TERRORISM: Israeli Finance Minister Warned To Remain At Hotel

Israeli Finance Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, was told to remain at his London hotel by British security services. He had been scheduled to appear at a meeting close to one of the explosions. "The finance minister was forced to stay in the hotel where he is staying, at the request of British security services,". said Oren Helman, Netanyahu's aide.



The crucial matter is timing. When did Netanyahu get the order to remain at his hotel? Was it before or after the explosions? Obviously if it was after the explosions there is no conspiracy at all. But if it came before the explosions there is something going on here.

The fact that he got warning and was told to remain in his hotel is now confirmed. Its the timing that is not.

[edit on 7-7-2005 by John bull 1]

[edit on 7-7-2005 by John bull 1]

"The explosion happened just beneath the hotel at the same time the meeting with businessman interested in investing in Israel was expected to begin," Oren Helman, an aide to the right-wing former premier, told public radio Thursday."

There's your answer my friend. He would have been there already if he wasn't warned beforehand.

CNN made a passing comment about Israeli Intelligence warning of the attack in advance. Odd how they're so good at knowing exactly when these things are going to happen and making sure their people are out of the way.

If I was on a conspiracy site I might think...

What some people don't seem to think about is that if it had been a plan by the UK or even Israeli special forces, all they had to do to was postpone any meeting their people were involved in months before.

They don't have to wait for the last moment to safely get their people out of the way, and btw, he was in one of the hotels were the attacks occurred. I doubt that if they knew way before hand this would happen, they would keep someone they didn't want dead in one of the buildings where bombs were set off.

In the shadowy world of intelligence whats going to happen is known to only a few...a warning given too far in advance will advert whatever action will take place.

They warn who needs to know with only hours or minutes to spare as not to arouse suspition of prior knowledge.

The mossad knew when and where the attack woud take place.
They warned their man via another source as not to arouse suspition.
The attack was allowed to take place to increase the pressure on the middle east situation.

It wouldnt suprise me if Mossad didnt control the cell that planted them bombs, directly or indirectly.

Its well known that they planted a bomb outside their own embassy in London to increase the security from the police.

The Mossad...
are they worse than the CIA? maybe... in the sense that they will go to any extreme to get their agenda... while the CIA has to step carefully and avoid drawing attention....

How can we do business with a country that will bomb their own embassy to get more security? How can we trust anything they do or say...

IMO that the Israeli leadership needs to put a tighter reign on them, or else defunct them as a governmental entity altogher... and relegate them to the ranks of other terrorist groups... (this one happening to SUPPORT israel)

Andy, first you say, in another post, that Islamic terrorists are responsible for this and now this other response?

I think it is still too early to make any "assumptions" and i still can't believe that some people's thoughts, in other threads also, so early in this tragedy was apparently a sense glee that they "believe" their "theories" have been proven right and are not thinking about those who have been injured or killed....

I am not saying this to you Andy, but others who seem to "get a kick" out of a tragedy such as this one...

Apparently this warning to remain in the Hotel was given BEFORE the first explosion !!!!

Israeli Finance Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, was told to remain at his London hotel by British security services.

Mossad (and the CIA) should not have been mentioned once in this thread.


James Bond: Mr. Netanyahu, we've just recieved critical intelligence that suggest there may be a terrorist attack today. As of now we don't know the scope, we don't know when, we don't know where. It's best you remain in your hotel room until we get further information.

Benjamin Netanyahu: Ok then, keep me informed.



I see no conspiricy

Originally posted by John bull 1
Apparently this warning to remain in the Hotel was given BEFORE the first explosion !!!!

How much before, John Bull1?
Folks need to settle down on some of this.
Speculation is useless and unnecessary until ALL the facts are released, would not that be the prudent course of action?

Accordingly, this article gives a bit of an indication:

British police told the Israeli Embassy in London minutes before Thursday's explosions that they had received warnings of possible terror attacks in the city, a senior Israeli official said.

