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.

 

Car On Fire Driven Into Glasgow Airport Terminal

page: 31
26
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 12:08 PM
link   
Deputy Cheif Inspector Andy Trotter of British Transport Police is now making a Live statement in a press conferance

BBC N 24

Sky

He is talking about what will happen with the transport system and security therof tommorrow the beginning of the new week.

Regards

Elf.




posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 12:15 PM
link   
Charlie_the_loafer, your blurring to many issues in my opinion. There's no appetite for more British troops in Iraq, from the government or anyone.

Tax, i've lost count of the stealth taxes put on me in the last ten years, no need whatsoever to attack an airport or nightclub to increase taxs.

I think it's great your exploring different angles but you haven't made anything like a convincing arguement imo.



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
for those that doubt wether a gas cannister explosion would do any damage, please see this link. That was an accident that happened a few weeks ago. An oxy-acetelene cannister exploded, killing one man in his van.




Good examples.

there have been worse you can find links HERE to several amazing what one 20 lb cylinder can do. There is also mention of a 12/15 oz canister that injured one or two. We had one company that had a propane explosion here that killed several although I would not compare it since their tanks were much larger. The point is do not under estimate even the small cylinders and tanks they can be and have been deadly


U.S. adds marshals to overseas flights



Just thought I wuld add it to this thread rather then start its own. It is related and meant to augment security after what took place in the UK.

YahooNew

[edit on 7/1/2007 by shots]



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Origin Unknown
Charlie_the_loafer, your blurring to many issues in my opinion. There's no appetite for more British troops in Iraq, from the government or anyone.

Tax, i've lost count of the stealth taxes put on me in the last ten years, no need whatsoever to attack an airport or nightclub to increase taxs.

I think it's great your exploring different angles but you haven't made anything like a convincing arguement imo.

k, i understand your point.
i have just one question : i think all of us remember how 2 british soldiers , disquised as terorrists open fire on a police station in irak back in 2005 a couple of years back?
what do you think they did that? i don't want any sources , links of sites and so on, i just want your personal opinion.

here is a link if you don't know what i am talking about (you can find more links there) : sandiego.indymedia.org...



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 12:37 PM
link   
I'll have a look and get back to you later



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by shots

U.S. adds marshals to overseas flights



Just thought I wuld add it to this thread rather then start its own. It is related and meant to augment security after what took place in the UK.

YahooNew

[edit on 7/1/2007 by shots]


I heard about that earlier,
however, I thought you already did that after 9/11



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 12:41 PM
link   
origin unknown....

agents for mi5 and members of our government could use false flag attacks or encourage factions to commit attacks for these reasons:

power: tony blair and bush gained power and popularity after 9/11 and 7/7. they also get their place in the history books, written the way they want them to be.

money: companies in the security industry get to sell alot more stuff. be it CCTV, bullet proof cars, tanks, specialist knowledge... ALSO the oil industry benefits, looking at bechtel, halliburton and chevron it doesn't take a genius to reasonably suspect these companies have encouraged terrorism. though maybe not so much in the UK as the US.

and i don't know for sure who is behind 7/7 and 9/11 but i do know we have been lied to. tell me when you want me to remind you about Dr David Kelly.


SOMEONE CHALLENGE ME OR CHANGE YOUR STANCE!



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by infinite
I'm abit unnerved by the potential of a bombing campaign, the highest alert of threat is abit worrying. But, we shall get on with things.


On the face of it, it does seem worrying I agree.

But then when you realise that we saw off Napoleon, the Kaiser, Hitler, the IRA and its predecessors, 19th century radicals/anarchists and even Guy Fawkes, you understand that we've faced far more dangerous threats and come through fine. Essentially, Britain has suffered terrorist attacks at some level for at least the last four hundred years.

They were saying on the BBC that statistically you're far, far more likely to be killed in a road accident than a terrorist attack. (I believe the statistic was something like in the last decade, deaths from terrorist attacks in the UK have been equal to about 3% of casualties on Britain's roads in a single year).

Britain and other nations plagued by terrorism simply need to keep things in perspective. That doesn't mean get complacent, but again there's absolutely no need to panic (since that's the goal of terrorism).

It's hard to attack the type of terrorism we face today with logic because... well, flying a plane into a building or detonating a bomb strapped to yourself isn't a logical thing to do. It's an act of pure desperation. But it can still be fought - not using the armed forces, and I think it's unrealistic to expect this to go away any time soon, but using a sustained campaign by security and intelligence services, public vigilance and a strategy to work on hearts and minds.

[edit on 1/7/07 by Ste2652]



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by charlie_the_loafer
here is a link if you don't know what i am talking about (you can find more links there) : sandiego.indymedia.org...


Odd you would use an obsure source that links to underground sites, uses source like Al Jazeera, blogs and Prison planet. There may be some links that might go to accurate and trustable media souces but I did not see any myself just pointing out the story is highly suspect, so I would not bank on it being true.



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by twist dnb



SOMEONE CHALLENGE ME OR CHANGE YOUR STANCE!


OK, I'm going to challenge you to tone it down. M'kay?



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by twist dnb

bush gained popularity after

SOMEONE CHALLENGE ME OR CHANGE YOUR STANCE!


I challenge you , where are the smile litlle faces? i need one now.

i don't think bush gained any popularitty in the period that followed 9/11.
on the contrary.
but i am not familiar with any pools , and i would have been i still wouldn't have believed it , another form of manipulation ,by pools

but that's not a real challenge i guess, because i agree everything else you said



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by infinite

I heard about that earlier,
however, I thought you already did that after 9/11


They did however I think what they mean is they are adding additional marshals to those alreeady on flights or perhaps other flights that did not carry marshals at times.

Best way to compare it is Police are always at airports however at times of high alert there are more then normal.



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ste2652
Britain has suffered terrorist attacks at some level for at least the last four hundred years.


wiki has a list of them

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by shots

Originally posted by charlie_the_loafer
here is a link if you don't know what i am talking about (you can find more links there) : sandiego.indymedia.org...


Odd you would use an obsure source that links to underground sites, uses source like Al Jazeera, blogs and Prison planet. There may be some links that might go to accurate and trustable media souces but I did not see any myself just pointing out the story is highly suspect, so I would not bank on it being true.


instead of "not banking on it being true" you should be thinking : is it possible all the media is controlled and censored so that valuable informations don't get to us ?



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by twist dnb
origin unknown....

agents for mi5 and members of our government could use false flag attacks or encourage factions to commit attacks for these reasons:

power: tony blair and bush gained power and popularity after 9/11 and 7/7. they also get their place in the history books, written the way they want them to be.


Yes, and then lost his popularity by going into Iraq, many believe that all Blair will be remembered for is Iraq, and you think he wanted that legacy! Doesn't add up to me.



money: companies in the security industry get to sell alot more stuff. be it CCTV, bullet proof cars, tanks, specialist knowledge... ALSO the oil industry benefits, looking at bechtel, halliburton and chevron it doesn't take a genius to reasonably suspect these companies have encouraged terrorism. though maybe not so much in the UK as the US.


Bullet proof cars, tanks and knowledge! Who are they selling this to then?...surely it would be better to have a huge attack like on a football stadium, why use these lame amateurish efforts?...again, doesn't add up.



and i don't know for sure who is behind 7/7 and 9/11 but i do know we have been lied to. tell me when you want me to remind you about Dr David Kelly.


You don't need to remind me about David Kelly.


SOMEONE CHALLENGE ME OR CHANGE YOUR STANCE!


What?



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Origin Unknown

Bullet proof cars, tanks and knowledge! Who are they selling this to then?...surely it would be better to have a huge attack like on a football stadium, why use these lame amateurish efforts?...again, doesn't add up.



the war is already started , there is no need for a huge massacre, just a reminder , or a somekind of justification for future acts

when there was no war, and it needed to be started that's when 9/11 occured.
now it only needs to persist.

and everyone (coallition forces) one in irak rides either in a tank or in a bullet proof car

[edit on 1-7-2007 by charlie_the_loafer]



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 01:09 PM
link   
It's lines like the following that just don't add up to me:

"and everyone (coallition forces) one in irak rides either in a tank or in a bullet proof car"

The security forces and the military are clearly closely connected. So i'm meant to believe that one of the reasons the security services would pull off a job like this is so the military by more security equipment. They're on the same side?....why the elaborate botch job?...it's all to pie in the sky for me, sorry.



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 01:12 PM
link   
Hey been away for a bit, nice to see this thread developing.
Seems like the burnt guy is still alive.....??
Seems quite fitting that he should suffer in pain, and not go to his 40 virgins or whatever it is.

I just wonder where the next incident will come?



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 01:17 PM
link   
This was a False Flag. Its cute that people talk about False Flags all the time, the uss liberty, 9/11, Northwoods. Yet when there is an attack everyone says "oo what laws should we change," "stop the immigrants," "glass parking lot,"

Why change your laws isn't a camera on every street corner enough? Isn't random searches by bobby's enough? How about all out censorship on the internet will that help? Blair said that internet makes terrorists so lets ban that too.

I'm afraid we can't profile so that means every other person gets shaken down even if they are elderly or a young child. How about no more gasoline unless it goes straight in your car no more canisters of gas are allowed.

We must get to the root of the hatred though right? Not foreign wars nooo its the internet and free speech those are our enemies not the government blowing up the mid east.

Now that i have taken away all your liberties and this site btw because of its content it would have to go are you safe now? Or must you stay inside because still a car may be turned into a devastating wmd.

The nwo must laugh at us when we support loss of liberty what a mind screw. So i leave you with Gordon Brown's NWO speech from May of 2007. Priceless

www.youtube.com...

[edit on 1-7-2007 by Beefcake]

[edit on 1-7-2007 by Beefcake]



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by charlie_the_loafer

is it possible all the media is controlled and censored so that valuable informations don't get to us ?


No not in this day and age. Years ago perhaps but now with citizen journalists it is impossible. They cannot control everyone at least not that I am aware of.

This very thread you are posting on is a result of citizen journalists the media was not allowed on the airport for hours after the fact because the police immediately cordoned off the area. In fact I beleive ATS had more coverage then the media did at one time yesterday. Fox CNN carried Breaking Banners but on ATS members were posting information on the event.



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join