New legislation in light of Woolwich attacks

[CB Fry]

That's a possibility, but remember that this is a video we're talking about here. Someone would have had to gone through every frame of that and painstakingly remove the blood from each frame, giving the impression of natural skin underneath. I honestly don't know whether there are video editing suites that can remove gore from hands quickly.

 

The pertinent bit of the vid lasts about 21 seconds. At 24 frames per second, that's roughly 500 separate images to alter, retouch and stick back together. It was posted the same day of the attack.

 

Total realms of fantasy.

 

Changing the colour on that video would take, for most normal people, about four seconds. And I include having a quick slurp of tea in that time.

 

Really not that "painstaking", then.

[buctootim]

...

Edited 29 May, 2013 by buctootim

[Verbal]

That's a possibility, but remember that this is a video we're talking about here. Someone would have had to gone through every frame of that and painstakingly remove the blood from each frame, giving the impression of natural skin underneath. I honestly don't know whether there are video editing suites that can remove gore from hands quickly.

 

The pertinent bit of the vid lasts about 21 seconds. At 24 frames per second, that's roughly 500 separate images to alter, retouch and stick back together. It was posted the same day of the attack.

 

Enough time to make the images look less horrific? Possibly. My personal opinion is that this video, in terms of artefacting and all the other stuff you see when images are changed, is more likely to be closer to the original content than the very different videos we saw on television and still frames on the TV.

 

Here's the vid that was on ITV news. This one actually shows signs of tampering. Check the ghosting around the hands.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54F4lROHpmM

 

It's not surprising that you're so ignorant about video postproduction. But the fact that you parade your ignorance as 'evidence' is laughable and, I have to say, increasingly a bit disturbing.

 

When you colour-correct, you do NOT repaint frame-by-frame. A basic setting change in RGB to pull own the R (red channel) can be done and processed within about 30 seconds, and the effect is rendered across all red-channel colour throughout the clip.

 

By the way, Tim is dead right in saying that the attempt to grade out the blood in that doctored clip from your 'Illuminati' enthusiast friend is hopeless - orange hands, orange knife blade, and heavily discoloured red-route lines.

 

So here's a tip to your conspiracy-loon mates: you need to use secondary colour correction to achieve the deception you're after, because this enables you to isolate parts of the image, and alter colour without changing colour in other parts of the frame. Even then, though, the quality of the source material is so poor - so over-compressed - that you still won't be able to do much that would fool anyone other than those whop wish to be fooled.

 

The 'signs of tampering' you refer to with the ghosting is another example of your ignorance-as-evidence approach. The ghosting in the frame-grab is an artefact of interlaced recording - in other words, it's on the original phone-camera recording itself.

 

To explain for others reading this thread (ie you can ignore what follows because it's inconvenient to you): there are two basic ways of capturing moving images digitally or on video: interlace and progressive.

 

In progressive mode, each of the 25 frames per second is recorded in its entirety. So if you freeze-frame it, you'll see a mix of image sharpness and, depending on the shutter speed, motion blur (eg if you record with the shutter set to OFF you'll see the most motion blur because you are recording at an effective shutter speed of 1/25 of a second, and motion will blur out more than if you had set the shutter speed to the more conventional 1/50. To express this the other way around, by increasingly the shutter speed you can produce the motion-blur-free effect you see at the beginning of Saving Private Ryan).

 

In interlaced mode, the image recorded every 25th of a second is split into two 'fields'. Each field records half of the image. If you were able to view each field, it would look like you were viewing the image through horizontal prison bars. The following field then records that part of the image covered by the prison bars. These two fields are then combined into a single frame. If you think about it for a moment, the ghosting - which is not just common but universal in interlaced recording - is the product of combining two parts of the image recorded at fractionally different times.

 

Interlaced recording is common in newsgathering, for example, and in any form where the need to process information quickly is paramount - hence its use in camera phones too (although it is possible to record progressive).

 

So in short this is yet more pap crap. I just can't work out whether you're a compulsive liar or you are really that twisted as to suggest the Woolwich incident was an invention.

[pap]

It's not surprising that you're so ignorant about video postproduction. But the fact that you parade your ignorance as 'evidence' is laughable and, I have to say, increasingly a bit disturbing.

 

When you colour-correct, you do NOT repaint frame-by-frame. A basic setting change in RGB to pull own the R (red channel) can be done and processed within about 30 seconds, and the effect is rendered across all red-channel colour throughout the clip.