Netanyahu Changed Plans Due to Warning

Jumping to conclusions here or on this matter is foolhardy, at best.
It would be like some of us coming straight out and blaming this tragic event on Islamic factions, when at this point in time, it has not been conclusively proven so, correct? Then why is there speculation already being made on Israel and MOSSAD? Enlighten me, cause quite frankly, its puzzling to see such taking place when even the British authorites are still sorting matters....





seekerof

Originally posted by Muaddib
What some people don't seem to think about is that if it had been a plan by the UK or even Israeli special forces, all they had to do to was postpone any meeting their people were involved in months before.

Exactly. Or, move the meeting to a hotel in the outskirts of London.

But that wouldn't fit in with MOSSAD/CIA conspiracies, would it.

The point is Seekerof that the British police force have stated that they received no warning before the attack.

Yet the former Israeli Prime Minister did.

Now, I can understand why you'd want to deflect attention from this contradiction but contradiction there is.

This thread does not espouse a new wild conspiracy theory it simply places clearly before the ATS members and visitors that this contradiction exists.

Those who are charged with protecting the citizens of London were not as well informed as a visiting Israeli politician.

As ever Members are invited to draw their own conclusions.

Erm, if that was the case, John Bull1, then why did the British/UK authorities--Scotland Yard, to be exact-- warn the Isrealis? Virtually all sources [and mind you, one was provided above] indicating a "timeframe" also indicate that what you assert is wrong, but of course, I too can understand why you would want to deflect such attention.





seekerof

[edit on 7-7-2005 by Seekerof]

The source asserts that the Israelis were warned, all be it, minutes before the first explosion. (Minutes: there are 59 before you legitimately can not call it that)

The Police chief in a live broadcast said that the police had no warning.

A specific question about this Israeli warning was left unanswered.

I think it's plain to see there is a contradiction.

That contradiction needs to be explained.

Then seek explanation from Scotland Yard, maybe?
From the article:

Just before the blasts, Scotland Yard called the security officer at the Israeli Embassy to say they had received warnings of possible attacks, the official said. He did not say whether British police made any link to the economic conference.

seekerof

From the article:

Just before the blasts, Scotland Yard called the security officer at the Israeli Embassy to say they had received warnings of possible attacks, the official said. He did not say whether British police made any link to the economic conference.

As opposed to a police senior representative saying there was no previous motivation? Yeah, makes a good item to tick off on a conspiracy checklist.

Unfortunately, what you folks, who are jumping on the conspiracy bandwagon are not taking into consideration is that, we are dealing with an extremely traumatic event. You can not expect the world to operate to a timeline of your making. There is death, dismemberment, confusion, and often times, according to Murphy's rules of combat, No matter how good the plan, it goes to Hell the second that the first shot is fired.

Sheesh... Sorry, but some of you are so quick to want to bag a perceived bad guy, and prove your short sighted theories that you don't have a bit of sorrow, empathy or even sympathy for the people who are involved. You are making yourselves look like wild-eyed buffoons.

sigung86 "Sheesh... Sorry, but some of you are so quick to want to bag a perceived bad guy, and prove your short sighted theories that you don't have a bit of sorrow, empathy or even sympathy for the people who are involved. You are making yourselves look like wild-eyed buffoons. "

Can't agree with you here sigung86, John Bull makes a valid point about the apparent discrepancy of the police stating there was not warning of the attacks and the warning issued to the Israeli rep. Discussion of this may seem callous to you, but it really doesn't say anything about the feelings of the discussion participants--they could be feeling empathic pain, sorror and sympathy as you apparently are.

Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
CNN made a passing comment about Israeli Intelligence warning of the attack in advance. Odd how they're so good at knowing exactly when these things are going to happen and making sure their people are out of the way.

Why would they schedule their attack at the same time as they've scheduled their meeting? If the yehudis are supposed to be behind it, why, in the world, would they go about it in such a way as to obviously expose themselves?

Isn't it more likely that one of the many groups that has called for the destruction of Israel planned their attack to coincide with the meeting?

andy
a warning given too far in advance will advert whatever action will take place.

Why in the world woudl they give a warning at all? Why wouldn't they just....not attack a place that their people had to be 'mysteriosuly' withdrawn from?

