Company that hired Visor Consultants ON 7/7 FOUND!

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Aug, 31 2005 @ 06:59 AM

Originally posted by AgentSmith
It's because of people like you only choosing to hear what they want while ignoring everything else that most of these wild stories begin anyway. I guess you think of that as a good thing

Just so long as you believe your 'enlightened'...

Keep mocking people and stay on that high horse of you.
Some day you're gonna hit the ground hard.

It's because of people like you that 9/11 happend in the first place.

And I think we'd all agree if I say don't post in this thread anymore, you've hijacked enough of them.

[edit on 31-8-2005 by Shroomery]

posted on Aug, 31 2005 @ 07:17 AM
If you mean by 'hijacking' the posting of evidence that unfortunately doesn't backup yours and some other people's ideas, then I think you'll find that it goes against this websites motto of 'Denying Ignorance'.

Oh and I can see the dozens of people attacking me right now, oh god my U2U box is full up with flames...

I think when you say 'everyone' you mainly mean you and dh.. Out of a forum of about 50,000 members, that's hardly significant. Especially coming from a pair that have a habit of mouthing off without anything to add to the argument. I wouldn't be suprised if you had the same IP address.

If your so right and I'm so wrong, where's your arguments complete with sources to disprove what I said?
No where, because there arn't any.
So you have to resort to this rather childish behaviour. At least I can back up my claims which is far more that you can say.

So if you and your cronies want to have somewhere where you can fantasize about your theories and massage each others egos, I suggest you put your hand in your pocket and get your own forum set up, then you can be king of the hill all you want.
Don't expect other people though to stoop down to your level just so you can feel right about everything. Which is what you seem to expect people to do, even if you don't realise it.

[edit on 31-8-2005 by AgentSmith]

posted on Aug, 31 2005 @ 07:34 AM
It was you who started mocking good sources.
It was you who felt the need to post about how we're all loonies with too much time on our hands. And now you're at it again with another victim.

You got what you've asked for. Nice attempt to turn it around though.

posted on Aug, 31 2005 @ 07:39 AM
Not everyone here are loonies, just people like you and dh who have little to say and lack the ability to back up their arguments. You are extremists in your own right as you only have the capability to see in Black and White.

We're still waiting to hear why my research is wrong by the way and how you know more about Visor's industry better than they do?

[edit on 31-8-2005 by AgentSmith]

posted on Aug, 31 2005 @ 10:00 AM
You're right. Dammit. You're totally right. How would they get a list of missing people on the train? ARGH!!! It made sooooo much sense. Visor reponded to the crisis as it happened-so did Tubelines. It's not Tubelines, though. Man, I hate to give it to you, but I can't deny the facts you've put forward. I WILL take what has been presented by AgentSmith and try to use it to help me find this M*%&#$F%#$&@ company.

Cheers AgentSmith, you pro-fact SOB. Damn. Damn. Damn.
Thanks for gettin my back on this DH/Shroom, but he's right.

The Savage

[edit on 31-8-2005 by The Savage]

posted on Aug, 31 2005 @ 10:13 AM
uh, no worries. Sorry I come across a bit aggresive - it's not you I just seem to flail out at people because a couple manage to annoy me. Then when someone else says something similar I forget it's not them I'm talking to.

But they didn't have a list of people on the train though (Visor and whoever they were working for), they were talking about a list of people missing from the company.

But yeah, read those documents on crisis management for businesses, there's plenty more out there too though that one is specific to London, which is highly relevant. In that and if you search there are quite a lot specific to the effects of terrorism as well. That should help you.

[edit on 31-8-2005 by AgentSmith]

posted on Aug, 31 2005 @ 10:29 AM
Do you think the three attacks triangulate an approximation of where this company might be? I mean, why would they pick those particular stations? They have to be around where people would get on to go to work. I know Piccadilly is like this great metro area in London with banks and sh#t. Powers mentions that the company is nearby Jewish(no, I'm not anti-semetic people-sigh) businesses and American Banks. I have a feeling that the company is probably around the center of these incidents. I don't KNOW of course, but it SOUNDS reasonable.

