Originally posted by Indy
The fact that they were so quick to call it an accident indicates to me that it was probably terrorism. Terrorists have been after London for a while
now with one terrorist attack and another failed terrorist attack. Now the fuel depot outside of town blows sky high. At this point I'd think it
was terrorism unless they can prove otherwise.
Thats some of the weirdest and most twisted logic i've ever heard ?! It sounds like the witch trials of the dark ages, just because you seem to want
it to be a terrorist attack, you want authorities to prove that it wasnt ?!!?!
When the bombs went off in London, within an hour or so it was announced that it was possibly a terrorist attack, and confirmed within the day. Why
would this be any different ? Accidents happen in these kinds of facilities all the time, its just that this one has been of catastrophic
magnitude.
Do you blame every accident on terrorists ? Has the archetypal image of the terrorist become the new 'bogeyman' of the 21st century ? Next time you
get a flat tyre, I reckon it might well just a be terrorist action - unless of course you can prove otherwise ?!