And if it was ultra-nationalist israelis, why would they involved netanyahu, why attack anythin in london, if anything they'd be attacking Sharon right now.

I think ThatsJustWeird's take on it is a much more sensible suggestion. That there was word of an attack, and they figured 'gosh, do ya think Netanyahu might be a target?'

John Bull 1
This thread does not espouse a new wild conspiracy theory it simply places clearly before the ATS members and visitors that this contradiction exists.

I'm not so sure that there isa contradiction between 'we didn't know this attack woudl happen' and 'scotland yard was concerned that there might be an attack, enough so that they told the former rightist leader of Israel to stay home'.

That contradiction needs to be explained.

Indeed, the contradiction isn 'weak' i think, but it defintely needs to be explained.

Seekerof
Just before the blasts, Scotland Yard called the security officer at the Israeli Embassy to say they had received warnings of possible attacks, the official said. He did not say whether British police made any link to the economic conference

I think an important question here is, who else did they inform, but it really doesn't fit in with any conspiracy. Why would the Britishers conspire with the israelis, of all people? The islamo-fascist angle makes much more sense, especially if a prominent Israeli was nearly killed by the attack. Netanyahu is the last guy that a hypothetical 'ultra-nationalist israeli cabal' would want to kill, or associate with the conspiracy.

astronomer68
John Bull makes a valid point about the apparent discrepancy of the police stating there was not warning of the attacks and the warning issued to the Israeli rep[/qujote]
But thats also dependant on the brass at scotland yard informing all of its membership, which is plausibly unlikely given that a huge terror attack happened moments after they get even a hint of it. It does sort of make more sense for the upper brass to say 'tell the israeli embassy to up its security, as a precaution', before they submit a report to their own government and inform all of their officers, especially with the G8 going on, and protestors to deal with too. Also, the brit government has probably been on a generalized alerty because of the G8 anyway. So this new information might've been enough to tell an obvious and unusual target, but not enough to basically repeat a warnign to the britishers involved.

But still, it would be good to clear it up.

Also, aren't people saying that it was first reported as 'before', then retracted to 'after'? I'd think that thats a scandal in itself, why did everyone jump to 'oh it must've been after', i mean, the public, fine, but the actual journalists? What information did they research that justified changing it to after?

Originally posted by Astronomer68
sigung86 "Sheesh... Sorry, but some of you are so quick to want to bag a perceived bad guy, and prove your short sighted theories that you don't have a bit of sorrow, empathy or even sympathy for the people who are involved. You are making yourselves look like wild-eyed buffoons. "

Can't agree with you here sigung86, John Bull makes a valid point about the apparent discrepancy of the police stating there was not warning of the attacks and the warning issued to the Israeli rep. Discussion of this may seem callous to you, but it really doesn't say anything about the feelings of the discussion participants--they could be feeling empathic pain, sorror and sympathy as you apparently are.

Got you Astronomer, and completely agree with that. I guess the point I didn't make well enough is that folks are sniping like mad hyenas, looking for a perfect explanation in a stressful, horrific moment in time, when not everyone has all the exact facts in a timely moment. And rather than give things a chance to settle, the hyenas gather and begin howling.

It is possible that the official who said there was no pre-knowledge of it all may have not been in a position to know what was already known and what was not. Security information is not given to everyone, otherwise it wouldn't be very secure. And yet, rather than give time a chance to settle in and the mistakes taken care of, they are already screaming, "Collusion! Conspiracy!" with no relevent evidence, one way or the other.

I am sorry that I didn't read my own post better before I saved it, otherwise I might have reworded. I didn't mean to imply that people don't care... More to the effect that they don't use common sense when they jump up screaming for scalps.

sigung86 - I completely agree with your point about leaping before looking.

Anything else from another media or government source to support this?

I heard something similar re 9/11 and got kicked for mentioning it (Jewish People were not in the buildings at the the time). So I figured I had bad info and got a slap for indicating what I heard. Now Netanyahu and the English disaster. Would really like some sort of confirmation on your post.

Dallas