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.

 

7/7 London bombings lies

page: 3
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 07:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Strangerous
Many other acclerants likely to be present; aerosols, perfumes in people's bags, oils and other lubricants within the train systems. Again this is not the proof you claim it is. You'll notice the very few of the wounded who exhibited burns - if, as you suggest, it was C4 etc then the majority of the wounded would exhibit burns


TATP explodes at room temperature. Would perfumes, oils and lubricants be affected? I can imagine a high temperature explosion causing them to ignite but a entropic one? Aeorsols maybe but to the extent reported, I doubt it.

[edit on 31-10-2006 by uknumpty]




posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

How many of those exercises had:

1. Investigations of terrorists by law enforcement called off a few months before a major terror attack?
2. Had foreign governemnts, especially Israel, warning of an impending attack shortly before they occurred?
3. Mimiced a terrorist attack disturbing close to the actual terrorist attack that occured?

None.


Well obviously none because they're routine crises management exercises run by/for City firms and none involve any of the things you've listed (other then, as in the case of 7th July, having a realistic scenario around which to run the exercise. A multiple bomb attack on the Underground being one of the most likely real event to occur, and thus also the most likely event to base your scenario on)

Incidently, if the exercise were in any way connected with real events, why would the director of the company running the exercise have told us all about it on national TV?


Do you really think this company is a front? www.visorconsultants.com...

Or were they just doing what they've been commissioned to do week in and week out for years?



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Essan


Well obviously none because they're routine crises management exercises run by/for City firms and none involve any of the things you've listed (other then, as in the case of 7th July, having a realistic scenario around which to run the exercise. A multiple bomb attack on the Underground being one of the most likely real event to occur, and thus also the most likely event to base your scenario on)

Incidently, if the exercise were in any way connected with real events, why would the director of the company running the exercise have told us all about it on national TV?


Do you really think this company is a front? www.visorconsultants.com...

Or were they just doing what they've been commissioned to do week in and week out for years?


Doing what they were commisioned to do. Commisioned by WHOM?

The company and its director did not necessarily have to be in the loop. Simply following instructions for a terror drill, unknown to them, was to mimic a very real incident very soon.

Or, they could have known. Since it was a public exercise, and most people simply do not connect the dots very quickly and at all, admitting to such a thing would not be such breach of secrecy.



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by uknumpty

Originally posted by Strangerous
Many other acclerants likely to be present; aerosols, perfumes in people's bags, oils and other lubricants within the train systems. Again this is not the proof you claim it is. You'll notice the very few of the wounded who exhibited burns - if, as you suggest, it was C4 etc then the majority of the wounded would exhibit burns


TATP explodes at room temperature. Would perfumes, oils and lubricants be affected? I can imagine a high temperature explosion causing them to ignite but a entropic one? Aeorsols maybe but to the extent reported, I doubt it.

[edit on 31-10-2006 by uknumpty]


Accepted but there are many other heat sources that could ignite the accelerants: hot brakes, the electrical current, internal systems within the tube train. The fact that a few (very few) of the wounded showed some flash burn effects does not mean it wasn't TATP.

People get burnt when it's a simple tube / train crash - does that mean all crashes are initiated with C4? Of course not.



posted on Nov, 1 2006 @ 06:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

Doing what they were commisioned to do. Commisioned by WHOM?


One of their clients. Which could have been any one of thousands of City based companies ..... Maybe even the company they're carrying out a similar crises management exercise for today.



posted on Nov, 1 2006 @ 08:34 AM
link   
Nafeez Ahmed has written a book about the London Bombings called:

The London Bombings: An Independent Enquiry

Not venturing in MIHOP territory he does however uncover some unpalatable truths.


At first, the police were sure that the 7/7 bombers used weapons-grade plastic explosives and sophisticated timers. Two weeks later, they changed their minds - the bombs were home-made and were detonated manually. Since then the official account has changed repeatedly and remains riddled with anomalies and confusion.

The government is resisting calls for a full inquiry and has instead presented a 'narrative' written by a civil servant. This supposedly defiinitive account has already collapsed in the face of public scrutiny and leaks from the security services.