 

By the way, Tim is dead right in saying that the attempt to grade out the blood in that doctored clip from your 'Illuminati' enthusiast friend is hopeless - orange hands, orange knife blade, and heavily discoloured red-route lines.

 

So here's a tip to your conspiracy-loon mates: you need to use secondary colour correction to achieve the deception you're after, because this enables you to isolate parts of the image, and alter colour without changing colour in other parts of the frame. Even then, though, the quality of the source material is so poor - so over-compressed - that you still won't be able to do much that would fool anyone other than those whop wish to be fooled.

 

The 'signs of tampering' you refer to with the ghosting is another example of your ignorance-as-evidence approach. The ghosting in the frame-grab is an artefact of interlaced recording - in other words, it's on the original phone-camera recording itself.

 

To explain for others reading this thread (ie you can ignore what follows because it's inconvenient to you): there are two basic ways of capturing moving images digitally or on video: interlace and progressive.

 

In progressive mode, each of the 25 frames per second is recorded in its entirety. So if you freeze-frame it, you'll see a mix of image sharpness and, depending on the shutter speed, motion blur (eg if you record with the shutter set to OFF you'll see the most motion blur because you are recording at an effective shutter speed of 1/25 of a second, and motion will blur out more than if you had set the shutter speed to the more conventional 1/50. To express this the other way around, by increasingly the shutter speed you can produce the motion-blur-free effect you see at the beginning of Saving Private Ryan).

 

In interlaced mode, the image recorded every 25th of a second is split into two 'fields'. Each field records half of the image. If you were able to view each field, it would look like you were viewing the image through horizontal prison bars. The following field then records that part of the image covered by the prison bars. These two fields are then combined into a single frame. If you think about it for a moment, the ghosting - which is not just common but universal in interlaced recording - is the product of combining two parts of the image recorded at fractionally different times.

 

Interlaced recording is common in newsgathering, for example, and in any form where the need to process information quickly is paramount - hence its use in camera phones too (although it is possible to record progressive).

 

So in short this is yet more pap crap. I just can't work out whether you're a compulsive liar or you are really that twisted as to suggest the Woolwich incident was an invention.

 

And yet again, this is more quantity masquerading as quality from your good self.

 

You begin your post by knocking the Illuminati type that released the vid. Completely irrelevant btw, as I don't believe the person who posted the video is making any claims whatsoever about the blood, or lack thereof, on the hands. Seems to me that the only agenda on this video is reminding people of the dangers of divide and rule, even if the term "higher ups" is embarrassing. I have to ask, when the person who posted the video isn't making those claims, why are you doing so? Same old Verbal, obfuscate, ascribe what is not there, and discredit.

 

That kind of makes all of your points about the malicious intent of the video's poster null and void.

 

Before we travel into your description of interlace vs progressive, I think it's important to address one thing. How many separate recordings do you think you're watching here?

[Gemmel]

LOL give up pap or get some help.

[hypochondriac]

Reminds me of this bloke:

 

[Viking Warrior]

Pap based on your superior knowledge about no blood on the killers had are you now concluding that a soldier was murdered last week ? Yes or no . And if you say yes are you again suggesting somebody else killed lee and not these two guys

No doubt you will not give an honest answer as it is something you rarely do on such topics

[JustMike]

and people wonder why the other thread was locked!

[JustMike]

Yeah, I found the tacked-on message at the end to be a bit noddy too.

 

However, I could not escape the fact that his hands are nothing like the bloody messes of compressed colour they are in the photos plastered over the national media.

 

 

It's not rocket science, mush.

 

are you saying, just for clarity that this chap did not stab the bloke on the floor?

[Barry Sanchez]

Pap can not reply, he is crying for the Somalian Pirates and FARC rebels....................

[CB Fry]

are you saying, just for clarity that this chap did not stab the bloke on the floor?

 

The, like, government did it.

[Verbal]

The, like, government did it.

 

Conspiracy theorists usually aim higher than that. So the culprits are more likely to be the intergalactic skypilots who control the Earth's orbit (obviously).

[pap]

are you saying, just for clarity that this chap did not stab the bloke on the floor?

