Qutb, don't duck this one (London Bombing)

Moderators: DrVolin, 82_28, Elvis, Jeff

Re: The tickets are immaterial

Postby Byrne » Fri May 19, 2006 8:34 am

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>There is absolutely no indication that such a drill was going on that day.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br>Qutb,<br>What would be your explanation for the large presence of police etc. and the numerous delays, which have not been addressed/acknowledged in any of the official reports.?<br><br><br>Further post re delays experienced, from forum at <!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.hof.org.uk">www.hof.org.uk</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em><br>Posted by Paul Neve on Fri Jul 08 2005 @ 09:07:36 <br> <br>Someone asked me to re-post my mum's experiences from yesterday morning, so here goes: <br><br>My mum goes to work pretty early, taking the tube at about 7am from Morden to Elephant and Castle. <br><br>Doing her regular run yesterday -- AND NOTE THAT AT 7AM, THIS WAS WELL BEFORE THE "OFFICIAL" START OF YESTERDAY'S TERRIBLE EVENTS -- her train stopped in the tunnel between Tooting Bec and Balham. It stayed there for 15 minutes, before the driver announced he would have to disembark his passengers at Balham. However (he said) he could not get the train into Balham because of the train already there. All he could get into Balham station was the driver's carriage, so everyone had to walk through the connecting doors between carriages and get out there. <br><br>When she finally got onto the platform, there was SERIOUS amounts of OB and fire brigade there, all peering suspiciously at the bottom of the train already in the station. <br><br>SO SOMETHING WAS GOING ON ALREADY, AT JUST AFTER 7AM, MORE THAN AN HOUR BEFORE THE FIRST REPORTED EXPLOSION. <br><br>None of this has made the news, however. Neither has the reported shooting in the entrance hall of Canary Wharf. Yesterday someone posted on here about a suspected terrorist being shot there -- now I wouldn't put any credence on a story I'd only heard in one place (especially if that place was HOF!) but when I told a friend about it in the pub yesterday afternoon, a guy overheard me and said "yes, that's true, there was someone shot, and they've closed the island, no-one off or on". This guy surely couldn't have also read it off HOF, so it add a bit more credibility to the story. Once again, though, there has been no mention in the media.</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
Byrne
 
Posts: 953
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2005 2:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The tickets are immaterial

Postby Qutb » Fri May 19, 2006 8:54 am

<!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>"What would be your explanation for the large presence of police etc. and the numerous delays, which have not been addressed/acknowledged in any of the official reports.?"</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br>First of all - I don't know if it's true that there was an unusually large presence of police etc. Some have reported that they perceived there to be, sure. And firemen at one of the stations. They could have been there for whatever reason, who knows. I certainly have no way of knowing. <br><br>Delays can be caused by whatever reason too... I don't know how common they are on the London underground, I'm not that familiar with it. <br><br>But one possibility is that the MI5 etc had some intel about what was going to happen, just not precise enough to know exactly when, where and who. As they seem to have kept at least the "ringleader" Sidique Khan under surveilance for a while, it's not inconceivable that they had picked up something, or that there was a pattern of communications and movements which led them to believe that some event was approaching. <p></p><i></i>
Qutb
 
Posts: 1203
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 2:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Guilty of Being Brown in Public

