The London Bombing: Why did British Gov Fail to Warn the Poeple?

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by infinite
So who done it then?


and why was it done? ID cards, police state, authotarian laws? all the conspiracy reasons have been debunked already


lol come on, all the conspiracies have been debunked? i dont think so.
Al-Qaeda has been debunked too, doesnt seeem to bother people.

who knows who did it, we shall have to wait and see. I know who i think did it.
my point is really, a government press conference does not debunk a conspiracy.
In government press conferences, they tell you what they want you to hear, if it coincidently happens to be the truth then thats a bonus.




posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by AdamJ
lol come on, all the conspiracies have been debunked? i dont think so.
Al-Qaeda has been debunked too, doesnt seeem to bother people.


WOW!!! Thats a big claim....

Al Qaeda has not be debunked on ATS.

Whoever bombed London was a home grown terrorist, the UK attack is domestic. Just cause 9/11 was a conspiracy,in some eyes, doesnt mean this is.



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 01:13 PM
link   
Not all media reporters have their lips attached to the governments bungholio you know.

The one's that aren't would come out and say whatever truth they have about the subject regardless if the government wanted it hush hush...



[edit on 9-7-2005 by tbare]



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I do apologize. And in fact, it wasn't Blair, but the Ministry of Defense. So again, my apologies. I was using them synonomously and going on the assumption (Ack!) that this was accepted fact. I'm not sure whose word takes priority, but the announcement was made.
MoD Plans Iraq Troop Withdrawal - July 4, 2005


Certainly no need to apologize, Benevolent Heretic, and thank you for the July 4, 2005 update and clarification on the situation. Much appreciated.


As a side note, both you and ECK are aware that Rumsfeld and company have been setting time tables of a gradual drawdown of forces from Iraq within 12-18 months, correct?
Also ran across this a few minutes ago:


Defence chiefs are planning to reduce the size of the British military force in Iraq from 9,000 to 3,500 troops within 12 months as part of a phased withdrawal from Iraq, The Telegraph can reveal.

In the first stage of Britain's "exit strategy", troops will be withdrawn from three of the Army's five military bases in southern Iraq by April 2006.

--snip--

Senior American and British military figures believe that withdrawals can begin by April next year because coalition forces will have trained enough members of the Iraqi defence and police forces to take control of security throughout Iraq.

Britain to pull 5,500 troops out of Iraq


I am still failing to see the "desperation" in this matter prior to the events of 7-7-2005, though, but hey, that is just my take.

Thank you, again.







seekerof

[edit on 9-7-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by infinite

Originally posted by AdamJ
lol come on, all the conspiracies have been debunked? i dont think so.
Al-Qaeda has been debunked too, doesnt seeem to bother people.


WOW!!! Thats a big claim....

Al Qaeda has not be debunked on ATS.

Whoever bombed London was a home grown terrorist, the UK attack is domestic. Just cause 9/11 was a conspiracy,in some eyes, doesnt mean this is.


well its difficult to debunk something that has never been proven. What did they find in the mountains in afgahnistan huh? not very much id venture.

If people who bombed london were home grown why did a terrorist site calling themselves european al-qaeda claim responsibility.

point is, you do proper investigations into things, thats the only way you get the truth, not through the tv, and if people block investigations something is up.

media just parrot what they are told, they do not have the authority to speak out their own opinions. Some journalists on the screne over time realise thing aint right and do their own reporting aka greg palast, john pilger, but they dissapear from the tv screens. bbc newsnight is the only real news programme around. but just caus someone says something on tv, doesnt mean it is so.

Agree this is not yet a conspiracy, but i think al-qaueda = gladio, just my personal belief, so i think this is probably just another attempt to scare people. however it remains to be seen. government press conferences are not the seed of all truth i am afraid



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by tbare
Not all media reporters have their lips attached to the governments bungholio you know.

The one's that aren't would come out and say whatever truth they have about the subject regardless if the government wanted it hush hush...



[edit on 9-7-2005 by tbare]


yea i agree, but remember that at a government press conference, the media just report what was said, thats all they do.



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Blair had announced he would be pulling British troops from Iraq. Rove was in the news. Not only that, but Bush’s approval rating is at an all-time low and his support for the war in Iraq is drastically waning in the US.