 

Just for clarity, I'm having difficulty reconciling the bloody nature of the attack with the bloodless attackers. Same issue I raised in an initial thread when I was just pointing out the clean state of the jacket. Since then, I've seen video footage of the same event that shows different things.

 

Go and ask people what happened in Woolwich last week, and 9/10 will probably tell you that a soldier had his head cut off, yet it's still not clear that Lee Rigby was actually decapitated. The post-mortem revealed the cause of death to be multiple, incisive wounds.

 

The more I look into it, the convinced I am. One of the most interesting things I've found is one of the least sensational. It's a picture taken from the top floor of the bus. Linked, rather than embedded, because it does show the victim. It's just another incongruent artefact from what was billed and reported as a bloody massacre.

[pap]

Pap can not reply, he is crying for the Somalian Pirates and FARC rebels....................

 

Pap can not reply. He is busy being an implement of industry and adding to his legendary professional status. Actually, that's not quite true 'cos I just did, twice.

 

How's the form with yourself, Bazza?

[pap]

Conspiracy theorists usually aim higher than that. So the culprits are more likely to be the intergalactic skypilots who control the Earth's orbit (obviously).

 

I'll pay your fiver for you if you can keep all your posts this civil

[CB Fry]

Just for clarity, I'm having difficulty reconciling the bloody nature of the attack with the bloodless attackers. Same issue I raised in an initial thread when I was just pointing out the clean state of the jacket. Since then, I've seen video footage of the same event that shows different things.

 

Go and ask people what happened in Woolwich last week, and 9/10 will probably tell you that a soldier had his head cut off, yet it's still not clear that Lee Rigby was actually decapitated. The post-mortem revealed the cause of death to be multiple, incisive wounds.

 

The more I look into it, the convinced I am. One of the most interesting things I've found is one of the least sensational. It's a picture taken from the top floor of the bus. Linked, rather than embedded, because it does show the victim. It's just another incongruent artefact from what was billed and reported as a bloody massacre.

 

Okay then. Not decapitated but murdered in cold blood in broad daylight with a eff-off big knife (don't tell us, the knife was superimposed by ITV News).

 

What does your razor sharp not-actually-decapitated revelation tell us? That he isn't a murderer after all and is in fact a political prisoner of the evil UK government? The whole thing is made up? None of it happened?

 

Do tell.

[stu0x]

Just for clarity, I'm having difficulty reconciling the bloody nature of the attack with the bloodless attackers. Same issue I raised in an initial thread when I was just pointing out the clean state of the jacket. Since then, I've seen video footage of the same event that shows different things.

 

Go and ask people what happened in Woolwich last week, and 9/10 will probably tell you that a soldier had his head cut off, yet it's still not clear that Lee Rigby was actually decapitated. The post-mortem revealed the cause of death to be multiple, incisive wounds.

 

The more I look into it, the convinced I am. One of the most interesting things I've found is one of the least sensational. It's a picture taken from the top floor of the bus. Linked, rather than embedded, because it does show the victim. It's just another incongruent artefact from what was billed and reported as a bloody massacre.

I can tell you with one hundred percent certainty that you are a deluded fool. And I don't need a dodgy YouTube video to 'prove' it.

[Verbal]

I'll pay your fiver for you if you can keep all your posts this civil

 

I'll not pay you anything but I'm curious as to your complete avoidance of the very basic scientific (optics of blood on dark materials) and technical (grading fx; interlaced recording) issues I've raised. (Incidentally, you inability to restore the redness of the bloody hands with colour correction has to do with the fact that you're now working with a degraded and 'baked in' image - I won't bother explaining because you'll just ignore it.)

 

Any normal well-balanced person who had doubts about what they saw - very second-hand - would say things like:

 

'I don't get why there's ghosting on his hands in the frame grab.' Not 'The ghosting is proof that this video was tampered with.'

 

Or: 'Why is there a video with his hands turned orange?' Not: there no blood on his hands and I'm going to ignore the fact that he's a black man with orange hands carrying an orange-bladed carving knife.'

 

Or: 'How do you colour-correct?' Not: 'Each frame would need to be hand-painted by elves.'

 

And so on. In short, a normal person wouldn't display the distinctive psychological trait of 'confirmation bias' - that is, a condition which drives the sufferer to rule out all explanations, including the most blindingly obvious ones, in favour of a narrative which, in this case, indicates conspiracy and manipulation by grand forces unknown.

