If the 11-M was the script for a Hitchcock film, the famous report of Diaz de Mera play the role of MacGuffin. A perfect excuse plot, around which are woven machinations of concealment, threats and conflicts between duty and conscience. And all of this, completely irrelevant to the real plot.
As uranium "Notorious" or $ 40,000 stolen from "Psycho", just try to capture the attention of the viewer to take other twists and turns, which for the sake of "Wizard of suspense" led into an unexpected ending.
How important can have the (obvious) links between ETA and Islamic terrorism in a case where, if something can be ruled out because this is the Islamic authorship?
discarded the use of Goma 2 ECO in trains and proved the falsity of the evidence against the stripping of Lavapies, what sense does it continue to insist on circumstantial aspects that only cause confusion and distract from the fundamental?
The official version is, well discredited, cornered, and their advocates are aware of it. And not just a few cranks Conspiranoids or a few right-wing media , but the hearing itself are being relentlessly dismantled the gross lies that supported the control. Therefore, Díaz de Mera case can only serve to make the coup leaders and their cronies make us divert attention from the real issue. What exploded on trains? Why is it took a few hours the decision to hide? Who is trying to hide? Who gave the order to place false evidence to blame the strip? And the most important of all: everything was improvised or had something prepared in advance?
TUCC / Rolón
0 comments:
Post a Comment