Jump to content

Murder of James Bulger


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

I know this will be a touchy subject for alot of people, but what are anyone's thoughts on the murder of Liverpool toddler James Bulger?. I mentioned this is another thread but thought I'd post here. I came across this site:

 

https://enchantedlifepath.com/2019/09/24/james-bulger-denise-fergus-ignored-call-saying-weve-got-your-boy/

 

Was this horriric murder really the work of two 10 year old school boys, or is there more to it that we are not being told.

Edited by Occulus5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some good questions and points raised in that article. Certainly very curious that James father Ralph noted his suspicions that the two boys may have been 'patsies' used to cover up a pedo ring (and the 5 computers that uncle Jimmy went through in such a short time researching the two killers). It was certainly a case that gained widespread coverage and caused much outrage. The article does make some basic errors though imho; it fails to really place itself back in 1993 and looks at things through the lens of now rather than then, especially so when it claims that security should have caught these kids in the shopping centre for so long and that the mother of another boy who was targeted by the two boys should/would have done more. It was this case that really 'woke' many up to the dangers and security back then was not as professional as it is now. In fact I doubt back then it was even 'manned' by security full time. It was the Bulger case that made people realize that 'kids could be killers', certainly in the UK, so the other mum probably thought the boys were just being cheeky rather than evil little bastards, until after the fact. 

 

It certainly could have been a psyop though. It certainly brought much fear and outrage and probably helped CCTV to become more normalised and widespread/accepted. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for giving your views on this story. Yes I have to agree about the errors comparing back then to today when it comes to those points mentioned; people tend to forget 1993 was a different world compared to what it is now, there was no mass saturation of surveillance, I don't think the word "CCTV" was even used much. Yes I doubt the CCTV back then was anywhere near as hi tech as it is today with the facial recognition we have and that the cameras today will be monitored/manned 24/7.  Likely there would've been probably very few cameras in the Strand shopping centre (compared to now where they are in every single shop, often fixed to the ceiling, round every corner, in lifts, entrances to public toilets and so on, basically every area will be monitored with few blind spots). And of course people didn't react with suspicion like they do today if they saw a little boy walking away with two 10 year olds.

 

What you said here is very interesting and it's something I've always thought myself:

It certainly could have been a psyop though. It certainly brought much fear and outrage and probably helped CCTV to become more normalised and widespread/accepted. 

 

When the story kept being mentioned on the local news throughout the 1990s they always made a point about the CCTV footage, it's as if they were trying to condition people into thinking that the cameras where the key to catching them and that this is what's needed to stop things like that happening again - ie. problem, reaction, solution. The James Bulger murder was the first time I had ever heard of closed curcuit TV cameras in public places. Speaking of CCTV, but the news media stated that Venables and Thompson were seen on CCTV outside the Strand pulling James down the road, but as far as I'm aware no such footage has ever been shown.

 

I think alot of truth type people who are suspicious of stories like this then to look for far out theories, like for instance that it was a cover up of a pedophile ring etc, but it really could be a genuine murder but was used as a problem, reaction, solution pysop in order to push through some new legislation or law, in the James Bulger case to help normalise CCTV and be accepted.

Edited by Occulus5
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not quite sure what you mean by patsies. Weren't they the ones who murdered James?. I know there were (allgedly) 38 people who saw the two boys with a little  boy as they walked from Bootle to Walton, but the people who said they saw them never relevealed their faces when interviewed on TV.

Edited by Occulus5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Occulus5 said:

Yes I doubt the CCTV back then was anywhere near as hi tech as it is today with the facial recognition we have and that the cameras today will be monitored/manned 24/7.

Exactly. Don't forget that it was another false flag (911) that made 'security' more of an industry and much more widespread. So you have two events that both likely played their part in the surveillance state and in the Problem Reaction Solution you mention. 

 

28 minutes ago, Occulus5 said:

When the story kept being mentioned on the local news throughout the 1990s they always made a point about the CCTV footage, it's as if they were trying to condition people into thinking that the cameras where the key to catching them and that this is what's needed to stop things like that happening again - ie. problem, reaction, solution. The James Bulger murder was the first time I had ever heard of closed curcuit TV cameras in public places. Speaking of CCTV, but the news media stated that Venables and Thompson were seen on CCTV outside the Strand pulling James down the road, but as far as I'm aware no such footage has ever been shown.

Yep, that is my recollection too, that whenever it was covered by the media they would show the CCTV stills. Obviously they could have been used because of the powerful nature of the images, but as with all media coverage, there is an agenda at play. 