Postby Bismillah » Fri May 19, 2006 9:05 am

Qutb:<br><br><i>"I know it's a shocking insight to some, but sometimes the simple and obvious is what actually happened."</i><br><br>Four very young British men took a trip to London. None of them were without prospects and two of them were fathers or fathers-to-be. Thegovernment of ASnthony Blair QC rejects a public inquiry and provides, instaed, a "narrative": Those four young men allegedly chose to sacrifice their lives by striking a deadly blow against a state and a government that they allegedly hated beyond all reason. So how did they go about this task (the most vital task of their very short lives - the task for which they and their families would be remembered)?<br><br>By blowing up Sandhurst Military Academy? <br>By attacking the Houses of Parliament? <br>By bombing the BBC?<br><br>No. By walking onto a Tube train (thus confining the serious damage to a single carriage) and dismembering - at random - a dozen powerless working people of all colours and faiths. And themselves. <br><br>That, allegedly, was the carefully-planned climax of their very young lives. <br><br>You find it "simple and obvious" that they would do this? I call that racist. Such a story can only be found prima facie <i>likely</i> by people who find Muslims (per se) quite extraordinarily irrational, brutal and <i>stupid</i>.<br><br><i>"What I see in these alternative 7/7 theories that propose some kind of govt/intel operation is contrived, almost desperate attempts to deny the fact that young European Muslims, indoctrinated in the radical Islamist ideology, are willing to blow themselves up to kill others in politically motivated attacks."</i><br><br>How do you know they are willing? You don't. It had never, ever, been done in Europe before, and it has never been done since. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" - or so we're told. Well, far from extraordinary, the evidence presented against those four young British blokes is threadbare, ambiguous and utterly inconclusive. And their alleged crime was entirely unprecedented.<br> <br></i>"Acknowledging this isn't "racist", by the way."</i><br><br>Yes, it is racist. See above. When it comes to Muslims, different standards clearly apply: they're Guilty Until Proven Innocent. (Capable of anything, that lot...)<br><br>In the Seventies, it was the Irish: The Birmingham Six, the Guildford Four, the Maguire Five: all convicted of terrorism on drummed-up charges, all released on appeal years later. Of course, once the "terrorist" is safely dead, there's no risk of him appealing. The Imperial British Narrative State would appear to have learned from experience. <br><br><i>"Denying the reality of radical Islamism and its appeal to certain segments of the young European Muslim populace borders on wilfull ignorance in my view."</i><br><br>Denying the reality of domestic State terror and its appeal to certain segments of the US and European ruling class amounts to wilful ignorance in my view. Unlike Blair's Narrative, Operation Northwoods and Operation Gladio were not fairytales. <p></p><i></i>
Bismillah
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2005 6:35 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

qwerty and HTML blues

Postby Bismillah » Fri May 19, 2006 9:14 am

Sorry about the typos and formatting errors. <p></p><i></i>
Bismillah
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2005 6:35 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Guilty of Being Brown in Public

Postby Qutb » Fri May 19, 2006 9:24 am

"they're Guilty Until Proven Innocent"<br><br>Nonsense, in this instance. I'm sure you'll agree that the four carried the explosives in their backpacks (some tortured theory could probably be constructed that the bombs were planted under the rails and that the MI5 killed the four and secretly disposed of them somewhere, but that aside...). I think it's a much simpler explanation to assume that they wilfully detonated these explosives, than to theorize about remote control (which probably wouldn't work in the underground). Timers is a more interesting hypothesis, with the bomb that went off on the bus, but that still doesn't necessarily point to a <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>government</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> conspiracy. <br><br>How about the failed suicide bombers of 21/7? Are they innocent too? Doesn't 21/7 show that there are in fact young Muslims in England of a radical Islamist persuasion who are willing to do this sort of thing?<br><br>Every researcher of European and British Islamism has said pretty much the same thing: the only thing surprising about this is that it didn't happen sooner. <br><br>Have to go, would like to write more. <p></p><i></i>
Qutb
 
Posts: 1203
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 2:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Poor old Occam (The Great Misunderstood)