 

By the way, your latest suspicions strongly suggest that you lack the simple ability to follow the sequence of events of the murder. You do know - don't you? - that Lee Rigby was attacked by the wall in front of the car, where there are two large blood pools plus a blood trail away. You do know - don't you? - that he was pulled into the road after all this blood-letting had happened and had in all likelihood bled out by then. You do know - don't you? - that most eyewitness accounts have Adebolajo doing most of the stabbing, with at least one account suggesting that Adebowale was filming it. Etc, etc.

 

Any normal person who perhaps had got carried away with their enthusiasm for a bit conspiracy nuttery would apologise for being so patently ridiculous - not to mention deeply insulting the the family of the victim.

 

As I said earlier, it's not just that your posts are insulting and ridiculous in the way they blow past any reasonable and technically valid explanation, and implicitly ridicule the victim and his family - there's something sinister in them. I have my suspicions, but the fact that Woolwich has been elevated (if that's the word) to a conspiracy theory by Infowars is a clue, because you are absolutely in step with them in your reasoning. Of course, they are more specific, and less squeamish about the 'force' that's really behind this: for the bat-**** crazies on that site, Woolwich is another operation conducted under the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Infowars, as I've said before, appeals not just to right-wing fanatics in the US; it draws support from Muslim extremists like Tamelan Tsarnaev, the older Boston bomber.

 

So: Neo-Nazis and murdering Islamo-fascists - that's the company you keep. Nice.

[pap]

I'm well aware of confirmation bias, and well aware that I probably suffer from it. I think you probably have the same condition. This is the third thread in which we've discussed conspiracy related matters. Unfailingly, I don't think you've conceded a single point.

 

Usual suspects doing the name-calling in those threads, too.

 

You are so keen to put me in with the infowars crew. It's just another example of you letting your imagination run wild and completely missing the mark. If a smoking gun was ever found on one of the big conspiracies, Alex Jones would be the last person in the world I'd want to run the story. I can't think of a bigger turnoff in the conspiracy movement, a shouting unfocused boorish man who happens to cream loads of cash out of it. There's a reason he's the go-to guy whenever they want to put a truther on the telly....

 

Still, let's hear your "sinister" accusations. Go further than what you've actually written. I'm interested in seeing whether you cross the libel border.

[latter day saint]

Just for clarity, I'm having difficulty reconciling the bloody nature of the attack with the bloodless attackers. Same issue I raised in an initial thread when I was just pointing out the clean state of the jacket. Since then, I've seen video footage of the same event that shows different things.

 

Go and ask people what happened in Woolwich last week, and 9/10 will probably tell you that a soldier had his head cut off, yet it's still not clear that Lee Rigby was actually decapitated. The post-mortem revealed the cause of death to be multiple, incisive wounds.

 

The more I look into it, the convinced I am. One of the most interesting things I've found is one of the least sensational. It's a picture taken from the top floor of the bus. Linked, rather than embedded, because it does show the victim. It's just another incongruent artefact from what was billed and reported as a bloody massacre.

 

have you ever seen someone that has been stabbed ? in real life i mean not in a computer game,on CSI wotever or in some sh*te horror film ? i have 3 times( one of the times i was the victim) and there was no blood spraying about like some cheap slasher flick. i was stabbed in the shoulder in a fight & it went unnoticed as i was wearing a black sweater which didnt show the surprissingly small amount of blood that escaped from the wound. at the same time my mate had been stabbed four times with a carving knife and the bastard who did it wasnt covered in blood like Carrie.

[pap]

have you ever seen someone that has been stabbed ? in real life i mean not in a computer game,on CSI wotever or in some sh*te horror film ? i have 3 times( one of the times i was the victim) and there was no blood spraying about like some cheap slasher flick. i was stabbed in the shoulder in a fight & it went unnoticed as i was wearing a black sweater which didnt show the surprissingly small amount of blood that escaped from the wound. at the same time my mate had been stabbed four times with a carving knife and the bastard who did it wasnt covered in blood like Carrie.

 

I'm not going to tell you I've seen something I haven't ( I haven't ).

 

Are all stabbings the same? Accounts of this one were fairly graphic. I quite enjoyed your Carrie reference, but its completely at odds with what one eyewitness said, who likened it to a horror movie, speaking of hacking and removing organs, etc.