 

30 minutes ago, Occulus5 said:

I think alot of truth type people who are suspicious of stories like this then to look for far out theories, like for instance that it was a cover up of a pedophile ring etc, but it really could be a genuine murder but was used as a problem, reaction, solution pysop in order to push through some new legislation or law, in the James Bulger case to help normalise CCTV and be accepted.

I agree. Sometimes it is simply a crime that the elite fully take advantage of, and at other times it is one they created, and sometimes it is both at the same time. Certainly, and I am going off logic more than memory here, you would have to think that the Bulger case 'facilitated' people more willing to accept CCTV in malls as did the 911 and 7/7 events in all other public places. 

 

Just now, Occulus5 said:

I'm not quite sure what you mean by patsies. Weren't they ones who murdered James?.

 I am assuming that Ralph was meaning that although the boys killed James, it was either by order of the elites, or through some sort of MK Ultra type way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, BornFreeNowAgain said:

Exactly. Don't forget that it was another false flag (911) that made 'security' more of an industry and much more widespread. So you have two events that both likely played their part in the surveillance state and in the Problem Reaction Solution you mention. 

 

Yep, that is my recollection too, that whenever it was covered by the media they would show the CCTV stills. Obviously they could have been used because of the powerful nature of the images, but as with all media coverage, there is an agenda at play. 

 

I agree. Sometimes it is simply a crime that the elite fully take advantage of, and at other times it is one they created, and sometimes it is both at the same time. Certainly, and I am going off logic more than memory here, you would have to think that the Bulger case 'facilitated' people more willing to accept CCTV in malls as did the 911 and 7/7 events in all other public places. 

 

 I am assuming that Ralph was meaning that although the boys killed James, it was either by order of the elites, or through some sort of MK Ultra type way. 

It's possible they were mind controlled, and I know that sounds far fetched to some. But if they were under mind control then they would have no recollection of what they did when they were brought into the police station and interviewed. They seem to admit that they killed James, although it's odd they sat in court and were never asked to speak, supposedly because they had already admitted to the murder. Having said that, I still find it hard to believe that two 10 year old boys murdered a 2 year old child. Odd that you never hear anything talked about the two, nothing from their teachers at school or them interviewed about what they were like.

Edited by Occulus5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Occulus5 said:

It's possible they were mind controlled, and I know that sounds far fetched to some. But if they were under mind control then they would have no recollection of what they did when they were brought into the police station and interviewed. They seem to admit that they killed James, although it's odd they sat in court and were never asked to speak, supposedly because they had already admitted to the murder. Having said that, I still find it hard to believe that two 10 year old boys murdered a 2 year old child. Odd that you never hear anything talked about the two, nothing from their teachers at school or them interviewed about what they were like.

All possibilities remain open when it comes to this stuff. No doubt that the impact that this had on the public was 'you cannot trust anybody and everyone is a potential danger'. I do remember vaguely an article that did cover the boys home life and it was said that one of them was from a really bad background and that he had been the ringleader of the killing of James. 

 

Yeah, that 'he has already plead guilty so no need to have them on the stand' has been used before. I think the mass shooter in the movie theatre (James Holmes) was one such case that I remember. I do think that even kids can murder and be so evil to carry out such acts. Obviously that is a massive indictment on society as a whole because in a 'normal' society that would not happen. You only need to look at psychopaths and even narcissists and their whole existence is based around snuffing out the light of others. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, BornFreeNowAgain said:

All possibilities remain open when it comes to this stuff. No doubt that the impact that this had on the public was 'you cannot trust anybody and everyone is a potential danger'. I do remember vaguely an article that did cover the boys home life and it was said that one of them was from a really bad background and that he had been the ringleader of the killing of James. 

 

Yeah, that 'he has already plead guilty so no need to have them on the stand' has been used before. I think the mass shooter in the movie theatre (James Holmes) was one such case that I remember. I do think that even kids can murder and be so evil to carry out such acts. Obviously that is a massive indictment on society as a whole because in a 'normal' society that would not happen. You only need to look at psychopaths and even narcissists and their whole existence is based around snuffing out the light of others. 

I think the one from the bad background would've been Jon Venables as it's said he was the one who basically coerced Thompson into going along with it. I think there has to be more to this, could be a pysop or a hoax (unlikely a hoax) or it was connected to a pedophile ring as the above site seems to suggest, or it was used to push a new law or create further mistrust in society. Yes I suppose kids can murder and can be evil and they don't necessarily have to come from bad families. I wonder why the boys school was never questioned or intervied? did they not wish to talk to the press/newspaper/media? about Venables and Thompson and what they were like at school?. I find that a little odd.

 

There are many videos on youtube about James Bulger, but I bet if anyone was to point out any of the things mentioned on that website or even things that Ralph Bulger himself stated in his book then I doubt they will want to listen and they will just think it's nonsense. Most of those videos will be there purely for subscribers and views rather than wanting to know the truth. Most people just accept the official version.

