Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Massive car bomb in London? Just saw on FOX news

page: 11
16
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 06:07 AM
link   




I may be skeptical automatically because I am such a strong beleiver that 7/7 never happened.

Open your mind a little.


Tell that to the poor secretary who worked in the office near me who was blown to pieces.





Sure.

Everytime I post my view on 7/7 here, within 24 hours there is always some Brit to post here that they personally knew a victim and "shame on me".

Again statistical probability. Considering there were only 52 victims. There are about 35,000 Active ATS members. The chances that more then 3 ATS members personally knew 7/7 victims has got to be less then 1 hundreth of a percent.

Also it is a bit unsensitive of you to use the phrase "Blown to peices". Psychologically profiling that statement I can conclude that you had no emotional/personal relationship to this person.

In other words you are BS and dont have any credibility since you are probably going on hearesay.

But feel free to defend your argument. What was his/her name? Where did he/she work? Did you know this person?

If you cant tell, I want hard PROOF. And I have not been able to find any of it concerning 7/7.

[edit on 1-7-2007 by ImplementOfWar]

She worked for a company called AYH and was on one of the tubes, I did not know her personally but used to see her, her picture was in the Daily Mail along with other papers showing all the victims.

I'm being unsensitive am I, pots and kettles mate. Also, don't call me 'BS', quite petty to result to insults.

[edit on 1-7-2007 by mrbocci]




posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 06:08 AM
link   


by shrunkensimon

They also happened to blur their faces out of the TV...why? Don't we deserve to know who did this?


The UK press have to abide legislation about publicising terrorists. For one thing showing a face may tip off this person's co-conspirators or contacts to flee.

Another thing is that showing a face on TV may be relied upon later by a defence lawyer to suggest that the captured person is prejudiced from receiving a fair trial.

There were bystanders who gave commentary to the press about the man shouting Allah, or do you suspect that all the bystanders were planted agents of the NWO too ?

Been watching too much of matrix again.



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 06:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by sy.gunson

There were bystanders who gave commentary to the press about the man shouting Allah, or do you suspect that all the bystanders were planted agents of the NWO too ?

Been watching too much of matrix again.


Because the man shouted "allah" that automatically means he was a "real terrorist"? Would it be out of bounds for the M15 agent to yell "Allah allah" in order to give credibility to his little show?

This does not prove the terrorist was real or fake. It also does not prove the bystanders were real or fake. The important thing here is that it doesnt prove the terrorist was real.

[edit on 1-7-2007 by ImplementOfWar]



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 06:18 AM
link   
Showing his face could be used by his defence team to claim that he was unable to get a fair trial.



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 06:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by ImplementOfWar
Sure pull the "How disnoble of you to question" card out.

I was expecting that.

False terror operations are exactly something I see the British government trying to pull off. For the exact mentality that you have. That there are bad guys out there that want to do harm. To me I can see them justifying staged attacks that are nothing more then theatrics in order to persuade the sheeple and to conform them to Britains ideal of BIG BROTHER.

I cant see how these terrorists could fail so miserably in trying to blow up a few "petrol" tanks. It all seems way too conveinant and against statistical probability. But I'm not trying to preach, I am just throwing my opinion out there.


So, you freely admit that there are indeed "bad guys out there that want to do harm". How do you come to the conclusion, within the first 24 hours, that this is not a "bad guy" operation? And why do you feel the British Government would do this? What have you read, seen and experienced to bring you to this point?

Why should terrorists have a high rate of success? They are not all highly trained for months at a time so how can they know everything about a successful bomb? If it is so easy I am glad no-one as smart as the CTers turn to this kind of despicable act - I would expect nothing less than a 100% success rate from the experts.

You say 7/7 was an inside job, and I assume seeing as you feel this weekends discoveries and attack are fake, that you also believe the 21/7 attempted attacks were staged as well? What is the purpose of all this? Do you really know of anyone here who is scared to go out or feels forced to change how they live? Is life continuing for everyone just like when we had to deal with the IRA or the blitz? Why are these attacks supposed to put more fear into the population?

I am not calling anyone dis-noble for questioning ANYTHING (and I am certainly not singling you out here), you should always have an open mind if you believe the official line, believe a conspiracy theory, or anywhere in between. But many more CTers have closed minds compared with the "official" side. I just don't like individuals pulling statements out of their backside with absolutely nothing to back it up with. "I can see this..." "Wake up you sheep! It's so obvious!" Evidence, logic and reason is overrated in some circles it seems.



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 06:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by ImplementOfWar
Because the man shouted "allah" that automatically means he was a "real terrorist"? Would it be out of bounds for the M15 agent to yell "Allah allah" in order to give credibility to his little show?

This does not prove the terrorist was real or fake. It also does not prove the bystanders were real or fake. The important thing here is that it doesnt prove the terrorist was real.

[edit on 1-7-2007 by ImplementOfWar]


Now that is true dedication if our intelligence agents can stay in character whilst taking 90% burns!



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 07:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by ImplementOfWar
Would it be out of bounds for the M15 agent to yell "Allah allah" in order to give credibility to his little show?


I highly doubt that any M15 agent would sit in an car bomb and give himself 3rd degree burns to do that.

However, it would NOT be out of bounds for a RADICAL ISLAMIC TERRORIST to set a car bomb and yell "allah allah".

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar .. and ..
sometimes a radical islamic terrorist is just a radical islamic terrorist.