One other thing. Powers used to work for Scotland Yard. One of the first warnings was apparently from Scotland Yard to the Isreali Embassy. Scotland Yard fits very uncomfortably into all of this.

Yeah, I was getting all snipey too. Counter-productive. History. Let's get these fu#$ers!!!

posted on Aug, 31 2005 @ 11:38 AM
You do have a good point there, I believe he did originally say that it was the exact same stations they used in their paper simulation, as you say if this is accurate then it would make sense they would have picked them for some reason for the exercise purposes.
I don't know the layout of London at all well, are they near the financial district? From the little he says it may very well be the case.

I don't know how much can be gained by knowing who the company they were walking for is. But ALL information is indeed useful as one can find clues in the places they least expect.

It may very well be that there are members of the team that carried out the attacks infiltrated into various organisations. The evidence regarding the (lack of) CCTV from the bus for instance may suggest this.
I don't think this means that it is a government plot at all, I just think there is an external (probably foreign) force at work here that has people in various places enabling them to get inside information on things and even manipulate situations to their advantage.

It could very well be that they play 'tricks' in order to encourage people to distrust the government further. Which, is sadly not very hard - as they quite often manage to make a booboo over something LOL.
Of course, what better than to attack a people and then turn them against the people that are supposed to be protecting them?
That too is also a strong possibility in my mind.

I've rambled on and I can't remember the original point.. sorry!

Ah yes the Israeli warning, it was kept pretty quiet. I'm not sure how accurate it is in timing of when the warning was issued. It struck me as odd that so early on such information would find it's way into the press in the first place. It most certainly was not an official press release and it makes you wonder what the source was. It may very well be genuine or it may be another tactic designed to cause distrust. It is very hard to tell, either way it didn't find it's way into the media, especially within a couple hours wasn't it?, by honourable means.

Of course assuming it is true then I believe the warning was, allegedly, not long before the attack happened, it has also to be remembered that the intelligence agencies and other agencies involved tend to not act as a collective mind. So they would be limited in time in who they could tell. They would not realistically have time to help civilians but the political ramifications would be severe if it was found out they hadn't warned a foreign ambassador.

There are also reports that there was police and even military (though it may have been SO19) activity in the area at the time. They may have received intelligence but not had specifics, problem is I think a lot of people don't realise the sheer volume of people moving in London at that time.
Even if they used racial profiling and had been looking for people of possible muslim descent with backpacks or bags then it would not have narrowed it down an awful lot as anyone that has been there will know.

Naturally, if they did have some idea and were unable to stop it, then it isn't the sort of thing one wants in the media right after the event when everyone is feeling emotional and there are likely to be a lot of kneejerk reactions.

Unfortunatly people are very quick to condemn officers who are at fault but they never acknowledge or appreciate all the work they do that does go well. When an officer is lost a valuable member of a team is lost and hundreds of thousands of pounds of taxpayers money is lost and more needs to be spent to fill a gap when we already have a lack of experienced officers on the street.

The whole situation is very very complicated and there are numerous possibilities to look at..

Going back to your original post, even though I'm sure that the company you mentioned is nothing to do with the Visor exercise, it is worth investigating them and their origins if as you said they were first on the scene.
It may be worth looking at seeing if they or anyone in the company has a direct relationship with the company that services the bus CCTV for instance. I posted a bit of info I found at the beginning of the thread, you can get all the company info and accounts from Companies House for a couple quid. But you need to use a credit card to pay for it, and I'd rather not associate myself with looking to be honest.

