RicheyJames wrote:eastmidswhizzkid wrote:and these are not my theories.if you remember,we were discussing items posted elsewhere.
really? was this not you then:
eastmidswhizzkid wrote:apart from taking the heat off of g.w.bush's (lack of) enviromental commitments at the g8 -not to mention all the lovely new freedom-restricting laws that will ensue.id cards anybody?- would we (london) have still got the olympics if the bombing had happened two days before?i think not.
and another thing- the general election wasnt so long ago.if the intent was the same as is assumed with regard to madrid (ie influencing the electorate against involvement in iraq) why not then?
i didn't see anyone else making those particular points?
<yawns> ...oh well if you insist:
all of these points (except maybe the one about the olympics,admittedly that was suggested by a friend of my missus') are amongst the many related articles on the net;doubtless these are on the whole unread by yourself.paraphrasing them makes them no more my creations than the direct quoting of another by
james blast makes that
his creation.
as for being baseless,the fact is that
any terror action against UK pr its allies is used to bring in tougher laws with less parlimentary resistance than they may otherwise have had.you yourself share my concern over id cards,the main stated government reason being as an anti-terrorism measure.even though the london bombers were british citizens (and would presumably have been carrying id cards were that legislation in place) do you think that will stop the gov't expediting the proposal in the name of security?
as for bush and the enviroment,friends of the earth and other "green" pressure groups have already condemned the lack of us cmmitment at the g8;saying that "there is unlikely to be any change in american enviromental practice whilst bush is president."
these things do not deflect from "real problems".they are simply other cosiderations.
finally,i have no problem with people disagreeing with me -though of course it is up to them to then convince me of their point of view,if they wish me to adopt it.
i don't percieve it as foolish to consider less "obvious" factors;nor do i condemn those who choose to ignore them.however,your intolerance of
others debating things with which you do not agree leads me to assume you have a blinkered view.
Moving house would entail expenses which would in turn entail me not being able to sustain the lifestyle to which I have become accustomed. 