Postby Bismillah » Fri May 19, 2006 9:47 am

<!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>"Doesn't 21/7 show that there are in fact young Muslims in England of a radical Islamist persuasion who are willing to do this sort of thing?"</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br>"This sort of thing"? They were two completely different sorts of things! One was a mass murder and (allegedly] quadruple suicide, the other was either a practical joke, a scare tactic or a wet fart.<br><br>Anyway: even if they did intend to kill anyone on 21/7, what exactly would that prove about responsibility for 7/7? Precisely nothing whatsoever. <br><br>There have been hundreds of cases of women killing their husbands. There have been many, many precedents for people robbing their employers. This does not prove that Mrs. Brown was in fact responsible for the murder of her husband, or that Mr. Smith did in fact steal the cashbox.<br><br>And there have also, of course, been many, many cases of police forces and intelligence agencies conspiring to murder or frame up innocent citizens. <br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>"I think it's a much simpler explanation to assume..."</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br>Can we call this the first principle of The New Criminology? Whatever Seems Simplest Is In Fact What Happened. But "simplest" to whom? There's the rub. Qutb's revolutionary new labour-saving device will be a godsend to the police, the lawcourts and the government. Never again will our Leaders and Protectors be required to investigate crimes or present evidence. Forget transparency, verifiability and due process of law; from now on, a simple explanation will suffice.<br><br>Handy, that. And Blair's "narrative" is precisely such a simple explanation. <p></p><i></i>
Bismillah
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2005 6:35 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Poor old Occam (The Great Misunderstood)