Approval ratings are less important to Bush than ever because he cannot run for re-election.

Regardless, youur statement that his ratings are at an all-time low are incorrect:

Saturday July 09, 2005--Fifty-one percent (51%) of American adults approve of the way George W. Bush is performing his role as President. This is the fourth straight day his Approval Rating has topped 50%.

The President's Approval Rating is 54% among men and 48% among women.
Bush ratings above 50 percent



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
I am still failing to see the "desperation" in this matter prior to the events of 7-7-2005, though, but hey, that is just my take.

Not to argue, but to clarify:

End of June - The support for the war has been waning for some time.
June 29 (or thereabouts) - Bush's approval rating hits an all-time low (46%) It's back up to 51% by the way...
July 2 - Rove's name makes it to mainstream media as the CIA operative leak
July 4 - MoD announces plans to withdraw British Troops
July 6 - G8 Summit begins with African Aid & Global Warming the main focuses.

I don't know that I'd call that enough to be 'desperate', but I do see how this administration had a lot to gain by another terror attack, especially in Britain. I'm also not saying that the US did it. But I do suspect that they knew about it and that it could have been an inside job of some sort.

I strongly don't believe the claims that Al-Qaeda did it. Unless any Joe 6-pack who calls himself and his garage buddies "Al-Qaeda" is legitimate, which this story seems to indicate.


"Al-Qaida is now an ideology. It's moved beyond being a structural organization," he said. "All one has to do to form an al-Qaida cell is to get together with a group of like-minded individuals and say, 'We are going to start an al-Qaida cell.' ... If one is prepared to carry out an attack in the name of al-Qaida, one becomes an al-Qaida operative."


London Bombs Likely Simple and Homemade

But I do believe (from the many articles that I've read) that these attacks were foretold and that Binyamin Netanyahu was directly warned to stay put.

I'm not an extremist when it comes to conspiracy theories, but I think the truth most likely lies somewhere in the middle of the 2 extremes.



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
London Bombs Likely Simple and Homemade

But I do believe (from the many articles that I've read) that these attacks were foretold and that Binyamin Netanyahu was directly warned to stay put.


The bombs were not homemade, met police said this afternoon in a news conference

and Israel foriegn minister has reported that there was no warnings



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
Approval ratings are less important to Bush than ever because he cannot run for re-election.

I hope you're right.
However there is a current proposal in the House to repeal the 22nd Amendment, which, if passed, would mean he could be 're-elected' again.

House Joint Resolution 24

Regardless, youur statement that his ratings are at an all-time low are incorrect:


I was speaking of his approval rating in the days prior to the London bombing, not after. Depending on where you look, it was anywhere from 42 to 48%. Have you not read that his approval rating was at an all-time low?
Polling Report
American Research Group

[edit on 9-7-2005 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by infinite
The bombs were not homemade, met police said this afternoon in a news conference

and Israel foriegn minister has reported that there was no warnings


I guess it depends then, on who you (or I) decide to believe. I tend to believe the reports that make the most logical sense to me. Sometimes those are the ones that come out immediately following the first scrambled reports, before the 'authorities' come in and tell the media what to say.



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 03:15 PM
link   
Organization Charter


Originally posted by infinite
Please dont get confused that this is related to New York and Madrid, the London attack points to domestic terrorism. The chances are its a cell claiming to be linked to Al Qaeda, not the top dogs from Al Qaeda. Bin Laden probably didnt have any involvement in this at all, heck, he probably has just find out it happened.

Al Qaeda, aka “the Base”, aka “the Organization”, et al, is not a single monolithic organization, but a network of groups with a common purpose.

Thus it is specious to suggest that a “cell claiming to be linked to Al Qaeda” isn't linked to Al Qaeda.

Al Qaeda connections are intentionally obscure for security reasons, and the whole point of a cell structure for terrorist groups is to make it difficult to track down members of other cells if a cell is compromised.

So I'm not sure what the point of this observation is.

As far as I can tell, no one has determined with certainty who is responsible for this attack.

However, if it turns out to be a group that uses Al Qaeda tactics, claims alliance with Al Qaeda, has the promotion of Al Qaeda's goals as its agenda and operates with Al Qaeda's approval and support, I don't see the point in claiming it is not Al Qaeda.



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 03:36 PM
link   
True Majic,

but we shall see how this developes over the next few days, i know Al Qaeda is made up of small cells, cells tend not to know eachother.



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 08:27 PM
link   

I hope you're right. However there is a current proposal in the House to repeal the 22nd Amendment, which, if passed, would mean he could be 're-elected' again.


Even if it passes the house which I doubt it would, it will not pass the 2/3 majority needed in the senate and 2/3 of the states would not ratify the resolution.



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 08:46 PM
link   
For the record, India daily is about as reliable as the World Weekly News. I tend to take anything they publish with a big chunk of salt.

What I want to know is why the hell they are supressing the actual death tolls? Because thats what I suspect. Given the placement of the bombs, plus the time of day, given London's population......you cant tell me only something like 50 or 60 died. Look at that double decker that got blown into shrapnel. I know for a fact those things are usually packed with standing room only, especially at that time of day. Yet a bomb that basically rips the top half off into oblivion only kills one or two? Comon.

I still have the suspicon there are far more casualties than have been reported, which is odd. When 9/11 happened, I remember they heavily overestimated the total casualties.

What would be the purpose of supressing casualties if they are trying to freak people out?



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 09:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I hope you're right.
However there is a current proposal in the House to repeal the 22nd Amendment, which, if passed, would mean he could be 're-elected' again.

The proposal needs the ratification of three quarters of the states within seven years, so that pretty much takes him out of the game.


I was speaking of his approval rating in the days prior to the London bombing, not after. Depending on where you look, it was anywhere from 42 to 48%. Have you not read that his approval rating was at an all-time low?

Boy, I hate to nitpick, but...

by Benevolent Heretic
Not only that, but Bush’s approval rating is at an all-time low





posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 09:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
The proposal needs the ratification of three quarters of the states within seven years, so that pretty much takes him out of the game.

What's funny is that just this minute, I read that! You're right. Dubya is out of the running. (thankfully... I think)


Boy, I hate to nitpick, but...

You sure fooled me.
I did mean in the days before the bombing, though.

You know what's interesting to me is that The five Congressmen who are sponsors of this resolution on the 22nd Amendment are:
Steny Hoyer (D-Maryland) Sponsor
Howard Berman (D-Ca.)
Frank Pallone (D-NJ)
Martin Olav Sabo (D-Mn)
James Sensenbrenner (R-Ws)

Four Democrats and one Republican…

Uncommon Thought



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 10:09 PM
link   
Yeah, 4 Dems and 1 R ...very interesting.

I hope that resolution dies a slow and horrible death. As a matter of fact, I'm all for term limits for Senators and Reps, too. Too many of them spend their entire professional life in one office. That can't be healthy.



posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 02:43 AM
link   
In support of the individuals who protect our countrys from foreign threats,
it is possible that it was merely one of many reports that come on a daily basis.

After all, bombing, and the unusual attacks here in the US are quite interesting to say the least. Remember small crop dusters being an issue?

Then it was ferries, and small aircraft. Then trains. We were running around not really knowing where it was going to come from.

Im sure the Brits didnt have solid evidence to sound the alarm. And given their past with the numerous bombings by the IRA, I am sure that if anyone could sound an alert early enought to protect someone, it would have been them.

Peace

[edit on 10-7-2005 by HIFIGUY]

[edit on 10-7-2005 by HIFIGUY]



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by andy1033

just imagine how many intelligence services there are in england perving into endless amounts of peoples lives. so you somehow think that the intelligence services would not be perving into muslims peoples lives, in this this day and age.
what are the intelligence services there for?

how come there are always people claiming that these intelligence services do nothing and know nothing.

[edit on 8-7-2005 by andy1033]

Guess wales , northern ireland and scotland get left alone then....


Originally posted by WestPoint23
Its so funny it doest matter where the attack occurs, who claims responsibly or what kind of attack it was people will always blame the US govern for it. Heck a freaking asteroid can hit mars and I bet we would have people here on ATS blaming the US government for it. US bashing for everything and anything wrong in the world even when you have - evidence seems like a popular sport now day’s. Its truly said it has come to this


Yeah and its so funny americans forget that Britain is actually 4 states not just england but its ok, the Irish guards know all about how some americans feel about them.

[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]






top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join