 

Let's not forget this started out as a decapitation. On a separate point, that information could have been released on the day. I do wonder why the public were left to seethe over it for days.

[Gemmel]

I'm not going to tell you I've seen something I haven't ( I haven't ).

 

 

Well you told us you could prove that the blood didn't exist and was added "To sex it up" (Strange use of words). Which as I stated you patently couldn't (And obviously didn't) I genuinely think you need some help.

[pap]

Well you told us you could prove that the blood didn't exist and was added "To sex it up" (Strange use of words). Which as I stated you patently couldn't (And obviously didn't) I genuinely think you need some help.

 

Yeah right

 

Keep on with your "obviously", "patently" and your "genuinely".

 

That makes you right.

[Gemmel]

That makes you right.

You said you could prove something and I said you couldn't.......... and you couldn't and didn't.

 

That's what makes me right

[Smirking_Saint]

Pap seems to be doing well......

[pap]

You said you could prove something and I said you couldn't.......... and you couldn't and didn't.

 

That's what makes me right

 

Only because you blindly refuse to accept any validity in the bloodless hand video.

 

Large font, eh?

 

Classy.

[Smirking_Saint]

Only because you blindly refuse to accept any validity in the bloodless hand video.

 

Large font, eh?

 

Classy.

 

Saying that anyone else is blindly refusing to accept anything is pretty hypocritical here pap TBH. The majority (ie everyone but you) are refusing to see any validity in it because the theories are obviously complete ****e and inconsistancies from myself a neutral have IMO been adequately explained.

[pap]

Saying that anyone else is blindly refusing to accept anything is pretty hypocritical here pap TBH. The majority (ie everyone but you) are refusing to see any validity in it because the theories are obviously complete ****e and inconsistancies from myself a neutral have IMO been adequately explained.

 

There's that word again, obviously.

 

Things aren't as obvious to me sir, but we don't have to fall out over it.

[Smirking_Saint]

So explain to me the reasons for why this situation happened ? What drove them to do it, who they were and what they stood to gain ?

 

I have no problem with people questioning things, questioning is a part of life but chasing after theories that are so far beyond the realms of impossibility with only some very inconsistant evidence to look at is crazy.

 

Tell me, of all of the worlds major conspiracies how many have been proven true ?

[pap]

Tell me, of all of the worlds major conspiracies how many have been proven true ?

 

Here is an article with ten. Dunno if you'd call them major.

 

http://listverse.com/2013/05/02/10-nefarious-conspiracies-proven-true/

[stu0x]

I'm not going to tell you I've seen something I haven't ( I haven't ).

 

Are all stabbings the same? Accounts of this one were fairly graphic. I quite enjoyed your Carrie reference, but its completely at odds with what one eyewitness said, who likened it to a horror movie, speaking of hacking and removing organs, etc.

 

Let's not forget this started out as a decapitation. On a separate point, that information could have been released on the day. I do wonder why the public were left to seethe over it for days.

I'm honestly not sure I get your point.

 

Are you saying witnesses lied? Or can you not understand how, if 50 different people see an extremely traumatic incident, they are all going to have differing (in some cases wildly differing) accounts of what happened, but that does not make them liars or covering something up, it makes them human beings?

 

What information could have been released on the day? Do you understand that Post Mortems, even emergency ones, are not conducted immediately?

 

Can you not understand how the most graphic injury someone suffers in an assault may not be the cause of death? Because the cause of death is what killed someone, so anything done *after* they were dead, for example, wouldn't be the cause of death. Do you understand what a PM is?

 

Genuine questions, as you seem to be drawing conclusions and basing logic on utterly faulty premises.

 

Like I said, I can tell you with 100% certainty that, if your argument is that this is part of some massive cover up on the basis that you've seen a video of someone who appears not to have blood on his hands, then you are deluded.

[Smirking_Saint]

Here is an article with ten. Dunno if you'd call them major.

 

http://listverse.com/2013/05/02/10-nefarious-conspiracies-proven-true/

 

Not really the level that we are talking about, some were a bit eye opening, some Im not surprised about and some really didnt read as they were proven true

[aintforever]

Only because you blindly refuse to accept any validity in the bloodless hand video.

 

Large font, eh?

 

Classy.

 

The video can be changed to go more redder or less redder, what is your point? One of them had obviously been adjusted but wether it has or not is meaningless. The c*nt is admitting doing it on the video, he was seen doing and he was caught alive at the scene by the rozzers. What possible conspiracy theory could there be?