So it is a very good find anyway! In my humble opinon

[edit on 31-8-2005 by AgentSmith]

posted on Aug, 31 2005 @ 12:55 PM

Peter Power, in official E-Mail reply for Visor Consultants:

...It is confirmed that a short number of "walk through" scenarios
planed (sic) well in advance had commenced that morning for a private company in London
(as part of a wider project that remains confidential)

and that two scenarios related directly to terrorist bombs at the same time as the ones that actually detonated
with such tragic results.
One scenario in particular, was very similar to real time events...


that morning= july 7th, London Tube bombing
private company=the LondonUnderground companies you noted

but P. Parker did not say that this private London company hired & paid
Visor Consultants... he did state that info was being withheld as confidential, as it was part of a wider project which had been negotiated over a longer period of time
ergo, Tube & Metro were only the assignment duty....the agency that contracted Visor Consultants remains secret!
0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 -

(( That was the '1 factoid' part,
now here's the '1 speculation' part...))
a - a - a - a - a - a -

An Essay by Webster Griffin Tarpley, Author- 9/11 Synthetic Terrorism:
Made in USA of 8-27-5

heading; Terrorism Under Cover Of Exercises And Drills

some excerpts;
Scotland Yard knew in advance that these attacks were coming,
as shown through the warnings to Netanyahu and, presumably,
other visiting bigwigs.

The long-range preparation of the London explosions {not bombings}
was carried out under the aegis of a trio of exercises:
Atlantic Blue for the UK
Topoff 3 for the US
Triple Play for Canada

The immediate cover for the London 7/7 events was by all accounts
the simulation being conducted by Peter Power and Visor Consultants,
which involved (simulated) bombs going off at pretty much the same stations
at the same times that explosions actually occurred.

The Visor Consultants drill may well have involved personnel on the ground who thought they were participating in a legally sanctioned simulation, but who were really performing actions which led to the explosions.......They can also transform unwitting employees into patsies,
some of whom can pay for their naivete with their lives.


as i can only assume that there were long range, secretive exercises,
being done by UK, US, Canada (as noted above)
i can only speculate that one or all three, agreed to hire Visor Consultants,
and either internal moles or Jihad intell used the cover & confusion of the
exercise to facilitate the real life bombings.

i submit the thread starter, does not actually identified the contractor who
ultimately hired Visor Consultants or Peter Power.....
I also have misgivings about Peter Powers' obfuscation with the murky
wording in his official e-mail release for Visor Consultants,
**note the vagueness about the simulated bombs and the actual/literal bombs...the terrorist bombs & the 'ones' that actually exploded,
he phrases them as two different things
--> maybe he made a slip of the tongue, & unconsciously stated the
gunny-sack bombs were not really the actual exploding bombs ??!??

posted on Aug, 31 2005 @ 01:08 PM
It is worth noting though, that as I pointed out before a 'walk-through' exercise in the business of Disaster Recovery (which is what they do) is:

When I say walk-through, I mean looking at the written plan, discussing it in terms of format and philosophy. When I do a table top or simulation, I make them address issues in the context of a scenario. I also hold them to a pretty high standard during a table top or simulation that others may liken more to a "drill" or "exercise". I make the team qualify their answers, do not allow them to just make things up off the top of their head and require them to prove that they can do what they say they are going to (call the number and see if it works for example).

Taken from the forum on 'Disaster Recovery Journal''s homepage, under the title of 'How does Industry define "Walk-Throughs"?'

And also in the email from Power (taken from the same Prison PLanet source):

"In short, our exercise (which involved just a few people as crisis managers actually responding to a simulated series of activities involving, on paper, 1000 staff) quickly became the real thing and the players that morning responded very well indeed to the sudden reality of events.

So I still don't think that people would have been involved on the ground.

Visor are the sort of people that any 'normal' company would hire, like a bank, retail outlet, it company, etc, hire to help them draft up plans to cope with sudden disasters ranging from fires and floods to, indeed, terror attacks.
Anyone in business will appreciate how even the slightest things that seem irrelevent can affect you. And all of those things are not irrelevent.

Visor would in fact be inferior to any company whose purpose includes a hands on response to incidents like this, which is why it seems highly unlikely that someone like Tubelines would hire them in the first place as there is nothing they could offer them.

[edit on 31-8-2005 by AgentSmith]

posted on Aug, 31 2005 @ 02:17 PM

Originally posted by AgentSmith

And also in the email from Power (taken from the same Prison PLanet source):

"In short, our exercise (which involved just a few people as crisis managers actually responding to a simulated series of activities involving, on paper, 1000 staff) quickly became the real thing and the players that morning responded very well indeed to the sudden reality of events.