As Ahmed demonstrates the attacks can only be fully understood in the ight of extensive co-operation between the Islamist extremists and Western Intelligence in Central Asia. The London bombings, much like the attacks on New York in 2001, were a widely predicted consequence of the West's global strategy. If we do face a future of terrorism we should at least understand the extent to which our governments have accepted this as the price of business as usual. Looking beyond the platitudes and deceptions of the war on terror, Nafeez asks what exactly we mean by the national interest and whether we are really well served by policies that promote terror abroad and tolerate extremism at home.


[edit on 1-11-2006 by uknumpty]



posted on Nov, 1 2006 @ 10:16 AM
link   
Being a Londoner I can tell you that this event caused a lot of disruption.

Although you cannot put any value on the loss of life I don't think loss of life was the intended goal of the terrorists.

If they intended to cause major loss of life, they could quite easily have attacked just a couple of days earlier at the live 8 concert in Hyde Park. Hundreds of thousands of people gathered together in one place....

Or the announcement that England was going to be host for the 2012 Olympics (conspiracy theorists will go mad at that date and announcement, ill bet)

I firmly believe the purpose of the 7/7 bombings were to cause financial repercussions within the stock market, and cause economic damage to the country by disrupting the capital.

Anyway...

Those are my thoughts on the bombings.

NeoN HaZe.

P.S. That morning I wasn't able to catch the northern line I normally catch at Balham since the station was closed.... I was lucky or I could have been caught up in it.... Bloody hate catching the bus!!


[edit on 1-11-2006 by Neon Haze]



posted on Nov, 1 2006 @ 03:13 PM
link   
Maybe you're right. If they wanted human carnage it would have been easier and less dangerous (transporting unstable TATP bombs by road, rail then tube) to target their home city of Leeds.



posted on Nov, 1 2006 @ 06:32 PM
link   
Off topic but may be pertinent, why is ok to call people fools, nuts and incompetent but not idiots or stupid arent they all insults?

The 7/7 event was orchestrated by the Goverment as previously stated. The Police story is full of lies and inconsistencies and the Goverment blocked any official enquiry as it said it would be pointless. Now maybe I'm a fool or stupid but if we are to believe this event and it is an event unpresedented in the UK one would assume that the Goverment would want to find out through the use of a public enquiry as to what really happenedbut it chose not to.

How convenient it must of been to be having a anti terrorist exercise the day of the bombings, plenty of time for the perpatrators to escape during the "exercise" and its funny how the same thing happened on 9/11, just a coincidence isn't it.
The 4 alleged bombers were patsies, the poor sods were part of the excercise but someone forgot to tell them that the exercise was for real and they would be made real terrorists.

Its the perfect cover story, you have 4 Asain men with rucksacks caught on cctv and the police anounce to the world that these were the bombers. Well I bet if they showed all the footage that day there would be thousands of simmilar looking men so the pictures prove nothing, again the set up is just like 9/11. One photo released of Asian looking men at a airport security check point and again were told these are the terrorists, that is the proof offered to the Brtish public , 2 photographs used to convince us who carried out these attacks.

Again look at the background of the bombers, average joe's with no previous, not affiliated with any known groups, just normal men who suddenly decide to blow themselves and others up. Yeah I get out of bed everyday with the same thought. When are the doubters going to realise that there is a war going on, its a war against our freedom and liberty, these events are not unique in history, its happened time and time again. Goverments cannot be trusted, Goverments pose the greatest threat to their own people, again this is historic so why do people find it hard to accept. Its not like it hassent happened before, what will it take for those with closed minds to finally open them.



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 04:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by magicmushroom

How convenient it must of been to be having a anti terrorist exercise the day of the bombings, plenty of time for the perpatrators to escape during the "exercise" and its funny how the same thing happened on 9/11, just a coincidence isn't it.
The 4 alleged bombers were patsies, the poor sods were part of the excercise but someone forgot to tell them that the exercise was for real and they would be made real terrorists.



For the last time: the planned exercise was a corporate crisis management exercise - involving a few people from the company concerned sitting in an office. Nothing more. The idea is to 'pretend' an incident has happened and ensure that proceedures are in place. For example, if a key member of staff is killed or unable to get to work, if records are destroyed etc etc.

