Page 1 of 1

London 7/7 fake terror attack taken apart

PostPosted: Fri Sep 15, 2006 7:26 pm
by isachar
It's deja vu all over again.... Why does this all seem so familiar?<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href=""></a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>This video, at 27 minutes, is superb! Now that's what a production done by responsible adults and researchers looks like.<br><br>Too bad all us US folks get is that doofus movie 'Loose Change' by no-planers Avery and (Dylan?), and disinfo agit-prop by Von Kleist, Thierry the frenchman (agent) and webfairy crap.<br><br>'Press for Truth' was reasonably well done, but it is WAY too long and glosses over and ignores WAY too much. <p></p><i></i>

Re: London 7/7 fake terror attack taken apart

PostPosted: Sat Sep 16, 2006 1:23 pm
by Seamus OBlimey
Also on Youtube in 3 parts...<br><br><!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="">Ludicrous Diversion 7/7 Part 1</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--><br><br><!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="">Ludicrous Diversion 7/7 Part 2</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--><br><br><!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="">Ludicrous Diversion 7/7 Part 3</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--><br> <p></p><i></i>

PostPosted: Sat Nov 11, 2006 1:40 pm
by Robert Persson
I'm late chipping in to this thread because I haven't spent any time in the forums before, but I've got to add to the praise for this documentary. It doesn't get bogged down in technical details, but leaves us to check these up for ourselves if we need to. What remains is a core case that the vast majority of people should easily be able to grasp, based on facts which can be readily verified by looking at mainstream news sources.

The one who said there are no 9-11 movies quite like that are right. Personally I think the Barry Zwicker one is basically sound, but the format - a mainstream news hour - does look a little apologetic, as if it were a stunt to compensate for our tinfoil image. And there is all that stuff in the 9-11 Truth movement about the "official conspiracy theory", which is of course irrefutable in terms of fact, but, as a rhetorical device it sounds a bit weak for the same reason.

In contrast Ludicrous Diversion gets right in there and immediately reclaims the label "conspiracy theory" in the space of a minute or two. And it does this so confidently that it is able to take you straight on from there to the meat and potatoes of its argument without sounding the least contrived or awkward. Rare is a film like this that has the power to win unpopular arguments and gain friends iin such a confused and hostile social space.

I would say, to be fair, that this movie has one advantage that no 9-11 movie can have. It is that it is not dealing with an event that has taken on such an unmistakably mythical character as 9-11 has. And because it can find down-to-earth historical precedents for state lying, such as the long list of falsely convicted Irish non-terrorists, it does not have to deal with precedents that have also become untouchable due to their mythic aura, namely the elimination of the Kennedy brothers and of Martin Luther King. Because of this, Ludicrous Diversion doesn't have to waste precious minutes wrapping itself in yellow ribons or red poppies or whatever other confused solemnities we find imposed on us whether we like it or not. That means it has been spared the ignominy of having to say that, with a solemn heart, it is about to fart in the church of fallen heroes because only by farting disagreeably can the dead can be honoured. You know what I mean?

What I am suggesting, in other words, is that in order to establish the general principle that a major act of "International Terrorism" could have been faked, perhaps there is a case for doing this first of all for something like 7-7. Once that is done perhaps the 9-11 sacred cow may start to look a litlle less sacred.

btw, isachar, I'm not clear from your wording exactly what you make of the webfairy, but in case you are iunsure, webfairy is without doubt a disinfo operation. Rosalee Grable, the Chicago grandmother that she is supposed to be in real life, does not exist.

Re: London 7/7 fake terror attack taken apart

PostPosted: Sun Nov 27, 2011 2:38 pm
by JiriHelan
On 7 July 2005 happened terrorist attack in London.

It was presented, that Al Qaeda executed the terrorist attack. In real, the terrorist attack did England government and announced that it was work of Iran in order to the England government could impose sanctions on Iran. England believes, that Iran is controled by mafia, which was damaged by sanctions. It‘s expected that tha mafia will send out assassin on person which was implicated into case. This person is protected by police. Assassin will get into trap, the police will catch him and uncover the mafia.

Re: London 7/7 fake terror attack taken apart

PostPosted: Sun Nov 27, 2011 8:24 pm
by abel danger
From the historical economic forensic archives of the Abel Danger Global Virtual Network: re London Bombings 7/7; Cressida Dick; Insurance Frauds

Thank you.

Re: London 7/7 fake terror attack taken apart

PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2012 11:35 am
by JiriHelan
The message above was published indirectly by police, in order to persuade iran mafia, to send out assassin. The police has means (mind control weapons) for uncovering mafia via this person.

Re: London 7/7 fake terror attack taken apart

PostPosted: Sun Apr 08, 2012 1:22 am
by tron
expand please, provide background and references.