So I still don't think that people would have been involved on the ground.

perhaps you are getting caught up in his 'dead-ending the issue'
Maybe a clearer version of Parkers explaination is in order...
when he says our exercise was only a few crisis managers
and a support staff of paper pushers and such, numbering 1,000
(which probably generally describes his company too)
He might actually be technicalities only.

there seems a disconnect to me, because he goes on to praise
and laud the players that morning,
meaning to me that there were many cogs+wheels+cams+gears
that were in a coordinated action that 7 July morning.
(you wouldn't expect a high caliber top executive & spokesperson
to be so redundant as to note his companies managers & staff
who were involved in an imaginary, paper-world, hypothetical terrorist
attack, in one breath.....and an instant later identify the same team as a
cast of players who really rose to the occasion & 'responded'
heroically.....people in a fictional exercise dont reflex or respond to
outside & real-world events in any fashion, otherwise their mission would be compromised!)

i think he's trying to cloud the issue with disinformation.
i would suggest that Visor Consultants were contracted by the UK
operation Atlantic Blue, to act as overseer of an actual psycho-drama
production which included the TubeAuthorities and the MetroAuthorities
and both their companies,
another company provided the EMTs & 1st responders,
another group provided a cast of survivor victims, on both the bus & tubes,
still another group provided the terrorist patsies,
there were team members(from the Topoff 3 or the Triple Play, Black-Ops) to act as referees and coordinators, to insure the mechanism reached zero-hour!

i had to put forth that model so you could read your points of contention
in a different light...otherwise a point by point by point would exhaust itself
by the sheer volume of explaining viewpoints.
I submit that we are being told half-truths, which my be partially correct
unless one counters with the 'correct' questions. I see the E-Mail Official Response, which we have both referenced, in a way different interpetation
that you la difference non?

posted on Aug, 31 2005 @ 03:18 PM

"In short, our exercise (which involved just a few people as crisis managers actually responding to a simulated series of activities involving, on paper, 1000 staff) quickly became the real thing and the players that morning responded very well indeed to the sudden reality of events.

I do understand what your saying, I think, but all it means is that, as it says:

* Several (key) people from the organisation which hired Visor were taking part in this walk-through (that's going through a written plan round a table) exercise on that morning using the same scenario.
For their scenario they used a model of a company with 1000 staff - this could be innaccurate or accurate to the number of people in the actualy company in question but is irrelevant.

* The people in the company involved in the exercise then had to put it into practice and act as it was real.

* The people involved as 'crisis managers' are not Visor employees, they are employees of the company that hired Visor who are the nominated personnel to handle emergencies.
When he says they rose to the occasion, all he is saying that these people handled the crisis in the way it affected their company as they were being trained to in the first place.

None of what they do would involve going out on 'the field'.

Here's an example (of the top of my head) of a possible scenario:

We are an IT company with 200 staff with our offices based in the financial sector of London. Our clients include several large banks and our duties include the smooth running of their IT systems for day to day financial transactions.

It's rush hour in the morning, suddenly there is a terrorist attack at 3 of the major underground stations in the district, with the possibility that some of our staff are on those trains.

We now have to account for all staff in the company that not present, once we have determined who is not there that should be, we have to inform the authorities that we have missing persons and who they are.

We also have to fulfill our obligation to our customers, only now we are understaffed and there is panic. Existing staff members are concerned about colleagues and family.

We are also missing two company directors and several key members of staff. Unfortunatly it includes all of the members of staff that have authorisation to make payments to other companies. We were overdue on a payment to the company that provides our datacentre and today is the last day before they suspend service (and yes even big companies get overdue - trust me I know). They don't care about what happened - business is business (which also happens). Unless we have a way to get payment to them our datacentre is going offline and we may as well scuttle the ship...