Postby AlicetheCurious » Sat May 20, 2006 8:34 am

<!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Flashback: BBC Poll, June 30, 2005</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--></strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Do you support ID cards?</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Should there be a national identity card system in the UK?</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>Tony Blair has promised to listen to concerns about plans to introduce a national ID card scheme after seeing his Commons majority slashed.<br><br>At prime minister's questions, Mr Blair urged critics to recognise that secure ID cards could help tackle crime, terrorism and illegal immigration in the UK.<br><br>However, former minister John Denham told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that he expects the government will have to make major changes to get the bill through.<br><br>Do you agree with the government's ID card proposals? What do you think about the cost? <br><br><br>Should the UK have ID cards?<br>Yes : 17%<br>No : 83%<br><br>8958 Votes Cast<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/4625971.stm?display=1">newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/t...?display=1</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>July 31, 2004:</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--></strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Big brother database<br></strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br>Leader<br>Saturday July 31, 2004<br>The Guardian<br><br>True to his remit, the ever vigilant information commissioner Richard Thomas gave the most apposite warning about the government's draft identification cards bill yesterday. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Forget the cards and concentrate on the national database that lies behind them and the people who will have access to it.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> Remember we live in a country in which 44 million passport holders and 38 million licensed drivers will all be carrying identification documents containing biometric information (facial images or even iris scans) in the next few years.<br><br>It takes the current bill three pages to outline all the information to be held on each individual on the new national database. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>This open-ended system reaches far beyond what is needed to establish identity, yet the Home Office has resisted as "unnecessarily restrictive" any specifications on what can be held.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> Worse still, access goes far beyond just the police or even the security services, but includes Inland Revenue, Customs and Excise and <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>"any government department nominated by the secretary of state".</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> Even worse what was always regarded as a fundamental right - the right for individuals to see what information is being held on them - is being taken away. Mr Thomas is right to insist this must be corrected and reinforced with an audit trail showing who has accessed data and on what occasions.<br><br>All this would be bad enough, but a department that has had two years to produce the draft legislation was rightly roasted by the Labour-dominated Commons select committee on home affairs for even more prosaic shortcomings. Not even the most basic needs, such as the number of card-reading devices needed by public services, have been worked out. No wonder the MPs were concerned by the danger of spiralling costs, a concern exacerbated by the secrecy under which the procurement process is being undertaken. Given the list of the shortcomings, the committee's support for the scheme is somewhat surprising, but its message is clear: buck up, ministers.<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://politics.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,9115,1273313,00.html">politics.guardian.co.uk/c...13,00.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>March 30, 2006:</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--></strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>ID cards 'to be made compulsory'</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>ID cards may become compulsory</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>Identity cards will be made compulsory if Labour wins the next election, Home Secretary Charles Clarke has said.<br><br>Under the current scheme all passport applicants from 2008 will have to get an ID card - although there will be a brief opt-out period until 2010.<br><br>But Mr Clarke said he plans legislation after the next election to make it compulsory for everyone to get a card, whether or not they have a passport.<br><br>The Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats both oppose ID cards.<br><br>But Mr Clarke said he did not think the opposition would be able to stop the scheme because by 2010 a "large number of people... should either have cards or hope to have cards".<br><br>"I would be very surprised if the next Conservative manifesto said 'stop the scheme'. It would be very difficult to do," he said.<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4860642.stm">newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/u...860642.stm</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><br><br>...Whoever is responsible, the London terror attacks shine a bright and fearful light on the future we have to look forward to: war abroad and terror at home, the murder of innocents everywhere. Our government has promised us an era of “permanent war,” and Rumsfeld and Cheney have repeatedly assured us that it is only a matter of time before the US is struck again, perhaps by a “weapon of mass destruction” in the hands of terrorists. One can only wonder what our leaders have in store for us.<br><br><br>Some time ago, Antiwar.com ran this epigram from Simone Weil on its home page:<br><br>“The great error of nearly all studies of war... has been to consider war as an episode in foreign policies, when it is an act of interior politics...”<br><br>War has long been the ultimate social control. Steve Lopez wrote in the Los Angeles Times, "There's a dirty secret [behind this war] no one has told you, and here it is: <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>This war is not about changing Iraq, it's about changing America</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->....The whole idea is to train you to expect less and to feel patriotic about it."<br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>The terror attacks on the people of London, the 9/11 attacks on Americans, and the Iraq war itself are not matters principally of foreign but of domestic policy</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->–a fact which has been neglected by most anti-war commentators, who tend to view these things only in terms of American (or British) imperialism. While the main victims of the war on Iraq are the Iraqi people, the main purpose driving the war and its attendant terror is the class war by the American elite against American working people. The war in Iraq is being waged as a means of controlling ordinary Americans (and British), providing the opportunity for transforming American society into a military and police state through such measures as the Patriot Act, airport searches, the suspension of habeas corpus at Guantanamo and in the case of Jose Padilla and more than 1,000 persons detained in the US after 9/11 without charges or due process, and for the unprecedented attack on pensions and retirement and other aspects of working people's livelihoods. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>The ruling class could never get away with these things in the absence of a war, which had to be created under false pretenses for the purpose.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Update: Blair emerges stronger from tumultuous week</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br>Mike Peacock – Reuters July 10, 2005<br><br>Tony Blair has emerged stronger after a week in which he has experienced the sweetest highs and darkest lows, politicians and insiders say.<br><br>The prime minister punched the air after helping London win the 2012 Olympics but a day later the capital's transport network was struck by four bombs, killing more than 50.<br><br>Sombre but unbowed, he secured from fellow Group of Eight leaders a doubling of aid to Africa and promises of freer trade in the future, announcing it to applause from his counterparts.<br><br>...<br><br>Blair said it offered a positive counterpoint to the terrorists who bombed three underground trains and a bus.<br><br>"We offer today this contrast with the politics of terror," he told reporters from the steps of the Gleneagles hotel.<br><br>While rock star and Africa activist Bob Geldof praised Blair's efforts, political insiders said <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>the attacks on London also dealt the prime minister a strong, if unwelcome, hand.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>His opponents will have to rally round in a show of unity.<br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Controversial measures like ID cards, which ministers argue will help combat terrorism, will probably sail into law without any revolt by doubtful members of his Labour party.<br><br>And crucially, Labour members who want Chancellor Gordon Brown to inherit the premiership will have to lie low.<br><br>"Gordon will find it very difficult to challenge Tony any time soon, even privately," one Labour parliamentarian said.<br><br>Just two months ago, after winning his third election with a vastly reduced majority, politicians of all colours were talking about how long "lame duck" Blair would last....<br></strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>Brown was the pivotal figure in Labour's election campaign as it became clear only his economic record would overcome public dislike stemming from the unpopular war in Iraq.<br><br>His allies expected him to be in power by late 2006...<br><br>Now, <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Blair's pledge to serve a full third term -- handing over the reins only shortly before a likely 2009 election -- rings much less hollow.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>...<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=3324">www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/...sp?ID=3324</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br> <p></p><i></i>
AlicetheCurious
 