Edited by Occulus5
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I listened to the audio from the police tape recordings of the two boys being asked about the murder, and from what I can tell I couldn't see any indication that they were part of some pedophile ring that under MKUltra. Apparently both boys had quite a troubled upbringing, Thompson's parents had separated and he was having trouble at school truanting and was then transferred to a different school which made things worse, the same school as Venables. All that is just based on a few mainstream documentares I've watched. I find it hard to believe they were evil kids as such just that they had a troubled upbringing. But it still doesn't mean the murder wasn't taken advantage of by TPTB, and what Ralph Bulger was talking about in his book I've not a clue.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Occulus5 said:

I listened to the audio from the police tape recordings of the two boys being asked about the murder, and from what I can tell I couldn't see any indication that they were part of some pedophile ring that under MKUltra. Apparently both boys had quite a troubled upbringing, Thompson's parents had separated and he was having trouble at school truanting and was then transferred to a different school which made things worse, the same school as Venables. All that is just based on a few mainstream documentares I've watched. I find it hard to believe they were evil kids as such just that they had a troubled upbringing. But it still doesn't mean the murder wasn't taken advantage of by TPTB, and what Ralph Bulger was talking about in his book I've not a clue.

Yeah I remember hearing about the troubled upbringing. Whether they were born evil or 'made' evil, it is the same outcome and only evil would kill a defenceless child so they were evil. It is interesting the Ralph Bulger angle; presumably on researching what happened to the two killers and how the system protected them, he stumbled across how this world really works. Let us not forget that Jimmy Saville and Cyril Smith were two famous people 'protected', so it is not difficult to come across the web of evil depravity if you look. Maybe that is all he was meaning. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, BornFreeNowAgain said:

Yeah I remember hearing about the troubled upbringing. Whether they were born evil or 'made' evil, it is the same outcome and only evil would kill a defenceless child so they were evil. It is interesting the Ralph Bulger angle; presumably on researching what happened to the two killers and how the system protected them, he stumbled across how this world really works. Let us not forget that Jimmy Saville and Cyril Smith were two famous people 'protected', so it is not difficult to come across the web of evil depravity if you look. Maybe that is all he was meaning. 

Yes I suppose you are right there. Yes it was an evl act, whether there anyone else involved, I don't know. Maybe Ralph was pointing pedophiles unrelated to James' death.

 

I did come across this though:

https://www.itv.com/news/granada/2023-03-29/man-who-discovered-james-bulgers-body-dies-in-police-custody

 

I don't know why anyone would become a drug addict after discovering a child's body, but maybe it really can affect you.

 

Maybe the person who wrote the article I linked is just getting a little carried out away by assuming there is some massive cover up about the murder when there probably isn't.

Edited by Occulus5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Occulus5 said:

Maybe the person who wrote the article I linked is just getting a little carried out away by assuming there is some massive cover up about the murder when there probably isn't.

Wow, poor bastard! I can well believe that discovering the body of a child under those circumstances when you are a child yourself could have long lasting effects. 1993 was still a period in time where there was expectation to be tough, especially for boys and men so he was probably expected to just get on with it and cope. Obviously there were probably socio-economic factors at play too causing him to fall into the drug spiral but compounded by his earlier experience finding James. 

 

If you mean the original piece on the first post, I agree. I think there were many 'leaps' in his thinking, some logical and some really stretching almost looking for things that weren't there. It would be interesting what the numerology/symbolism was around the killing but that is not my strong point at all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, BornFreeNowAgain said:

Wow, poor bastard! I can well believe that discovering the body of a child under those circumstances when you are a child yourself could have long lasting effects. 1993 was still a period in time where there was expectation to be tough, especially for boys and men so he was probably expected to just get on with it and cope. Obviously there were probably socio-economic factors at play too causing him to fall into the drug spiral but compounded by his earlier experience finding James. 

 

If you mean the original piece on the first post, I agree. I think there were many 'leaps' in his thinking, some logical and some really stretching almost looking for things that weren't there. It would be interesting what the numerology/symbolism was around the killing but that is not my strong point at all. 

It would be interesting to see if there is any numerology or occultic symbolism around the killing as you, if there is it's strange noone has talked about it.

 

I do tend to think that the murder was the ideal and perfect opportunity for them to get the public used to having CCTV cameras in public places where they would be more acceptant of it after the murder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Occulus5 said:

It would be interesting to see if there is any numerology or occultic symbolism around the killing as you, if there is it's strange noone has talked about it.

