Diana Doddi Inquest

[Beachcomber]

It's one of those supernatural phenomenon that ionns cant understand

More like an underlying law of coincidence.

Surely that's a contradiction in terms? The two are mutually exclusive.

[Sheik Yir Erse]

The two are mutually exclusive.

What's that....... the terms "Ionns" and "understand" in the same sentence?

[ionnsaigh]

Beachcomber,

Yes both are mutually exclusive " supernatural phenomenon " is the language of priests and imbeciles.
The former have a controlling self interest in maintaining - the justification of their own miserable existence.
The latter are undoubtedly deranged individuals - who ultimately seek some form of attention. Part of the lets discuss unexplained phenomena - and attribute it to supernatural abstract nonsense. Their desire for attention knows no bounds - special spiritual self indulgent - that if the reality of the matter be exposed - serves only to slow down the course of Human development.

[Beachcomber]

No, it was the suggestion that coincidences occur in response to some law that I was referring to. If that were the case then they wouldn't be coincidences at all.

[ionnsaigh]

Clever boy

[hugh]

Have I missed anything? I was the victim of an information blackout myself and had to buy a new electric abacus...Trevor Rees Jones! that
was his name! It's all coming back to me now. His survival belies the assassination theory.
The problem with conspiracy theories is they start with a conclusion based on personal paranoid fantasies then have to twist, spin and distort
every relevant fact to meet the end. Thus we end up with imaginary information blackouts, shadowy figures on grassy knolls and all the other
paraphernalia of paranoia (was that a Pink Floyd album?)
Mind you, with all the crap they print and broadcast these days I'd almost welcome an information blackout. Whatever happened to journalism?

[Pete Reek]

A man called Murdoch, and some others, came along.

[ionnsaigh]

Have I missed anything? I was the victim of an information blackout myself and had to buy a new electric abacus...Trevor Rees Jones! that
was his name! It's all coming back to me now. His survival belies the assassination theory.
The problem with conspiracy theories is they start with a conclusion based on personal paranoid fantasies then have to twist, spin and distort
every relevant fact to meet the end. Thus we end up with imaginary information blackouts, shadowy figures on grassy knolls and all the other
paraphernalia of paranoia (was that a Pink Floyd album?)
Mind you, with all the crap they print and broadcast these days I'd almost welcome an information blackout. Whatever happened to journalism?

Why does his survival belie the assassination theory?. He was not the principle target. A conspiracy theory is - in many ways similar to that of a prosecution - in that guilt or innocence have to be proved - your definition of conspiracy theory - if taken literally - rules out any honest enquiry. An abstraction of the theory - that suits nobody - other than conspirators.

[hugh]

I thought I was stating the bleedin' obvious, but, just for you, I will try to clarify.
Covert operations prefer to remain covert (that's why they're called covert). They (I would imagine) would make an effort not to leave messy
clues lying about, like eye witnesses. The art of assassination by car crash has not yet developed to the point where it can differentiate between
principle targets and bodyguards within the car in question, although I'm sure they'll be working on it..
Conspiracy theories are not obliged to prove anything. Under their auspices anyone can spout any old nonsense to air their own personal
prejudices, replete with all the usual non sequitors, false syllogisms and meaningless chuntering (talking in general, you understand, nothing
personal Ionnsaigh )
In an ideal world, prosecution has to prove guilt, otherwise innocence is assumed. I know it doesn't always work that way, but that's because we
don't live in an ideal world. We live in a world where all sorts of unplanned things happen. Like car crashes.

[ionnsaigh]

hugh , Aye yer a right clever bugger so you are. Personally I couldn't give a shit - about any of the Royal family - who cares wither the Queen gave the nod or not. What I support is freedom of speech - particularly when it comes to criticisms of the Monarchy. At what point does genuine criticism - become treason.

[hugh]

Cheers, Ionns. Heartfelt, I'm sure! I'm not that bothered about them myself, mate, they all seem pretty pointless and a bit thick to me..
(well, a lot actually...the cost of their education must run into a good few grand (and the rest) per "O" level (or whatever it is these days))...
money down the drain whichever way you look at it...I just thought that particular theory was an absolute non-runner...surely our brilliant
security services have better things to screw up (sorry, bigger fish to fry).

[ionnsaigh]

[ionnsaigh]

I watched the bbc much heralded documentary The Monarchy . Such a nice wee wumin - oor majesty - looked surprisingly enough - rather quite ordinary. The amount of Americans - who didn't appear to know who she was - also surprised.
Of course they don't happen to share a common border - or for that matter be subjected to continual - Royal propaganda. predominately of the English variety.
Nice to see Margaret wits her name - you know that wan that's - a Socialist - ridding in style.
Awe the talk aboot special relationships - excuse us - what relationship - certainly one - that I would disapprove of. Anti American - certainly not - ask bobbie - Anti Capital - certainly yes - ask anybody.
Prince Philip England Greece - an that last wan - Norway - wis it . a could never bow the knee - tae the like o that .

[ionnsaigh]

[bill]

I'm not a great one for royalty,but it is interesting to see what goes on behind the scenes on an occassion like a state visit.
President Bush looked like a fish out of water in her maj's company .