Posts: 570
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 7:45 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Poor old Occam (The Great Misunderstood)

Postby Byrne » Tue May 30, 2006 12:14 pm

From <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_7-9-2005_pg1_5" target="top">www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_7-9-2005_pg1_5</a><!--EZCODE LINK END-->:<br><br>Wednesday, September 07, 2005 <br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong> <br>Import of Improvised Explosives Training equipment from US: UK and Canada looking for Pakistani link to 7/7</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br>By Maqbool Ahmed <br><br>KARACHI: A six-member team of British and Canadian explosives experts is arriving in Islamabad in the last week of this month in connection with the investigations of a network of British and Canadian nationals of Pakistani origin which is believed to have imported “Improvised Explosives Training” equipment from the United States in June 2003, sources in the interior and foreign ministries told the Daily Times on Tuesday. <br><br>The equipment was sent as personal baggage through Overseas Couriers and was seized by Pakistani authorities. <br><br>Sources said Canadian authorities eventually knew about the network when they checked the computer hardware of a Pakistani-Canadian, <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong><!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/thecanadian.html" target="top">Momin Khawaja</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--></strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->, containing the information about export of the training equipment, during a routine search. Sources said in Pakistan the importer was <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong><!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,200-2101149,00.html" target="top">Junaid Baber</a><!--EZCODE LINK END-->,</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> who had fled the US after 9/11.<br><br>According to a preliminary report of the investigations jointly conducted by Canadian and British authorities and sent to Islamabad, Junaid Baber, Momin Khawaja and <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Haroon Rasheed Aswad</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->, a suspect in London bomb blasts, had met in London some time in February 2004. <br><br>The report said Junaid Baber stayed at the office of Al Mahajroon, the Islamist organisation recently outlawed in Britain, in Lahore for more than a month after arriving in Pakistan. Then he moved to an apartment at Abrar Centre on Wahdat Road in Muslim Town, Lahore. Junaid Baber stayed till December 2001 and then bought an apartment in Eden Heights on Jail Road. He also worked for the Pakistan Software Export Board from April 2002 to December 2002 and during this period he remained in touch with Momin Khawaja through the Internet using various Internet cafés, one of them the report identifies as Cyber Vision in Barkat Market. <br><br>In early 2003, according to the report, Junaid Baber approached a local importer and exporter, Akram Khan, as a buyer of some old containers and also requested him to bring back some of his personal belongings from the US.<br><br>The shipment (supposedly containing Junaid Baber’s belongings) in the shape of a briefcase was received through Overseas Couriers in June 2003 and was seized by Pakistani customs authorities on suspicion.<br><!--EZCODE HR START--><hr /><!--EZCODE HR END--><br><br>Military explosives were first suggested (leaked) by French Security Services, but it was later 'explained' that the devices were home made from acetone peroxide which can be synthesised from household chemicals (the recent narrative does not go into details...) <br><br>The article does provide further links with Londistan & various players............<br><br>Babar (referred to as Baber above) is <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Junaid_Babar" target="top">Mohammed Junaid Barbar</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> who is the US supergrass currently giving evidence against 9 people at the UK Old Bailey Trial. Babr cites <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2202315,00.html" target="top">Abu Hamza</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> and <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omar_Bakri" target="top">Omar Bakri</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> (the 2 at the London Finsbury Park Mosque who are linked to many in the 911, 7/7 Terror <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2030129,00.html" target="top">story</a><!--EZCODE LINK END-->) as 'influences........<br><br><!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/cdnsecurity/khawaja_mohammad.html" target="top">Mohammad Momin Khawaja</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> was the first man in Canada charged under the Anti-terrorism Act, arrested on March 29 2004, the day before the <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Crevice" target="top">Operation Crevice</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> UK Arrests.<br><br><!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haroon_Rashid_Aswat" target="top">Haroon Rashid Aswat</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> referred to as Aswad above, now where is he?.............<br><br><br>More <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://alphabetcity.blogspot.com/2006/02/flashback-abu-hamza-betrayed-by-former.html" target="top">here</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--><br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
Byrne
 
