It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Lord Gilbert: "If you told them that some ERRB warheads were going to be dropped there and that it would be a very unpleasant place to go, they would not go there.
"You would greatly reduce your problem of protecting those borders from infiltration from one side or another.
www.huffingtonpost.co.uk...
Served under Labour, and in Tony Blair’s Cabinet. Surely just a coincidence he’s now completely of his trolley?
Gilbert was roundly criticized for his comment by fellow parliament members. Responding for the government Lord Wallace said the coalition did not share the "rumbustious views" of Gilbert.
John William Gilbert, or Baron Gilbert, twice gained the seat of the defense minister, first in the Labor government of James Callaghan and then in the Tony Blair’s first PM term. Gilbert also was a member of the Intelligence and Security Committee while he was an MP. rt.com...
Your Lordships may say that this is impractical, but nobody lives up in the mountains on the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan except for a few goats and a handful of people herding them. If you told them that some ERRB warheads were going to be dropped there and that it would be a very unpleasant place to go, they would not go there. You would greatly reduce your problem of protecting those borders from infiltration from one side or another”
The way I am reading it, he doesn't suggest actually doing it, just telling them we are going to and hope they fall for the ruse...
Originally posted by happykat39
reply to post by stumason
The way I am reading it, he doesn't suggest actually doing it, just telling them we are going to and hope they fall for the ruse...
The threat alone would not stop the fanatics. They would just ramp up their terrorism and dare someone to drop a bomb on them and praise Allah as the flash disintegrated them.
It is that kind of sabre rattling that could actually lead to WWIII.
What rule did it violate? Did it provide the ATS audience with real information, the government is (actually) perfectly happy for people to chat about (in exchange for those said peoples IP address)?
stumason This was posted a few days ago then 404'd by the Mods...
Glad you now see there is one.
Considering every minute of Parliamentary business is covered and broadcast live, you'd think there would be a video of this supposed speech.
Stumson Aren't you in danger of spitting on the truth with unreasoned skepticism? But if you found a continuation (that did not match RT quotation) then you'd certainly have a point. However...
However, noticeably, they cut him off when he is about to go on
When you read the context it’s quite clear he wants to do it.
The way I am reading it, he doesn't suggest actually doing it, just telling them we are going to and hope they fall for the ruse...
Originally posted by Liberal1984
What rule did it violate? Did it provide the ATS audience with real information, the government is (actually) perfectly happy for people to chat about (in exchange for those said peoples IP address)?
Or was it in danger of becoming a Top Topic (even without a close knit group of 30 or so people, artificially giving it flags?)
Just wondering!
Originally posted by Liberal1984Glad you now see there is one.
Originally posted by Liberal1984
Stumson Aren't you in danger of spitting on the truth with unreasoned skepticism? But if you found a continuation (that did not match RT quotation) then you'd certainly have a point. However...
Originally posted by Liberal1984
(Whilst there are plenty of examples of BBC, Fox and Sky news deceiving their audience) I am not aware of one such example from RT. Nor would one be in RT’s interests because you can bet your pants that when one comes (as is somewhat inevitable in the business of journalism) it will be highly, highly, publicised by mainstream-regime media.
Originally posted by Liberal1984
Furthermore: What Lord Gilbert, said on camera is completely consistent with the way he was quoted by alternative media.
Originally posted by Liberal1984When you read the context it’s quite clear he wants to do it.
Otherwise it’s obvious it would not work, as even Taliban have access to radio news, and they would therefore be laughing about our empty threats.
What examples come to mind? What do you know of that’s false. I for one am most keen to see an example of RT lying.
And there are many examples of RT putting out total garbage.
So what? Anyone with half an ounce of matter knows that although our government does not control the media (except the BBC to some small degree) our media does control our government, and does a good job at putting private & lobbyists interests miles ahead of the publics.
Be careful putting them on a pedestal and declaring otherwise "free world" media as "regime", because anyone with half and ounce of grey matter knows RT is controlled by the Kremlin.
But there are very few news stories I see them not covering, whilst there are a great many (like this one) our “free?” media has not been allowed to show the audience. It was thanks to RT that I first learnt of the Syrians tricking prisoners into being suicide bombers…
It was, after all, setup with the sole intention of countering Western news outlets and their perceived biases.
If you can find the Lords footage we all know is filmed, and you spoke of as if it was freely available, and if you find a contradiction from what RT is reporting then you have a point. Otherwise it’s just speculation –speculation I’d argue is far more justified in Western media because the examples I’ve given are just a few I know of where they plainly lie to our people.
It is somewhat curious that the only quotes are short and provide no background, with the only video clearly cutting off a second part of the speech by Lord Gilbert which may have changed what he said entirely.
The Huffington Post (link already given) expanded on it www.huffingtonpost.co.uk...
Read the context? There is no context!