeak for 'neocon'

LOL! No there is a world of difference between wanting a pluralist democratic society and wanting rapacious unchecked capitalism. May I suggest that a new (and may I say more pluralistic ) dictionary should be placed on your shopping list.

As far as me calling you 'racist' or Islamophobic - why don't you quote me?

No evidence for that either?

Gutted dickhead.

Not gutted at all bearing in mind that you asked for evidence so
I'll give you stinking evidence how about this from you on this thread.

you spout islamophobic drivvle

you deserve to have the shit kicked out of you for spouting your paranoid islamophobic babble.

I agree that there are people out there who are Islamophobic but it demeans the term when people like yourself use it willy nilly just because their dogma is challenged.

 

[Das Uberdog]

Ok, so MI5 claim 2 thousand - why do you believe that? What evidence have they provided to you? Have they not lied before? What evidence do you have to believe that there are more than MI5's figure? Still none? Then stop. talking.

LOL! No there is a world of difference between wanting a pluralist democratic society and wanting rapacious unchecked capitalism.

There's a humungous difference between 'rapacious, unchecked capitalism' and neo-conservatism. What you're describing is classical liberalism, conservatism has always supported State intervention in the market. May I suggest you study political ideologies before returning to chatting shit about stuff you don't understand?

I'll give you stinking evidence how about this from you on this thread.

Both the quote you gave do not show me calling you an Islamophobe, they point to me knocking you down for spewing islamophobic bile. There's a difference - my emphasis suggests that rather than you being malicious, you're simply (incensingly) misguided.

I ask you again; provide evidence for your inane claims, or stop making them. Seriously - I don't see why this is so hard.

 

[Zachor]

Ok, so MI5 claim 2 thousand - why do you believe that? What evidence have they provided to you? Have they not lied before? What evidence do you have to believe that there are more than MI5's figure? Still none? Then stop. talking.

In the absence of any other figures of any credibility then the 2k figure has to be accepted to a certain extent. If these are the numbers of actual potential terrorists then going on previous terrorist actions such as the IRA then you can expect many more people either turning a blind eye or undertaking work for them.

There's a humungous difference between 'rapacious, unchecked capitalism' and neo-conservatism. What you're describing is classical liberalism, conservatism has always supported State intervention in the market. May I suggest you study political ideologies before returning to chatting shit about stuff you don't understand?

Maybe you should take your head out of your theories and have a look around and accept that there are different but equally valid opinions out there.

Personally I have no problem with a mixed economy in a society. i don't believe that the state should control everything and I certainly don't believe that private capital should control everything.

Both the quote you gave do not show me calling you an Islamophobe, they point to me knocking you down for spewing islamophobic bile. There's a difference - my emphasis suggests that rather than you being malicious, you're simply (incensingly) misguided.

You were accusing me of spewing Islamophobia which is tantamount to claiming that I'm Islamophobic which I am not. As for being misguided then in that case the entire human race is misguided as one person can never claim to see everything about a situation. I think you are misguided by only seeing one side of things myself but maybe that is a subject for another time.

If I continually posted links to some of the more obscene anti Islam sites as a way of backing an argument then you might have good reason to use the Islamophobe word but I do not. I question where necessary and support where necessary. Its called being balanced. Maybe you should try it it will do your blood pressure no end of good.

 

[tbaldwin]

Sinister stuff. Maybe balders is right about charities and they should be banned.

I dont think that charities should be banned....But i dont think they should be unconditionally trusted either....The Charity Commission is worse than useless.
And £20k going astray in a charity is not even a drop in a very big ocean of lethargy and corruption.

 

[Jonti]

... I thought tinfoil hat conspiracy threads were frowned upon......

I thought the same about cut&pastes without comment.

...
It's not that wild a scenario that they may have pocketed some of the cash for their own ends.

There are many things are "not that wild a scenario" -- come to that editor, you've been accused of many things that are "not that wild a scenario". Unpleasant -- even reprehensible -- isn't it?

So why do it to other folks? Hmmm?

 

[Dravinian]

It's not reasonable speculation if you have no fucking evidence for what your spewing! Any single person in this country may well be a secret murderer, the world might be a computer fabrication generated by robot overlords to occupy us whilst they harvest our body heat, the Earth might orbit the moon - all possibilities, meaningless without some evidence on which to stake the claim!

There is evidence you knob, it is circumstantial, but it is still evidence.

Two KNOWN terrorists worked there at the same time, when money was given by a charity and at least one named witness has said they were extremists at the time.

That is evidence, circumstantial evidence, but evidence nonetheless.

 

[Dravinian]

I thought the same about cut&pastes without comment.

There are many things are "not that wild a scenario" -- come to that editor, you've been accused of many things that are "not that wild a scenario". Unpleasant -- even reprehensible -- isn't it?

So why do it to other folks? Hmmm?

Why do it to other folks?

Other "folks"?

Not terrorists then, which is what they are...well were, can you not bring yourself to say it? Do you think it is an attack on Islam if you admit that?

We are talking about people who blow themselves up, along with a lot of other people and you think speculation about what they might have done is the same as someone making up some bullshit about editor?

Really? Or are you just pissing about, cause if you believe that there really isn't a lot of hope, if you just being an ass then fair enough.

 

[free spirit]

There is evidence you knob, it is circumstantial, but it is still evidence.

Two KNOWN terrorists worked there at the same time, when money was given by a charity and at least one named witness has said they were extremists at the time.

That is evidence, circumstantial evidence, but evidence nonetheless.

evidence of what though?

evidence that 2 disenfranchised local young people were helped by a project presumably aimed at reaching disenfranchised local young people?

or evidence that pudsey bear told them to do it?

 

[free spirit]

Why do it to other folks?

Other "folks"?

Not terrorists then, which is what they are...well were, can you not bring yourself to say it? Do you think it is an attack on Islam if you admit that?

We are talking about people who blow themselves up, along with a lot of other people and you think speculation about what they might have done is the same as someone making up some bullshit about editor?

Really? Or are you just pissing about, cause if you believe that there really isn't a lot of hope, if you just being an ass then fair enough.

no, the other folks who're being effectively slandered by everyone engaging in that line of questioning are the former truestees of the charity, and the accountant who signed off their accounts, and the funding officer for children in need, and the charity commission... but mainly the charities trustees IMO.

for these 2 volunteers to have syphoned off cash from this project the trustees (treasurer in particular) would either have had to be completely incompetant, or complicit in it - no other way it could have happened.

so IMO people should have some evidence before going around dishing out bullshit innuendo about people who were trying to do some good in their community.

Rather than slagging these people off, you might want to think about the very real possibility that they were some of the only people who actually made any attempt to reach these kids and divert them from the course they eventually ended up on. OK so they ultimately failed, but then it seems like the 2 kids left the project soon after 911 - or to put it another way, after the US / UK invaded Afghanistan.

SO what do you think was the most likely trigger for them becoming radicalised and eventually bombing london? The US / UK invading Afghanistan, and later Iraq (as I believe they stated in their videos) or some outdoor adventure weekend, and using some computer equipment funded by pudsey bear 6-8 years earlier?