 

You quite frankly come across as being a bit simple. You see things you don't understand and from you lack of understanding draw your own bizarre conclusions. think you need to spend less time on the internet and more times in the real world.

[pap]

The video can be changed to go more redder or less redder, what is your point? One of them had obviously been adjusted but wether it has or not is meaningless. The c*nt is admitting doing it on the video, he was seen doing and he was caught alive at the scene by the rozzers. What possible conspiracy theory could there be?

 

You quite frankly come across as being a bit simple. You see things you don't understand and from you lack of understanding draw your own bizarre conclusions. think you need to spend less time on the internet and more times in the real world.

 

The best explanation provided for the lack of blood in the video I've posted is VLC video manipulation. When people make these points, they handily ignore the points I make afterward, such as the colour levels going up universally in that scenario.

 

As for spending less time on the Internet, you sure you want to level that at me, 7.6K post boy? We joined at the same time

[CB Saint]

Pap, do you genuinely believe the the government staged this?

[Smirking_Saint]

We all get the colour scaling and its effects over the whole video, how do you explain his tango hands then ?

[CB Saint]

We all get the colour scaling and its effects over the whole video, how do you explain his tango hands then ?

 

Simple, he had just leant against a fence that had just been ronsealed.

 

Tripped over in a tanning salon.

 

Really badly smudged henna tattoo

[buctootim]

The best explanation provided for the lack of blood in the video I've posted is VLC video manipulation. When people make these points, they handily ignore the points I make afterward, such as the colour levels going up universally in that scenario.

 

 

Can you really not understand the difference between taking red out and adding red in? If you have a white sheet of paper with red stripes and remove the red from the whole sheet out what are you left with? - white paper yes? So now you have white paper and add red in across the sheet what do you have? Red paper. A picture with bits of red removed (say red hands and red lines) and a picture with red added to the whole image making it all blush pink, not the same Pap.

 

You really do come across as having a cognitive defect, intelligent in some aspects but totally off base and away with the fairies in other pretty simple processing tasks. Aspergers to be frank.

[pap]

You really do come across as having a cognitive defect, intelligent in some aspects but totally off base and away with the fairies in other pretty simple processing tasks. Aspergers to be frank.

 

Is that really necessary?

[buctootim]

Is that really necessary?

 

 

Yes. You remind me of my ex's brother. Functioned well on some levels but was convinced by conspiracies, especially around aliens. The difference between him and you was that you knew he struggled in some areas and sought out second opinions to confirm / deny what his own thoughts told him. He didn't try and convince the rest of the world that black is white.

[pap]

Yes. You remind me of my ex's brother. Functioned well on some levels but was convinced by conspiracies, especially around aliens. The difference between him and you was that you knew he struggled in some areas and sought out second opinions to confirm / deny what his own thoughts told him. He didn't try and convince the rest of the world that black is white.

 

Some would consider what you just wrote to be defamation of character. The truth is that beyond this forum, and what I post on my blog, or other social media, you know nothing about me.

 

This is why I try my best not to get personal on here. I can't say I always succeed, and I've certainly had a few snide words for you in the past, but I'm ever mindful that what I see on here is a fragment of a person, most of the time not even qualified by a real life identity. I find myself in accord with posters on some issues and completely opposed to them on others, but the whole time, I'm still conscious of what I'm seeing. Fragments. What they share on here, that's about it.

 

Within the confines of this debate, I've been very careful not to subscribe to an over-arching theory, partly out of ignorance, but mostly out of common sense. Aspects of it don't sit right with me. They do to you. Fine, we'll agree to differ.

 

What I don't understand is why the same three people, namely yourself, Verbal and VFTT, have thrown such abuse my way and made wild leaps of faith about my general character based on very little information. Verbal's continuing insistence that I'm keeping company with the likes of info-wars or neo-nazi's is a f*cking joke. I'm a lefty with some serious trust issues when it comes to the government.

 

It's a shame it can't be left at that, but you have to go further. We've had our beefs over the years, buctootim - but I don't dislike you, nor do I spend my time idly constructing an entire life story and psychological profile for you. I don't have enough of it. I have enjoyed interacting with all three of you in the past, but your overt abuse in this thread has been disgusting, and says a lot more about you than it does me.

