[Imc-uk-features] 374796

[Jeff Parks]

Chris wrote:

>>> There is no guidline against speculation and the
>>> current terror hype is clearly news...
>>
>> "Non-news : posts which are clearly purely comment, opinion
>> or rants unrelated to a recent event or action etc."
>
> It is related "to a recent event"...

I interpret that guideline to mean comment and analysis of other
"news, issues, actions and analysis reporting on grassroots,
non-corporate, non-commercial social justice, environmental and
political issues" is welcomed, that is to say comment and analysis of
events and actions that are/would be reported elsewhere on the
newswire, not random blog reposts about anything that happens to have
happened recently.

>> "Inaccurate : posts that are inaccurate or misleading."
>
> Can you be a bit more concrete and perhaps say in what way you
> think it is "inaccurate or misleading"?

In the lede: "Naturally, the two patsies who "rammed a petrol-filled,
four-wheel-drive vehicle into Glasgow airport," as Reuters describes
the pathetic suicide bomb attempt, are linked to the staged events in
London."

What evidence does Nimmo offer for his assertion that the London
incidents were 'staged'? None.

Paragraph 4: "[...] unable to make and detonate suicide bombs, unlike
their brethren in Iraq who are, after all, well-trained by British SAS
operatives donning Arab garb and wigs."

Again no evidence, and the assertion doesn't even tally with the
linked (in the blog version) Prison Planet article, which suggests the
SAS are carrying out the bombings rather than training others.

>> "Disruptive : Contributions by individuals who
>> habitually publish above mentioned discouraged content."
>
> There has been lots of debate on this list about Kurt Nimmo,
> I think we really need to distill it onto a wiki page, but there
> is not consensus that all his posts should be hidden though
> some wanted this... so I don't see how it's "Disruptive".

Well, then there we disagree, but I'm surprised anyone has spoken up
in favour of him, considering his piss-poor analysis, not to mention
his dodgy politics.

mit liebe u. wut,
Jeff
-- 
"It is less the ontological aspect of the force that matters so much
as the epistemological aspect of the force - it is not the brick that
scares the state, but the willingness to throw it."