 

I do tend to think that the murder was the ideal and perfect opportunity for them to get the public used to having CCTV cameras in public places where they would be more acceptant of it after the murder.

I guess it being a case from 1993 and pre-internet it has not got as much attention as those that came along during the internet years or that were at least fresher in the memory. Maybe there is not enough in this crime to catch the attention of the internet sleuths and that it really was just an horrific crime that sent shockwaves across the world. No doubt the élite' too full advantage as they always do in these circumstances. I mean there wasn't tons of CCTV around in 1993, well not from my recollection anyway so it is quite the odds that CCTV happened to be in this mall and two kids horrifically murdered young James. I think it was the first case in the UK of children brutally murdering another child. Those are some pretty long odds really. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, BornFreeNowAgain said:

I guess it being a case from 1993 and pre-internet it has not got as much attention as those that came along during the internet years or that were at least fresher in the memory. Maybe there is not enough in this crime to catch the attention of the internet sleuths and that it really was just an horrific crime that sent shockwaves across the world. No doubt the élite' too full advantage as they always do in these circumstances. I mean there wasn't tons of CCTV around in 1993, well not from my recollection anyway so it is quite the odds that CCTV happened to be in this mall and two kids horrifically murdered young James. I think it was the first case in the UK of children brutally murdering another child. Those are some pretty long odds really. 

No there wasn't tons of CCTV around, even in the late 90s and early 2000s there wasn't that much unless it was in a really big town or city, but now they are everywhere. Talking about this murder to regular people I often get a look of "you're weird", even if you are pointing out things like the route the two murderers took, where's the rest of the CCTV footage, etc people think you are strange. It's because I want to get to the truth about these things and don't trust what the media, police and govt tells me. For most people it's a case closed, two young boys murdered a child and that's the end of the matter.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Occulus5 said:

No there wasn't tons of CCTV around, even in the late 90s and early 2000s there wasn't that much unless it was in a really big town or city, but now they are everywhere. Talking about this murder to regular people I often get a look of "you're weird", even if you are pointing out things like the route the two murderers took, where's the rest of the CCTV footage, etc people think you are strange. It's because I want to get to the truth about these things and don't trust what the media, police and govt tells me. For most people it's a case closed, two young boys murdered a child and that's the end of the matter.

I suppose as we say, there wasn't much CCTV back then so perhaps there was very little other footage? 

 

Yeah, unfortunately this is the way of most 'normal folk' they don't question anything, and certainly not 'authority'; the CIA and media have done a great job brainwashing people to be too scared of seemingly being 'paranoid' to question anything and it works to a tee. 

 

In reading a little about the case, I think one of the other things that was so heart-breaking/shocking (aside from the culprits being 10 year olds) was the fact that the three of them came across many adults who did not act on their hunches and protect James even though they could either see his distress, had a gut feeling that something was wrong, or even witnessed the boys abusing James. He could have been saved many times over and wasn't and I think this really caused a lot of shock in this case. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, BornFreeNowAgain said:

I suppose as we say, there wasn't much CCTV back then so perhaps there was very little other footage? 

 

Yeah, unfortunately this is the way of most 'normal folk' they don't question anything, and certainly not 'authority'; the CIA and media have done a great job brainwashing people to be too scared of seemingly being 'paranoid' to question anything and it works to a tee. 

 

In reading a little about the case, I think one of the other things that was so heart-breaking/shocking (aside from the culprits being 10 year olds) was the fact that the three of them came across many adults who did not act on their hunches and protect James even though they could either see his distress, had a gut feeling that something was wrong, or even witnessed the boys abusing James. He could have been saved many times over and wasn't and I think this really caused a lot of shock in this case. 

They don't question anything. I was talking about the James Bulger murder to people I know, I live close to Liverpool and one of my sons goes to a school in Walton, and people said to me "why are you talking about this for, you're weird". No wonder they regard people on forums like this as weird.

 

Yes it's strange none of the 38 people who saw them bothered to intervene, but it's likely because they feared people accusing them of doing something wrong. Maybe the witnesses were made up.

 

Newspapers make me laugh though, like the Liverpool Echo:

 

I have to laugh how they seem to think they good investigative journalists. They couldn't even get James' name right, they kept calling him Jamie and even said that the two were teenagers, they were 10, you're only a teenager when you reach 13 years old. Local rag newspapers are as bad if not worse than the mainstream news media and major newspapers for getting their facts wrong, they are only interested in selling papers and not reporting on or getting to the truth. If anything contradicts the official story then it isn't allowed to get published. They are all reading from the same script. Someone like Richard D Hall is what I call a real investigative journalist. Imagine of Hall did a show about this murder, they'd really go after him.

Edited by Occulus5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...