 

pap might be crazy. There are worse things to be, as you've ably demonstrated on this thread.

[Ludwig]

You really do come across as having a cognitive defect, intelligent in some aspects but totally off base and away with the fairies in other pretty simple processing tasks. Aspergers to be frank.

 

 

Is that really necessary?

 

 

pap might be crazy.

 

Don't refer to yourself in the third person. It makes you seem crazy.

[buctootim]

pap might be crazy. There are worse things to be, as you've ably demonstrated on this thread.

 

There certainly are Pap. There are people who refuse to believe dead five old year Boston boys and his mutilated sister and mother exist. There are people who think somebody with his legs blown off has been paid for his acting skills. And there people who are able to ignore all the evidence and the suffering of his family and orphaned son, to claim a dead soldier didn't really die. They are the ones I reserve my utter contempt for.

[pap]

There certainly are Pap. There are people who refuse to believe dead five old year Boston boys and his mutilated sister and mother exist. There are people who think somebody with his legs blown off has been paid for his acting skills. And there people who are able to ignore all the evidence and the suffering of his family and orphaned son, to claim a dead soldier didn't really die. They are the ones I reserve my utter contempt for.

 

The nice thing about a thinly-veiled, not entirely attributed insult is that you can ascribe any qualities you want, and if someone challenges you on it, you can say "ah, I was just talking generally".

 

I've raised questions, expressed doubts, provided possible explanations for things that people said couldn't/wouldn't happen in good faith, and pointed out the obvious ease at which people can be created, bread and butter stuff for any serious intelligence agency.

 

You really are out to destroy now, aren't you?

 

Good luck.

[pap]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Don't refer to yourself in the third person. It makes you seem crazy.

 

pap disregards your remark, and resumes playing with his imaginary hedgehog Derek.

[badgerx16]

So, back to the OP :

 

Two major course corrections for Parliament are on the cards. Both are a direct result of the Woolwich attacks last week.

 

1) Revival of the Internet snoopers bill

 

http://rt.com/news/woolwich-snoopers-charter-murder-811/

 

2) £3Bn diverted from Welfare Bill to bolster security services

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10083049/Iain-Duncan-Smith-cut-welfare-to-fund-police-and-Forces.html

 

This one is particularly cynical; cost-savings measures like no housing benefits for under 25s and limitation of state payments to families with more than two children. These plans were shelved previously, but are now back on the agenda.

 

Does one exceptional event justify this sort of legislation?

 

No.

 

HTH.

[Smirking_Saint]

I did forget about the thread about the boston bombings. Wow simply wow

 

Pap I think unfortunately you have yourself defamed your own character, now I dont condone what Tim has said at all but you have to realise you are posting on a public medium things that people not only disbelieve but are a little disgusted and certainly surprised to be reading. Im not commenting on any psychological issues, as you say, I dont know you etc

 

You do come across as a very intelligent chap, however you seem to be a bit of a fantasist wanting there to be alterior motives. I personally cant understand this, but if you dont want people to judge those fragments you leave on here then think about what you are writing ?

 

No doubt the ban hammer is on its way though, or atleast the lock, which is unfortunate and frankly not needed

[stu0x]

The nice thing about a thinly-veiled, not entirely attributed insult is that you can ascribe any qualities you want, and if someone challenges you on it, you can say "ah, I was just talking generally".

 

I've raised questions, expressed doubts, provided possible explanations for things that people said couldn't/wouldn't happen in good faith, and pointed out the obvious ease at which people can be created, bread and butter stuff for any serious intelligence agency.

 

You really are out to destroy now, aren't you?

 

Good luck.

What would it take to actually convince you? Because you seem utterly unwilling to consider any evidence, however rational, and however overwhelming, that doesn't fit with your 'theory'.

 

I mean, if I were to tell you that I know from *first hand experience* that what you are saying is nonsense, would you believe me? Or would you just dismiss me as one of the lizard people, a shadowy construct created by the security services and planted on saintsweb and its predecessors several years in advance as a sleeper with the sole purpose of pulling the wool over the eyes of the only man who knows the truth?

[Smirking_Saint]

Buctootim was sent by the government to discredit pap......

[pap]

Buctootim was sent by the government to discredit pap......

 

C'mon now. I've said I don't approve of getting personal. I'm sure buctootim is here of his own volition. Don't turn the man into a government stooge.