Visor Consultants are one of a number of firms that specialise in assisting and advising other companies with their crisis managment proceedures.

The fact that such an exercise was planned for later that morning is about as suspicious as someone else holding their weekly fire drill on the same morning.....



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 07:15 AM
link   
Essan the orignal report said that a thousand people were involved in that execise so where do you get just a few from.



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 07:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by magicmushroom
Essan the orignal report said that a thousand people were involved in that execise so where do you get just a few from.


He actually says that there were 1,000 people in the organisation - ie the company for whom he was working on that day was a large one with about 1,000 employees. If you listen to the interview again it's perfectly clear that this was a normal crisis management exercise which they then had to shift into a real operation to track down missing employees etc

www.whatreallyhappened.com...



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 07:41 AM
link   
Essan , sory that last post was wrong. But moving on why have you just picked out one thing I said, where is all the evidence that the police said they would have. The attack was unpresendented in the Uk why no public enquiry. Why are there so many holes in the police's official story.

Even eye witness's to the event said the explosions came from under the trains. Think back to the days of the IRA and the lenghts the police went to to exhibit weaponry etc. We have a police force with a known history of perverting the course of justice when it comes to terrorism issues. Why should we trust or believe what they say. Why was that chap shot seven times in the head and he was totally innocent, do you think people will trust a police force that are capable of such things.

The police want more and more power and draconian laws. At the height of the Irish troubles we never had such draconian laws or such a police force so why now. What suddenly changed for these things to happen. Dont tell me its becuase of 7/7 because thats crap, we have had to deal with terrorism for decades. And just where is the much vuanted Al Qaeda, where are all the terror attacks that we are told they are so capable of, u going to tell me our police force stopped them all.

Look at the last fiasco in london with the police jumping the gun, they bring the country to a standstill, cause chaos and for what, we now know that some of these alleged terrorists that were going to blow up planes did not even have passports or tickets. And its all gone quite again on this hassent it. Is this going to be yet another cock up by the police. And dont say there dammed if they do or dont, their suposed to be experts in this with unlimited means of suveilance etc.

The fact of it is that there are those with an agenda on both sides and we are just the pawns in the game, why dont you just admit that why dont you comment on all
my comments instead of picking out the ones you want to comment on.



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 08:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by magicmushroom
why dont you just admit that why dont you comment on all
my comments instead of picking out the ones you want to comment on.


Because I only comment on things that I know about and where I think I can help by explaining facts and helping avoid misunderstandings and needless speculation
After all, isn't that what ATS is here for?

Although I would add that the 7th July bombings ended any chance the Govt had of introducing ID cards under the argument they were needed to prevent terrorist attacks! If only they'd been foreign bombers....



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by magicmushroom


Even eye witness's to the event said the explosions came from under the trains. .


Again read the article I highlighted from one of these loony conspiracy sites, the Guardian journo who started the 'under the train' story admits he did in error / haste. The bombs weren't under the trains.



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 05:32 PM
link   
In case you hadn't noticed, this is a conspiracy site so is it also loony? You'd do better to not try and qualify your points by preceeding them with terms like "loony", "nutcase", "nutjob" etc.

Referring to the Guardian journalist, and the "off the cuff" comment he made:


Beneath the headline is an extract from a newspaper interview with a passenger on the Aldgate train, reporting that the metal around the hole in the bomb carriage was "pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train". But it is the next entry that I find most alarming. Highlighted in blue is the sentence: "Mark Honingsbaum [sic] also recorded several witnesses speaking of explosions under the floor of the train."

I click on the link and listen once again to my off-the-cuff recording from the Metropole hotel. Then I press the button and loop the broadcast a second time. In the internet age, it seems, some canards never die


He says that his comment is a canard (did he say it but didn't mean it? Is he retracting it? If you listen to his report it doesn't sound off the cuff. He also mentions a women called Davina describing a huge fireball and having burns to her face) but he doesn't say that the report "from a newspaper interview with a passenger on the Aldgate train" is a fabrication. From the report you quote it still stands a being valid.

In fact here's the original report from the Cambridge Evening News:

I was in tube bomb carriage - and survived


"The policeman said 'mind that hole, that's where the bomb was'. The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train. They seem to think the bomb was left in a bag, but I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag," he said.


[edit on 2-11-2006 by uknumpty]



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Strangerous
People get burnt when it's a simple tube / train crash - does that mean all crashes are initiated with C4? Of course not.


Eyewitness quotes


Times: "Twenty seconds after the train started, there was a massive blast — really, really loud. Outside, sparks and flames burnt up the side of the carriage."
JACK LINTON

Times: "Seconds after the train pulled out, there was a huge bang, then a flash of light"
YVONNE MADUEKE

Guardian: "The first thing I knew I saw silver travelling through the air, which was glass, and a yellow flash,"
MICHAEL HENNING (watch Henning on BBC - wmv)

Guardian: 'One regular commuter on the packed Piccadilly line tube train said they instinctively knew a bomb had gone off when the train drew slowly to a halt after a blinding flash and loud bang.'

Guardian: "We were coming out of King's Cross and there was a really big bang, a big, bright flash of light and loads of black smoke started to pour into the carriage,"
TOM CURRY

Channel 4 - wmv : "large flash of light, felt a burning sensation" - watch
CHRIS RANDALL

Guardian: 'The blast sent a flash of flame down the outside of the train as the carriages reared up'

BBC: "Just out of Edgware Road there was this yellowish flash"
JOHN TULLOCH



Terrorist explosive blows up without flames - New Scientist


In conventional high explosives such as TNT, each molecule contains both a fuel component and an oxidising component. When the explosive detonates, the fuel part is oxidised and as this combustion reaction spreads it releases large amounts of heat almost instantaneously.

TATP molecules are made up of fragments that could react in a similar way. But Keinan says that videos showing samples of TATP being detonated show that it can do so without producing any flame.



[edit on 2-11-2006 by uknumpty]



posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 04:59 AM
link   
Ok the reason I call them 'loony' conspiracy sites is that they're badly constructed, present partial evidence / examples and mere rumours as absolute facts. They don't stand up to critical examination. They're the web equivalent of the bloke in the pub who's 'mate told him that ......'

ATS is completely different, we debate things fully, accept contrary views and review the evidence. ATS is often the web antidote to the loony sites - the 9/11 threads being just one example of this.

The quotes you provide do show some interesting themes but again they're in no way proof. These are non-expert individuals caught up in a horrific bombing - it would be very surprising if they're accounts were all consistent / 100% accurate, in fact that would be even more cause for concern than a few inconsistencies.

Some on here are obviously convinced it was all a dastardly plot by MI5 etc etc - I'm as cynical as they come but I can find no reliable evidence to persuade me that the official version isn't what actually happened.

There were some strange things that happened that day but they're probably just coincidental and have been leapt on by people overkeen to 'prove' that their theory is the true version of events



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 05:53 PM
link   
They may not be the proof you want but what has been concrete proof so far? Surely you can rely on someone to know a fireball from a not a fireball? Also it seems you wish to deny the validity of their experiences but possibly not others that support the official story.

Remember the chap constantly quoted who saw the bus bomber? He only described him completely unlike the only CCTV image of him that day released so far. However his description was replayed and quoted just about everywhere in the media (do they actually check these inconsistencies?) even though the actual images of the "bomber" contradict his "eyewitness" account. It was replayed because it supported the Government's storyline. Hmm that sounds familiar, fixing the facts around the policy.

Remember, the official story on 7/7 was brought to you by the same people who lied to invade Iraq. Be suspicious. Demand an independent enquiry.

[edit on 9-11-2006 by uknumpty]



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 06:12 PM
link   
Oh I am suspicious, very.

I agree on the need for an enquiry and I'd like them to look at the CIA / US Secret Service etc etc who were flying lots of things in at the time for Gleneagles.

There are other things that make me suspicious:
For example the Northern Line was closed at about 7.00 - nothing extraordinary in that but no-one's ever explained the Police being at Clapham South in numbers that morning (not normal for 'technical problems')

But the evidence being presented on these sites just isn't credible - if there was this fireball then where are the resulting burns to the majority of the people in the carriages? There's about 400+ people in a carriage during the rush hour so we could expect hundreds of burn victims if it was C4 but there weren't. The vast majority of the wounded were blast injuries.



new topics




 
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join