It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


'Former British Ambassador Says Terror Alert Is "Propaganda'

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 19 2006 @ 02:25 AM
I found a quite interesting read yesterday. This article gives the account of the former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan Craig Murray. In his statement, Murray re-affirms what many think about the convenience of this plot at a time when opposition to Blair's actions in the mid-east have been growing. Murray states that the plotters were merely tortured into a false submission.

Terror Propaganda

[edit on 19-8-2006 by DJMessiah]

posted on Aug, 21 2006 @ 12:24 PM

Murray describes the alert as "more propaganda than plot," and points out that of all the Muslim terror suspects who have been charged, 80% have been acquitted and only 2% have ever been convicted on offenses related to terrorism.

Oh, Really? 80% have been released? That certainly is an interesting tidbit.

posted on Aug, 21 2006 @ 03:01 PM
The whole war on terror is pure propoganda; you dont fight wars against terrorist you are creating. The people need to realize that their governments create and arm all these little terrorist groups.

They do it all the time. Send agents out to recruit certain wackos to commit terror attacks, then bust your own agents (who of course dont get in trouble); this lets them have something they can use for propoganda to support the war; all youd see on the news is "Home grown terror!" or "Al Queda planned massive attack; foiled by our great CIA". This was done so much in America especially in the last year.

Either theyll go out and find some poor people who would blow up a building for money, and use them; or they will just make the stories up alltogether; like this latest terror "scare" in England, which led to further police crackdown all over the world.

Its as see-thru as a glass window. Fake terror to take away our freedoms. The government says the terrorist commit attacks because they want to scare us, and because they hate our freedoms, and they want to disrupt our society. Why then would the government do exactly those things? Why, out of fear, would they disrupt out society and change our way of life by cracking down on security everywhere because of the terrorist "enemy"; why would they give the enemy what it wants?

Answer: the government wasnt lying. The terrorist DO want to scare us, disrupt our society, and take away our freedoms. Its just the REAL terrorists are the government themselves.

[edit on 21-8-2006 by AscendedMaster]

posted on Aug, 21 2006 @ 06:52 PM
Master I would like you stop referring to the United Kingdom just as know that there where more than just english people killed and injured in this "War on terror" which BTW I might add britain has been fighting for over a 100 years.

posted on Aug, 21 2006 @ 10:18 PM
Ok I will for you my friend. Even if it isnt united or a "Kingdom", I will call it that to avoid arguments. Now, as for my other points...what do you think about those?

posted on Aug, 21 2006 @ 11:34 PM
I think you have real strong points.

I like your delivery and can't argue with it. Keep spreading the word.

I only wish more people knew and weren't brainwashed by MSM.

posted on Aug, 21 2006 @ 11:43 PM
We should be fighting the war against, obesity and smoking. Because those are the two killers of people. I think we should be shutting down cigarrete companies and spending more money on health, screw the terrorists. That is of course if you are 100% logical and dont pay attention to the media whores.

posted on Aug, 22 2006 @ 11:18 AM

Originally posted by AscendedMaster
Ok I will for you my friend. Even if it isnt united or a "Kingdom", I will call it that to avoid arguments.

As someone who lives in two of those countries and has traveled to 3 of them I would say that they are united.

A monarchy, (from the Greek monos, "one," and archein, "to rule") is a form of government that has a monarch as Head of State. The distinguishing characteristic of monarchies is that the Head of State holds their office for life, unlike in a republic, where a president is normally elected for a certain amount of time.

Thats the definition of a kingdom, thats what I live in .

Now, as for my other points...what do you think about those?

What "war on terror" are you referring to when you say its only propaganda?

Do you mean the one britain fought with irish repuplicans for over a 100 years?
Or the latest one that the mr Bush has made up.

new topics

top topics


log in