Posts: 953
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2005 2:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Poor old Occam (The Great Misunderstood)

Postby Byrne » Tue May 30, 2006 1:08 pm

<br>From <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://j7truth.blogspot.com/" target="top">j7truth.blogspot.com/</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> Embedded links therein.<br><br>Monday, May 29, 2006<br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Mind the Gaps</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>The discrepancies, distortions, lies and inconsistent reporting of July 7th have made it extremely difficult to see how anybody can say with any conviction exactly what happened that day and who perpetrated those atrocities. The Government Narrative is full of vague assumptions yet is supposed to be a definitive account. The July Seventh Truth Campaign has put together a list of the most obvious errors and inconsistencies in the official account so far.<br><br>There are so many gaps, we had to split the document into two parts. Mind The Gaps Part 1 is here and Mind The Gaps Part 2 is here.<br><br>Meanwhile, here are just a few of the gaps you'll find listed:<br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>THE IMPOSSIBLE TRAIN JOURNEY</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>It was originally announced that the men had taken the 0740 train from Luton to Kings Cross Thameslink on the morning of July 7th. An eyewitness later stated that she had been at Luton station that morning and that the 0740 never ran that day. Thameslink Rail later confirmed that not only had the 0740 been cancelled but that all trains that morning ran with heavy delays due to problems further up the line. This confirmation first came from Marie Bernes at Thameslink Customer Relations and then from Chris Hudson, the Communications Manager for Thameslink Rail at Luton.<br><br>When it was later reported that the men had taken the 0748 train, it was found that this scenario could not be the correct one either. The 0748 did not reach Kings Cross Thameslink in time for the men to have made the journey to Kings Cross station to have been captured on CCTV “shortly before 8.30am” as the police stated. The 0748 did not reach Thameslink until 8.42am; seven minutes after the Eastbound Circle Line train had departed from Kings Cross, which later exploded between Liverpool St. and Aldgate.<br><br>The 0730 train actually left Luton station at 7.42am. Again, this train arrived at Thameslink station four minutes after the first of the bombed tubes had already departed Kings Cross.<br><br>The men were shown on a single CCTV image taken from outside Luton station, apparently entering the station six seconds before 7.22am, according to the timestamp on the image. On this basis, the earliest train they could have caught would have been the train that left Luton at 7.25am. This train arrived at King's Cross Thameslink at 8.23am.<br><br>The Government narrative of the London Bombings states that the men caught the non-existent 0740 train and that it arrived at Thameslink at 8.23am. The narrative then says that the men were caught on CCTV at King's Cross Thameslink at 8.26am, whereas it was previously reported that this sighting had occurred at Kings Cross mainline station.<br><br>The narrative goes on to say that the men were seen again, four minutes later at Kings Cross mainline, where they proceeded to split up in different directions, giving the impression that each man was off to board a tube train. The narrative does not state whether it was a sighting by a CCTV camera or a witness. The quickest route from Thameslink to the tube lines is through an underground subway but the narrative does not specify their alleged route from King's Cross Thameslink station to the mainline station.<br><br>"The 4 are captured on CCTV at 08.26am on the concourse close to the Thameslink platform and heading in the direction of the London Underground system."<br><br>However, if they were seen on the concourse of Kings Cross mainline, like the narrative says, then this suggests that the men did not take the subway but took the overgound route, since the subway leads directly to the tube platforms. It is unlikely they would have made the somewhat senseless decision to come back out from the tube platforms and make their way all the way back up to the main concourse just to go back down again and board the trains.<br><br>But confusingly, the subway route seems to be the only one which could have got them to Kings Cross quickly enough to have taken the trains they are alleged to have been on. Furthermore, the subway from Thameslink only gives access to the Victoria, Northern and Piccadilly lines. Therefore, this route would only have facilitated the journey of Lindsay, who is alleged to have boarded the Piccadilly Line train; the other two men who were alleged to have been on the Circle Line trains would have had to have found an alternative route to the Circle Line platforms, necessitating their splitting up and not being seen together.