They have to have a plan in these eventualities to ensure that losses are at a minimum and to fulfill the moral obligation of reporting who is missing. When everyone is panicking and chaos reigns to try and hold things together is difficult, but it needs to be done and you need a plan - helping you make that plan is what companies like Visor do.

I worked in a small company with only a people, and the owner and our secretary were killed in an accident. It was as you can imagine excedingly tragic and sad. But it happened on a payday, we still needed our money or we would not have roofs over our heads. Even in the darkness of what happened, a couple of us had to take those duties on even on that dark day. The point is life goes on and especially in the world of big business, you can't afford to have losses.

I'm not having a dig, but i think your misunderstanding what it means.

[edit on 31-8-2005 by AgentSmith]

[edit on 31-8-2005 by AgentSmith]

posted on Nov, 21 2008 @ 05:32 AM
I am Peter Power who you refer to and you are quite mistaken about who were ran an exercise for in 2005. Unfortunately, the BBC have just postponed a programme in their ‘conspiracy files’ series that would have explained who we were working for. Our client three years ago agreed to be named in the BBC programme since the attitude of the producer and his team was very balanced (several conspiracy theorists were also invited to take part). We even allowed our complete exercise material to be made available to the BBC. Regrettably broadcasting it now might jeopardise an ongoing court case, so they had little choice about postponing it to next year.

Early in 2005 Reed Elsevier, an organisation specialising in information and publishing that employs 1,000 people in and around London, asked us to help them prepare an effective crisis management plan and rehearse it before sign-off. Several draft scenarios were drawn up and the crisis team themselves set the exercise date and time: 9.00am on 7 July.

The test was planned as a table-top walk through for about six people (the CM team) in a lecture room with all injects simulated. Everything was on MS PowerPoint. The location of their Central London office near to Chancery Lane was chosen as one test site. With many staff travelling to work via the London underground system, the chosen exercise simulated incendiary devices on three trains, very similar to a real IRA attack in 1992, as well as other events.

As there had been eighteen terrorist bomb attacks on tube trains prior to 2005, choosing the London Underground was logical rather than just prescient. With this in mind it was hardly surprising that Deutsche Bank had run a similar exercise a few days before and, prior to that, a multi-agency (and much publicised) exercise code-named Osiris II had simulated a terrorist attack at Bank tube station. Moreover, I had also taken part in a BBC Panorama programme in 2004 as a panellist alongside Michael Portillo MP et al, in an unscripted debate (we had no idea at all what the scenario was to be?) on how London might once again, deal with terrorist attacks, only this time it was fictional (created entirely by the BBC).

Of just eight nearby tube stations that fell within possible exercise scope, three were chosen that, by coincidence, were involved in the awful drama that actually took place on 7 July 2005. A level of scenario validation that on this occasion, we could have done without.

An exercise that turns into the real thing is not that unusual. For example, in January 2003, thirty people were injured when a tube train derailed and hit a wall at speed. At the same time, the City of London Police were running an exercise for their central casualty bureau where the team quickly abandoned their plans and swung into action to cope with the real thing.

For a surprising number of people such coincidents cannot be accepted as such. There just has to be a conspiracy behind them, despite the obvious point that painstaking research will always identify probable above possible scenarios. By the way, the only reason I was asked to speak on TV news that day, when there was still much confusion about the real tragedies, was to encourage more organisations to thoroughly plan their own exercises knowing the threat of terrorism is and remains, very real. One tragic consequence being Islam, a great Abrahamic, monotheistic faith (along with Judaism and Christianity), has undeservedly become vilified by some people.

Peter Power
Visor Consultants

posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 05:28 AM
reply to post by The Savage


posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 07:27 AM
Wonderful, so not only do you not know how to turn your caps lock off but you resurrect a 5 year old thread while completely ignoring the posts it contains, in particular my closing one.
I would learn some basic skills like communicating and reading before you try your hand at anything complicated like 'alternative' theories.

posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 11:00 PM
Has Evidence been found that tubelines hired visor or is it the most likely entity to have done so due to deduction.

new topics
top topics
<< 1   >>

log in