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.

 

Olympics 2012 Preemptive Investigation

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 04:12 AM
link   
This may seem a like a post from myself that doesnt follow the norm of my usual train of thought etc, I just find the following developments very interesting indeed., I might get flamed for this, I might not.

It would be good to have a good portfolio of knowledge before the Olympics kicks off, so we have a good knowledge of how such events are managed, from a government / security point of view. If anything terror / false flag event whatever you want to call it were to occur, again we would have a good handle on the knowledge we had already accrued, so I will need some good ATS'ers help with this one -;

Information regarding insurance polices taken out on buildings within London, particullary on Canary Wharf (business heart of London), The Gherkin, Houses of Parliament, Big Ben,almost like a 9/11 investigation before any such event has taken place, I do not believe or wish for an attack, however it might be a good exercise to gather such information now in case some / or any terrorist / false flag / unknown attack were to take place, with the whole worlds eyes on London it would be a good oppurtunity for anyone to get attention or cause devasation.

There has been alot of controversy surrounding the 2012 Olympics, from the private security firm that has been contracted for the security (G4S) it has also been reported in the media that a known terror suspect has also been monitored entering the olympic stadium on no more than 5 occassions!! Interesting to also note that the highest building in the whole of Europe 'The Shard' is nearing completion soon also in the East London area.

The westfield shopping centre which is also the largest shopping centre in europe in stratford (7.3 miles from london city centre) has had restricted access to the carparking facilities there, which is now in effect.

The deployment of an extra 3,500 troops (total now stands at 13,500) to assist with the security & also alot of controversy of residents complaining that they do not want Anti Aircraft Missile launchers emplacements on top of their tower blocks has caused some concern.

The current budget for security for the duration of games stands at £550,000,000.

Does anyone know were information pertaining to insurance policies on buildings within the London business district would be available?

Can anyone help start compiling a portfolio of information?
What do people think to this sort of a proposal?

I am not fear mongering, rather than investigate something in retrospect, how about gather as much information before a potential event? If nothing happens, its all good, if something does happen we might be better informed & have better quality information.

I'll leave it at that
Richy
Nottingham, UK




posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 04:36 AM
link   
There is no way a terror suspect could get into the Olympic park the accreditation process is crazy.

More fear mongering and seed planting.

Also putting SAMs on buildings is crazy ! who on earth do they think will attack by the air.



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 05:24 AM
link   
Trust me when I say this. G4S is an embarrassment of a "security company". I have worked alongside G4S on many many festivals and events throughout the UK in the last few years. G4S do the security side of things and our company is responsible for traffic management.

G4S, just like our company, is kind of split in it's workforce between standard, full time employed workforce and "casual" staff. The casual staffs training is very very limited and minimalistic. I've seen these "security" folks try and handle situation which in 99% of cases ends up with a supervisor/manager being called because of the lack of training and people skills.

These people do a pathetic little course, get an armband that makes them look legit and are then sent to control festivals with 100000+ people and now the OLYMPICS.

Can't believe they had the budget to stick missiles on the roof but give the contract for security staff to such a pathetic disorganized company.

I guess this was a little off-topic but it had to be said.

If something DOES happen at the Olympics, god help us, because the people responsible for our security are, mostly, a bunch of teenagers.

Peace



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 05:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by judus
There is no way a terror suspect could get into the Olympic park the accreditation process is crazy.

More fear mongering and seed planting.

Also putting SAMs on buildings is crazy ! who on earth do they think will attack by the air.



I hope your being sarcastic because this has already happened.

5 times in one day just earlier this week i believe.



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 06:03 AM
link   
reply to post by jrmcleod
 



I wasn't lol

I know from personal experience how tough the accreditation process is, and for the media to report this has happened 5 times is a joke.



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 06:31 AM
link   
I thought the following was extremely interesting...

British 'absent' from Battersea Power Station auction

Battersea Power Station is about 12km away from the stadium... and no British interest? That to me would seem a little strange...
edit on 12-7-2012 by saladfingers123456 because: typo



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 06:40 AM
link   
here is a video of the SAMs being tested

www.guardian.co.uk...



posted on Jul, 14 2012 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swizzy
G4S, just like our company, is kind of split in it's workforce between standard, full time employed workforce and "casual" staff. The casual staffs training is very very limited and minimalistic. I've seen these "security" folks try and handle situation which in 99% of cases ends up with a supervisor/manager being called because of the lack of training and people skills.


I was thinking, maybe they were hired because if there were to be some sort of nuclear bomb or explosive a lot of people would die, including G4S people. 'Ive heard a lot of people talk about how G4S isn't properly trained etc, so maybe they just don't care if these people die as collateral damage as opposed to a more elite team of security.



posted on Jul, 14 2012 @ 06:55 PM
link   
double post
edit on 14-7-2012 by mvp531 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 08:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by mvp531

Originally posted by Swizzy
G4S, just like our company, is kind of split in it's workforce between standard, full time employed workforce and "casual" staff. The casual staffs training is very very limited and minimalistic. I've seen these "security" folks try and handle situation which in 99% of cases ends up with a supervisor/manager being called because of the lack of training and people skills.


I was thinking, maybe they were hired because if there were to be some sort of nuclear bomb or explosive a lot of people would die, including G4S people. 'Ive heard a lot of people talk about how G4S isn't properly trained etc, so maybe they just don't care if these people die as collateral damage as opposed to a more elite team of security.


Your thoughts are similar to my own thinking. That perhaps LOCOG knew that G4S would be unable to fulfill the March 2011 contract with the plan to deploy 3,500 British troops who will have combat knowledge.



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 08:14 AM
link   
If for example there were parts of London that were attacked, it would make sense to attack (false flag or real) the financial heart of the captial, which in London is located at Canary Wharf.

Please accept my apology for quoting from wikipedia, but the links to oil, Israel & Morgan Stanley bank are interesting none the less.

''Canary Wharf Group plc is the owner and developer of nearly 100 acres (0.40 km2) of property at Canary Wharf in London. It is notable because over the last 10 years it has constructed more office space in London than any other developer.[1] The group owns 7,900,000 square feet (730,000 m2) of property which is worth £4.9 billion, of which 99% is let (in 2008).'' - source Wiki Pedia

It also seems that the man behind this company has had much trouble in his buisness life also, a one Paul Reichmann.

Wikipedia Quote -;

Troubles

The company ran into severe trouble in the early 1990s. It was due in part to a general decline in the world economy, but the company was truly brought low by the Canary Wharf project. It was the world's largest property development, but remained half empty. Reichmann had taken the project as a major gamble. He had been impressed by Margaret Thatcher's reforms and obtained a personal promise from her that she would help the project, most importantly by extending the London Underground to reach it.

In Canada, Reichmann's once sterling reputation also began to suffer. In 1985 the company had bought Gulf Canada in a deal that included some $300 million in tax breaks. Many Canadians were infuriated that a massive corporation had been given such a lucrative deal. Toronto Life magazine also published a highly critical article on the Reichmanns. The family took offence at allegations that Samuel Reichmann had aided the Nazis with illegal smuggling operations during the Second World War. The family sued the magazine for an unprecedented $109 million. They were successful, and Toronto Life published a full retraction, but their heavy fisted response soured many in the Canadian media to the Reichmanns.

In 1992, Olympia and York collapsed under some $20 billion in debt. Paul Reichmann lost most of his family fortune.
Recovery and retirement

Despite these setbacks, Reichmann successfully rebuilt a small portion of his empire. This included setting up a partnership with George Soros, Lawrence Tisch and Michael Price along with investors such as Saudi Prince Al-Waleed to purchase a controlling stake in the Canary Wharf from the banks that made the original construction loans to Reichmann and which had taken control of the development. Reichmann became Chairman of Canary Wharf again and remained so until 2004.

During 2004 a takeover battle began for the Canary Wharf Group in which Reichmann eventually sided with Canadian developer Brascan to attempt a purchase of the company. During this process he resigned his position on the Board. In March, 2005 a consortium of investors led by Morgan Stanley under the banner of Songbird Estates purchased Canary Wharf Group, and Reichmann was therefore no longer involved with Canary Wharf on a day to day basis. Reichmann, at the time 75, announced that he intended to retire from business and sold many of his property holdings.''

I just wanted to demonstrate an overview of Canary Wharf, its current value, current owners and their connections & history as this would be a high value target if there were to be an attack, no matter the type.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join