<br><br>If we bear in mind that the eastbound Circle Line train left first, at 8.35am, and that Tanweer was reported to have still been on the Thameslink platform at 8.26am, they would have had to have moved at a fast pace for him to have caught this train. We must also factor in that the narrative states:<br><br>"At around 08.30am, 4 men fitting their descriptions are seen hugging. They appear happy, even euphoric. They then split up. Khan must have gone to board a westbound Circle Line train, Tanweer an eastbound Circle Line train and Lindsay a southbound Piccadilly Line train. Hussain also appeared to walk towards the Piccadilly Line entrance."<br><br>TFL Journey Planner advises to allow 6 minutes to transfer between King's Cross Thameslink station and the mainline in the rush-hour, which doesn't allow sufficient time for the accused to transfer between the Thameslink and the mainline stations.<br><br>There are no reported witness sightings of four men with large rucksacks running. It is extremely difficult to see how Tanweer got to the Circle Line platform so quickly, if he either had to go overground or take a complicated journey to the Circle Line platform from another of the only platforms he could have reached via the Thameslink subway.<br><br>In conclusion, the incorrect train given by the narrative cannot be put down to simple error.<br><br>Even if the men had taken a train from Luton which ran that morning, it still would have been extremely difficult, if not impossible, for them to have been sighted at Kings Cross at the time they were said to have been seen, or for them to have caught the underground trains which were later bombed.The narrative even says there were witnesses on the non-existent train who believe they saw the men. How could this be so when there was no such train? The anomalies in the narrative account regarding the train, its arrival time and how the men could have been sighted at Kings Cross only serve to cause much confusion.<br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>THE SIMULTANEOUS ANTI-TERROR DRILL</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>A company named Visor Consultants was running an exercise for an unnamed company which involved the scenario of simultaneous bombs going off at the time when London actually did come under attack. The Managing Director of Visor, Peter Power, gave an interview on the afternoon of July 7th where he said:<br><br>"At half past nine this morning we were actually running an exercise for a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning, so I still have the hairs on the back of my neck standing up right now." (Download MP3 audio file of this interview)<br><br>Despite this coincidence, sensationalized by Peter Power himself, he admitted later on that the drill had not completely mirrored the actual events, and had also involved mainline stations as targets. He also expressed surprise that people would be interested in the remarkable comments he made in his interview and also attempted to minimise the similarities between the exercise and the actual attacks. Despite the fact that he had said the exercise involved the bombs going off at ‘precisely’ the railway stations where the attacks had occurred, he later pronounced that in fact only two of the locations had been similar. However, even after downplaying the parallels, he went on to state "the timing and script was nonetheless, a little disconcerting".<br><br>Terror drills are not unknown in London, but other coincidences may be the involvement of Peter Power in several high profile tragic events before 7/7, such as the Kings Cross fire of 1987 and the Libyan Embassy siege of 1984, and the strong links that he has with the police and the Government.<br><br>He is a former Detective Inspector in counter-terrorism and is a close associate of Sir Ian Blair, the Metropolitan Police Chief. He was also selected by the Government to write the Best Management Practice Guide on Crisis & Business Continuity Planning & Risk Management.<br><br>Peter Power also has connections to former New York Mayor, Rudi Giuliani; he served on the Advisory Board to the Canadian Centre for Emergency preparedness(CCEP), alongside the senior Vice President of Giuliani and Partners, Richard Sheirer, who was also Director of the New York Mayor’s office of Emergency Management, overseeing the rescue and recovery operations following the September 11th attacks.<br><br>Giuliani and partners is a security consultantcy and Investment Bank and Mr. Giuliani himself, by another coincidence, happened to be in London for a conference and just yards away from Liverpool Street station when the blast occurred there on the morning of July 7th.<br><br>Peter Power acts as an independent security consultant to the media examining the impact of terrorism on London. It would not be unrealistic that he would be conducting an anti-terror exercise, but it is strange that it happened to be on the same day, at the same time, and involving the same stations. Peter Power himself admits this, even when attempting to downplay the coincidence. It arouses suspicion when considering the ‘Wargames’ exercises of the morning of September 11th, involving the same scenarios that later occurred. The chances of these situations being simple coincidence appear quite slim.