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muppetus Galacticus

Originally posted by ImplementOfWar
Because the man shouted "allah" that automatically means he was a "real terrorist"? Would it be out of bounds for the M15 agent to yell "Allah allah" in order to give credibility to his little show?

This does not prove the terrorist was real or fake. It also does not prove the bystanders were real or fake. The important thing here is that it doesnt prove the terrorist was real.

[edit on 1-7-2007 by ImplementOfWar]


Now that is true dedication if our intelligence agents can stay in character whilst taking 90% burns!


Ok so what does this prove? How do you know the terrorist received 90% burns? Are you his doctor? Or did you hear it on the news? Hmm.

It is easy to give the illusion you are on fire and burning. Stunt actors do it all the time.

Your statement proves nothing. In fact Id say it shows how closed your mind really is and how vulnerable and gullable you are to beleiving everything you hear from "the media".

[edit on 1-7-2007 by ImplementOfWar]



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by justyc

Originally posted by Origin Unknown
Loads of vehicles get towed away like that, you have a certain amount of time to get your car back.


you miss the point - being an ex londoner who once had their car towed away, i know for a fact that your car is taken to the police car pound where you can pick it up after paying a very hefty fine.

it DOESN'T get taken to an underground car park and any londoner will tell you that!


ERM, it depends on where in London it is parked illegally. London isn't some quaint village with just one police station/car pound. Its a city of more than 8m people and more than that when you consider those who commute from surrounding areas

Fact, members have proven that cars parked in the borough of Westminster, are often taken to a underground facility at Park Lane.



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 01:56 PM
link   
Well this certainly is interesting:

London Nightclubs Warned Before Attempted Bombing

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm....




posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 02:07 PM
link   
Absolutely right and If you get towed in Southern areas of Westminster the car ends up in a pound at Vauxhall, which you will be disappointed to hear, is above ground! This makes it easier for "The Grays" to abduct drivers queuing to pay their fines.

Reading some of the posts on this thread is proving to be a real education. MI5 operatives using stunt men techniques, questioning how burnt the driver really is, (40%, 50% 80%. Any advance on 80%? thank you 90% to the man in the straight jacket in the corner) . Some people here are in danger of making these terrorist head cases look positively sane.

[edit on 07/21/06 by Fang]



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
Well this certainly is interesting:

London Nightclubs Warned Before Attempted Bombing

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm....



Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm... if you had studied the recent trial of the "Crawley Cell" you will have heard the recording of one of them talking about bombing the Ministry of Sound, a night Club in London. He went on to talk about no one being able to call the victims innocent "all those slags dancing around". These guys appear to detest the sort of mixing of the sexes that is taken for granted in the West.



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 03:57 PM
link   
They did however post the faces of all the failed bombers on the attempt after 7/7 didn't they? Before they were captured.

As for the fair trial I believe these are held in secret without jury and the evidence does not have to be shown to the defence team at all only to the judge. Under current powers at least.



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 04:07 PM
link   
They certainly published CCTV footage of the failed bombers as they fled the scene. But they were refferd to as 'suspects' who the Police were keen to interview. In the case of the Glasgow attack the photos were of handcuffed suspects under arrest at the scene of the crime.



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by kickoutthejams
As for the fair trial I believe these are held in secret without jury and the evidence does not have to be shown to the defence team at all only to the judge. Under current powers at least.


Simply untrue...

The trials would probably be held in the Central Criminal Court at the Old Bailey. The public can watch from the gallery, (VERY limited space), and the press will attend. The trial are NOT televised which simply doesn't happen in the UK. There would be a conventional jury, nothing untoward here at all. The evidence is presented in open court by both sides, there is no question of the defence not being allowed to see evidence.



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 04:24 PM
link   
ah ok I may be referring to other measures which were also defeated in the commons in 2005

news.bbc.co.uk...

my bad



posted on Jul, 2 2007 @ 03:12 PM
link   
BBC have reported that Strathclyde Special Branch Officers were on their way to question one of the men currently under arrested just before the attack on Glasgow Airport. Apparently, there was something found in the 'Tiger, Tiger' Merc which led them to him-not quickly enough as it turned out.



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by ImplementOfWar
Excuse my innapropiateness, but I am calling BS.

I may be skeptical automatically because I am such a strong beleiver that 7/7 never happened.
Open your mind a little.


Don't be so bloody daft. Show me the evidence that 9/11 happened. All Ive seen are a few shaky TV images and a lot of rhetoric.

Exactly what sort of evidence do you need? Unless you were actually there you can never really know that an event happened, you will always rely on third part reports to some extent.



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Peyre
ERM, it depends on where in London it is parked illegally. London isn't some quaint village with just one police station/car pound. Its a city of more than 8m people and more than that when you consider those who commute from surrounding areas

Fact, members have proven that cars parked in the borough of Westminster, are often taken to a underground facility at Park Lane.


i think if you read the thread thoroughly you will discover that i know what london is like as i lived there for most of my life and that i in fact was the one who first proved after a bit of research that westminster council use that car park for their car pound.

im still wondering why suicide bombers would steal cars rather than use their own (like buying return tickets for a one-way trip)

still waiting for cctv of the london drivers - surely they have pictures of them by now



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 10:55 AM
link   
FOX TV News is reporting that all KEY SUSPECTS in this have been arrested. They have those who (allegedly) planeted the bombs in custody.

8 arrested total.






top topics



 
16
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join