It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Muslim community awareness of 7/7 bombing as possible Blair setup?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 04:59 AM
link   
Reading the mainstream media it seems that the families of the four men accused of the London bombing are unaware that many people doubt the official story.

Many people are of the opinion that the 4 accused men could have been 'set up' to believe that they were taking part in an anti terrorist exercise.

I believe that the families of the 4 accused men (and the London Muslim community) should be aware of this possibility, and have assumed that they would already be aware of it.

However, looking at the internet forums I have not noticed any obviously Muslim posters, and the comments made by the families of the accused seem to make it clear that they know nothing about the 'Anti terrorist setup theory'

Does anyone know if these families are able to be contacted directly or indirectly, or if the London Muslim community is aware of what is being discussed outside the mainstream media?

This sounds like a bit of a silly question (Do Muslims have computers?. . . .Duh!) but given what is at stake and the problems with the official story I would have expected some angry reactions from the Muslim community if they were aware of the 'setup theory'

Are they aware of it and too scared to speak out, or are they unaware?

Can anyone get a Muslim spokeman or two onto this forum?

IMO These guys need to mobilise themselves and start demanding some answers or they are going to get severely persecuted, possibly unjustly.

Anyone agree?




posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 05:06 AM
link   
They thought they were part of an exerciese?
So they didn't think it was odd that in the bags there were a load of explosives with timers ticking away? Or they perhaps thought that when they pressed the button a flag would come out and go *bang*?

All the interviews with family and friends in which it is revealed that they went to Pakistan and came back 'changed' and some had been going through depression are all lies then? And the sudden interest in religon that one of them started to show was also too a strange co-incidence?

The explosives were obviously planted as well I guess. And don't anyone even start about the police 'blowing up evidence', when in doubt they cordon off the area and blow up any suspicious packages. I've seen them blow up a tramps bag of clothes before in town, it's better safe than sorry.

The families don't need to hear crackpot theories at this time (or any) and we really don't want to fuel the fire of the extremists by handing them even more justifications and excuses on a platter.

And of course they have computers, why woudn't they?

I spose this guy for instance, is just an illusion.. He's not a bad bloke really


Abu Hamza

[edit on 17-7-2005 by AgentSmith]

[edit on 17-7-2005 by AgentSmith]



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 05:38 AM
link   
Timers do not have to tick

The Muslim community in London deserves to know that some people believe that the 4 accused were framed, and that the facts fit the theory that they were framed.

Do they know?

Are any of them on this forum?

Who are you to say that the Muslim community don't need to know? Are they to receive only censored information?

They deserve to know what is being said, and the setup theory fits the facts very well indeed. Your 'evidence' is spurious. . . .it doesn't even qualify as circumstantial.

Now stand aside and stop trying to at as a censor. . . .the press are already doing that, this site is about open discussion, not white power information clampdowns.



[edit on 17-7-2005 by Roy Robinson Stewart]



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 05:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Roy Robinson Stewart
The Muslim community in London deserves to know that some people believe that the 4 accused were framed, and that the facts fit the theory that they were framed.


How can they be framed when their body parts and remains are all over the scene of the crime, which investigaters found out after 5 days
plus eyewitnesses statements aswell and i would really like to see your "facts"




[edit on 17-7-2005 by infinite]



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 05:45 AM
link   
I was being sarcastic regarding the timers, at the end of the day they must have seen they were carrying a big bag of explosives with some form of detonator, and it does not take away the testimonies of the people that knoew them regarding their sudden interests in religeon, sudden depression, trips to pakistan and coming back changed, etc.

And yes, I am aware that there are some things that point at them being framed, however the idea it was Blair is ludicrous, it is far more likely that the terrorist in charge set them up to cover his/their own tracks.

Why are you so eager to inflame the situation by poisoning people against the government more than they are already? People are anxiously trying to quieten the situation down to stop any major clashes and that sort of *innaccurate and presumptuous* information is hardly going to achieve that is it?

Debate as to wherever they were set up is justified, suddenly blaming it on the Prime Minister is not.



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 05:48 AM
link   
The point is that they were carrying the bombs and got blown up but thought they were just part of the 1000 person anti terrorism exercise which was going on at the time. They were recruited as members of the terrorism exercise.

So one would expect their body parts to be found.



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 05:51 AM
link   
For there to be a conspiracy, the following have to be involved

- The Queen (she is head of state, not Blair)
- Privy Council
- Parliament
- MI5/MI6/GCHQ
- The media
- The muslim council
- the families bombers
- Friends of the bombers
- everybody that falls under the crown

As you can see, its impossible because so many people have to be involved

[edit on 17-7-2005 by infinite]

[edit on 17-7-2005 by infinite]



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 05:51 AM
link   
Is there any concrete proof to this, that they were recruited for the exercise? And it was a private sector excercise, nothing to do with the government, and why the hell would the bloke in charge keep going on about it on the news?



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 05:53 AM
link   
You know, when people come up with these incredible theories, they really, really seem to lack the ability to actually comprehend the huge number of people that would have to be involved, like you said Infinite.

Why do people insist on believing that a hugely complicated and massively unlikely story is true, while refusing to believe simple, conclusive facts?

Debating it is one thing, but trying to 'enlighten' the people involved is dangerous and irresponsible.

[edit on 17-7-2005 by AgentSmith]



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 06:00 AM
link   
Agent Smith

Your sarcasm is a waste of our time.

Please avoid it in future.

The aim of this site is to uncover the truth, not to quieten down Muslims!

A quick check of your 'evidence':

It is not necessarily the case that men would know that they were carrying explosives.

The testimonies of people that knew them are hardly conclusive, in fact those closest to them do not all believe that it is possible that they were deliberate bombers.

You offer in defence of Blair the idea that accusing him is ludicrous. This is not necessarily true and isn't evidence. Blair sponsors mass killing andis proven to have lied over the Iraq war. The 4 accused Muslims have no history of killing. Blair is a prime suspect.

You put away your can of whitewash now please.

If the government is innocent it has nothing to fear, not so?



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 06:06 AM
link   
Roy Robinson Stewart

But Tony Blair isn't head of state, the Queen is.

You haven't looked into the facts, for there to be a conspiracy the Queen has to know



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 06:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by infinite
For there to be a conspiracy, the following have to be involved

- The Queen (she is head of state, not Blair)
- Privy Council
- Parliament
- MI5/MI6/GCHQ
- The media
- The muslim council
- the families bombers
- Friends of the bombers
- everybody that falls under the crown

As you can see, its impossible because so many people have to be involved


Not true, there was no need to inform the families of the men involved, or the Queen, or the Muslim Council, or friends of the 4 men, or 'everybody that falls under the crown'.

And by the way there was a large anti terrorist exercise going on. . . excellent cover. . . .one agent recruits a few boys to help (hush hush) and most people running the exercise don't know what is going on.

As for the idea that the anti terrorist exercise was 'nothing to do with the government' that is really silly, of course it was something to do with the government!



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 06:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by infinite
Roy Robinson Stewart

But Tony Blair isn't head of state, the Queen is.

You haven't looked into the facts, for there to be a conspiracy the Queen has to know



The Queen is usually informed of government conspiracies against British subjects is she?

Pull the other leg it has bells on it!



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 06:11 AM
link   
I suggest you read the transcript, it was a private excersie:


POWER: Today we were running an exercise for a company - bear in mind now that I'm in the private sector - and we sat everybody down in the city - 1000 people involved in the whole organization - with the crisis team. And the most peculiar thing was it was we based on a scenario of simultaneous attacks on a underground and mainline station. So we had to suddenly switch an exercise from fictional to real. And one of the first things is, get that bureau number, when you have a list of people missing, tell them. And it took a long time -

INTERVIEWER: Just to get this right, you were actually working today on an exercise that envisioned virtually this scenario?

POWER: Almost precisely. I was up to 2 oclock this morning, because it's our job, my own company. Visor Consultants, we specialize in helping people to get their crisis management response, how you jump from slow time thinking to quick time doing. And we chose a scenario with no assistance, which is based on a terrorist attack because they've been close to a property occupied by Jewish businessmen there in the city, and there are more American banks in this city than there are in the whole of New York - a logical thing to do.

INTERVIEWER: How extraordinary today must feel for you as it unfolds. You mentioned a few moments ago there our experience with Irish Republican terrorism. And of course it was very different wasn't it because however perverted their behavior, the IRA believed itself to have some sort of code of honour, and tended to issue some kind of warnings, of course they often came too late to do any good.



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 06:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Roy Robinson Stewart
The Queen is usually informed of government conspiracies against British subjects is she?

Pull the other leg it has bells on it!


Tony Blair actually plots to murder his own people?

Pull the other leg it has bells on it!



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 06:15 AM
link   
Your theory has no logic because it means the government now can be thrown out of pariliament by the Queen, you think the government would risk being thrown out of pariliament? think Tony Blair will do that...err no. UK pariliament isn't the US senate, its completely different. UK is a Constitutional monarchy and for there to be a conspiracy, the head of state must be involved.

Read David Icke's theories, all his theories about the UK always link to the Queen because he understands the UK political system and how it works. For there to be a conspiracy, you have to tie in the head of state.

[edit on 17-7-2005 by infinite]



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 06:54 AM
link   
Your refutation of the theory that Blair could not have planned the 7/7 bombings is based entirely on your judgement of his character.

He stands to gain from the bombing, and he had the opportunity.

His character is proven to be rotten. . . .he is a liar and sponsors murder of innocent civilians.

The cap fits and he is going to wear it.



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 07:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Roy Robinson Stewart
He stands to gain from the bombing, and he had the opportunity.

His character is proven to be rotten. . . .he is a liar and sponsors murder of innocent civilians.

The cap fits and he is going to wear it.


What is he going to gain?

He said ID cards wouldnt of prevented this, he said he is not introducing authotarian powers, he isn't going on a bomb campaign in the middle east.

He is meeting with muslim leaders, he has stated he will protect muslims for racist attacks. He said the bombers doesnt represent islam



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 07:02 AM
link   
I must admit I have not been shown any real evidence that these men were responsible.

Yes they are muslim and yes they were there at the time, is that the only evidence? They had bags, this was seen on CCTV? Because they had bags, they were carrying explosives? Or was it because they were muslim and had bags? Well thats it then isnt it, muslims+bags=bombs...

It all seems a little convenient and contirived to me, it seems to be just what the public want to hear.

I need some real proof, this all smacks of BS to be honest.

[edit on 17-7-2005 by Kriz_4]



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 07:11 AM
link   
So the fact they are on CCTV together at Luton station (where the car with explosives in it was found) is coincidence, and the fact that there was one at each bomb site in the immediate vicinity of each explosion was all just jolly bad luck was it?
Where were they going together with these bags and why did they split up going in totally different directions? Did they have reservations at hostels? I havn't heard they have..



news.bbc.co.uk...



[edit on 17-7-2005 by AgentSmith]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join