<br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>THE PRIOR KNOWLEDGE OF THE ATTACKS</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>Terrorism experts in the USA reported that they had been told by “intelligence sources” that at least one person had been warned that a terrorist attack was about to take place. The person they referred to was the Israeli Finance Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, who was due to attend an economic conference in a hotel near Liverpool Street station.<br><br>"Just before the first blast, Netanyahu got a call from the Israeli Embassy telling him to stay in his hotel room. The hotel is located next to the subway station where the first attack occurred and he did stay put and shortly after that, there was the explosion."<br><br>Source: WTVQ<br><br>The Associated Press broke the story, and in a follow-up report, stated that the story had been denied by the Israeli Government who said that Netanyahu received the warning after the blasts occurred. However, the head of Mossad had said in an interview with a German newspaper<br><br>"The Mossad office in London received advance notice about the attacks, but only six minutes before the first blast. As a result, it was impossible to take any action to prevent the blasts."<br><br>Source: Al Jazeera<br><br>Other reports even claim that the warning was not received minutes before the attacks, but days before.<br><br>Netanyahu himself also denied, though, that he had received any such warning, calling the reports "entirely false". Although this report claims that the AP "quickly replaced the story", they never retracted it.<br><br>The following story can still be found on the Israel National News web site:<br><br>Israel Was Warned Ahead of First Blast10:43 Jul 08, '05 / 1 Tammuz 5765<br>(IsraelNN.com) <br><br>Army Radio quoting unconfirmed reliable sources reported a short time ago that Scotland Yard had intelligence warnings of the attacks a short time before they occurred.<br><br>The Israeli Embassy in London was notified in advance, resulting in Finance Minister Binyamin Netanyahu remaining in his hotel room rather than make his way to the hotel adjacent to the site of the first explosion, a Liverpool Street train station, where he was to address an economic summit.<br><br>At present, train and bus service in London have been suspended following the series of attacks. No terrorist organization has claimed responsibility at this time.<br>Israeli officials stress the advanced Scotland Yard warning does not in any way indicate Israel was the target in the series of apparent terror attacks.<br><br><br>Source: Israel National News<br><br>If there was advance knowledge of the attacks, even if they could not have been prevented, surely it would have been more constructive to have warned TFL Managers and people who could have worked to minimize the resulting confusion – if not the destruction - rather than a politician who was still in his hotel room and would not have been on a tube train that morning.<br><br>For the comprehensive list of anomalies in the official account of the July 7th attacks, see here and here. <br><br>The July Seventh Truth Campaign believes there are far too many errors and inconsistencies in the account to simply be attributed to lazy reporting and beaurocratic incompetence. Why does the narrative state the accused men travelled to London on a train which did not run? Did certain people have prior knowledge of 7/7 and if so, why? How could the former head of the CIA state that they had recovered timing devices from the blast sites, yet it later be stated that the bombs were detonated manually? Why was it reported by the authorities that military grade explosives were used, only for this to be swiftly denied within a couple of days? Why does the narrative state that it is still not known what type of explosives were used almost a year later? How is it that the narrative can accept there is no CCTV showing Shehzad Tanweer on the tube platform or the Aldgate train and no witness to attest to his presence, yet state that he 'must have been' there? How were the men identified so quickly on the basis of a couple of credit cards?<br><br>The narrative should have provided clear answers; instead it has only raised even more questions. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>It is not an adequate account of who bombed London on July 7th, how they did it and why.</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--></strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
Byrne
 
Posts: 953
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2005 2:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Previous

Return to 7/7 London bombings

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest