7/7 Home Office 'narrative' leaked: Iraq led to July 7

[Jazzz]

err Ted Olson is one person who I do have a problem with. He once said "It is easy to imagine an infinite number of situations ... where government officials might quite legitimately have reasons to give false information out."

But enough, I'm not stooping further to rebutting words you place in my mouth.

 

[editor]

err Ted Olson is one person who I do have a problem with. He once said "It is easy to imagine an infinite number of situations ... where government officials might quite legitimately have reasons to give false information out."

So he is a liar, yes?

...either caller or receiver was in on it and fibbing
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=2080310&postcount=544

 

[Jazzz]

So he is a liar, yes?

I'm very happy to fully discuss the inconsistencies in his account again if you desire, which is of great import to the whole 9/11 story. As Azrael23 says, if you are going to suggest someone is lying you have to be prepared to defend your reasoning and be open about it.

I must say though it says a lot that the one person who you are selecting for righteous indignation is no fellow poster but a USG bigwig who has defended the telling of false information.

On the other hand just as a personal example you have personally accused me of lying three times recently. On one of those I was mistaken and admitted it. On the other two the slur was completely unjustified.

 

[editor]

As Azrael23 says, if you are going to suggest someone is lying you have to be prepared to defend your reasoning and be open about it.

Which is precisely what you never, ever do when you post up your idiotic theories.

You just blithely accuse endless people of being involved in ludicrously complex plots and never produce anything to support your assertion that they're all in on it and lying through their teeth.

For example, you've accused Ted Olson of lying. And three years on, you're still to produce a single shred of credible proof.

 

[Jazzz]

A republican US government bigwig who said before the US supreme court that governments can legitimately engage in the telling of fibs. He told a story fully three years ago which I don't believe. It was discussed fully at the time and you have since banned discussion of it - unless I am mistaken.

And this is the one instance you can think of in your quest to paint me as someone who throws slurs around!

It ain't washing editor, give it up!

 

[editor]

A republican US government bigwig who said before the US supreme court that governments can legitimately engage in the telling of fibs. He told a story fully three years ago which I don't believe.

He's talking about the last conversation he had with his wife who was about to die, not discussing the business of politics.

World of difference,

If you want to debate this issue further, please produce some credible solid proof to support your assertion that he was lying or kindly shut the fuck up with your desperate conspiraloonery.

So, your proof. Where is it? Got any? YES/NO?

 

[Jazzz]

Come on editor, everyone wants to get back to the topic now, give it a rest eh?

 

[editor]

Come on editor, everyone wants to get back to the topic now, give it a rest eh?

100% wriggle! Just go right ahead and avoid that tricky question!

Way to go!

Best if you keep any further conspiraloonery off this thread now, please.

 

[Jazzz]

What did I come up on this thread that you consider 'conspiraloonery' exactly? You are funny.

Your questions are 'tricky' in the sense that they never end.

 

[free spirit]

The TSG run a stand-by system which has different levels (it used to have three, don't know what they currently do). Basically some are on duty and on patrol with an immediate response time. The number varies dependant on predicted activity / threat levels. Some are on duty but not on patrol (training, surveillance, etc.) with a few hours response time. Others are off-duty or on other duties with a response time of 16-plus hours.

G8 would have meant that those in the second and third tiers were not available to back-up the initial response in anything like quick time (though I believe some were despatched back down the M1 pretty damn sharpish). Whilst the immediate response tier would be "usual", I would not expect it to be enough to deal with a four site incident of this sort.

In short, therefore, I would think that the absence of large parts of the TSG
probably DID affect the immediate response and unubtedly affected the speed with which the required additional resources could be made available. That said, the effect was probably pushed down the chain to local policing pretty quickly, with officers pulled from other duties on divisions across the MPS and sent to assist. If this had been a public disorder situation this would have meant a poor response as they would not have the level of public order training / equipment as the TSG but for the sorts of duties required here it would make no difference.

(ETA: All of the above relates to the REACTIVE response. As to whether their absence helped the bombers get through - I would say a definitive "No", their presence would not have made any noticeable difference to the levels of visible policing and there is no suggestion that there were any specific preventative operations on which they would have been deployed. As for whether the bombers decided that their absence would make a difference - who can say?)

ok but Badger Kittens asking why the response was so craply organised and slow, I'm suggesting that one of the major reasons would be the absense of several thousand met (mainly) tsg officers. THing is that it was not only the officers that were up there, but also serious numbers of minibusses and vans that would usually have been used to rapidly deploy the appropriate numbers of police to each incident along with a large part of their command and control capability for major incidents (each team up there had their own van, and I don't think I saw more than a couple of hire minibuses). I know that on the day of 7/7 I was stood in scotland talking to 2 chief super's from the met, & I'm pretty sure they'd have sent the guys with most experience dealing with major incidents to scotland.

What I'm basically saying is that the loss of the secondary response units, transport, experienced commanders and officers at least in part led to confusion in the co-ordaintion of the response.

I work with you boys all the time on events & let's just say I'd hate to see the result when your more inexperienced officers have to try to sort out 4 major incidents across london operating at full stretch.

IMO the lure of massive overtime payments for going to the g8 was too strong & attracted too many of the most experienced met officers up north, leaving London unprepared for a 4 site major incident scenario.

As for whether the bombers took this all into account, all I can say is that if I was planning a protest designed to cause maximum disruption I'd have done it then because i'd have considered I'd have had the greatest chance of success. Bear in mind that all the FIT teams, sniffer dogs etc would have been up there too, and in general the focus was on something happpening in scotland... always hit where they least expect it init.

 

[laptop]

always hit where they least expect it init.

I think that's your flaw.

I said that the simplest explanation is that the bombers may have timed it to coincide with the G8 itself, rather than with the absence of the TSG.

Equally, if I were in anti-terrorism, that's one of the times I'd be most expecting a nasty in London (or elsewhere in the UK) - for precisely the same reason.

I agree that it was stupid to hold the G8 at thingy... Gleneagles.

If they really felt they had to hold a G8 in the UK, it should have been in... I was going to say Hyde Park, but I'm reckoning us Londoners are a bit rubbish at the moment.

The delegates should have been sat round a table in the Kelvinside Botanic Gardens.

Naked.

 

[rich!]

The delegates should have been sat round a table in the Kelvinside Botanic Gardens.

Naked.

I'm hoping there are laws against mass-gatherings of naked politicians and their support groups.

Wasn't it the barber by Parliament who, on retiring, said "Politics is showbiz for ugly people"?

 

[laptop]

I'm hoping there are laws against mass-gatherings of naked politicians and their support groups.

The Obscene Politicians Act?

Wasn't it the barber by Parliament who, on retiring, said "Politics is showbiz for ugly people"?

It gets credited to Paul Begala (former campaign manager for Bill Clinton), Christopher Hitchens , and a few others. I think I'll set off seeding the blogs with enough lies to prove it was Wilde

 

[Badger Kitten]

Sorry to be dim but what is the 'TSG'?

 

[jæd]

I agree that it was stupid to hold the G8 at thingy... Gleneagles.

So we shouldn't hold events outside of London just because terrorists might attack us there... Thats playing right into the hands of terrorists. Once the fear of terrorists (ie terror) force your planning then they've won.

 

[detective-boy]

Sorry to be dim but what is the 'TSG'?

Territorial Support Group.

They are a centrally organised unit who provide a patrolling reserve (in the minibuses, usually in groups of about six per van, but with four or more vans deployed together with sgt / insp in charge) to help deal with any major incidents (they are primarily trained and equipped to deal with public disorder but they are obviously a useful quickly deployable reserve of uniformed officers for any type of incident). Those not on the patrolling reserve part of their duties get deployed to assist Boroughs with whatever operations they have going, in uniform or plain clothes, or to police things like marches and demonstrations.

 

[Badger Kitten]

Ah, I see. Thanks.

 

[editor]

All that effort, and that's it?

It's not very good, is it?

 

[editor]

Oh hang on - you're the Holocaust denier with the nutjob site, aren't you?

...in which case.. it's time to delete and ban!

 

[Badger Kitten]

Drat, I missed it.

 

[Badger Kitten]

Was it the '10 characteristics of *official conspiracy theorists with apologies to Donna Ferentes' thing? Which is hilarious.

* by which he means the mainstream media, the police, the Government, 7th July survivors and anyone who does not agree with his batshit claim that it was Jews or Psy-ops forces of the New World Order engaged in false flag attacks that only the conspiraloons on the internet can percieve.

 

[sparticus]

Was it the '10 characteristics of *official conspiracy theorists with apologies to Donna Ferentes' thing? Which is hilarious.

* by which he means the mainstream media, the police, the Government, 7th July survivors and anyone who does not agree with his batshit claim that it was Jews or Psy-ops forces of the New World Order engaged in false flag attacks that only the conspiraloons on the internet can percieve.

Let's be clear on a few things:

Firstly there is an official conspiracy theory regarding July 7 and it can be summarised as the 'Leeds 4 are guilty'. This official theory goes on hold that there is no evidence to implicate elements of UK intelligence services as suggested by Michael Meacher. So when he says 'official conspiracy theorists' I believe he means those accepting the official theory (in this case of July 7).

This remains a theory until it is proven. We await a narrative and hopefully a fully comprehensive public inquiry to establish their guilt or otherwise, although I notice that despite your support for a public inquiry you are on record as believing that case for the Leeds 4's guilt is proven.

Second those challenging the government to prove their guilt through a fully comprehensive public inquiry include survivors of July 7 and their loved ones.

Thirdly those calling for a fully comprehensive inquiry represent a broad range of opinion and can not be lumped together as one homogenuous group and certainly not into one homogenous group that shares poseidon's worldview.

So it is wholly dishonest of you to divide opinion into 2 camps: On the one hand a camp who accept the official theory and this includes July 7 survivors (what all of July 7 survivors and all the victim's families, I don't think so) and on the other hand a camp of conspiraloons and fruitloops that are some how meant to share poseidon's worldview.

 

[jæd]

This remains a theory until it is proven. We await a narrative and hopefully a fully comprehensive public inquiry to establish their guilt or otherwise, although I notice that despite your support for a public inquiry you are on record as believing that case for the Leeds 4's guilt is proven.

Um... Doesn't the fact that personal effects of the 4 were found at the scene of the explosions, that remains of them were found at the scene and the fact they disappeared suddenly make this a very, very, very possible theory...?

Their guilt is about as questionable as the idea of the sun not rising tomorrow morning.

 

[sparticus]

Um... Doesn't the fact that personal effects of the 4 were found at the scene of the explosions, that remains of them were found at the scene and the fact they disappeared suddenly make this a very, very, very possible theory...?

Their guilt is about as questionable as the idea of the sun not rising tomorrow morning.

That may very well be the conclusion of a fully comprehensive independent public inquiry. Excuse me if I no longer take the security services and this government at their word. I would like to see all the evidence and see properly examined

Further I would like to see the possible connections between the Leeds 4 and the security services fully scrutinised. You have a problem with that?

 

[Jazzz]

Um... Doesn't the fact that personal effects of the 4 were found at the scene of the explosions, that remains of them were found at the scene and the fact they disappeared suddenly make this a very, very, very possible theory...?

Their guilt is about as questionable as the idea of the sun not rising tomorrow morning.

Have you got a link for their body parts/DNA being found at the scene? I don't remember this being the case for all of them.

 

[jæd]

Have you got a link for their body parts/DNA being found at the scene? I don't remember this being the case for all of them.

FFS...! Let me guess... You think it was carefully trained Tube mice that derailed Ms Kittens train...?

 

[Jazzz]

You made a statement of fact I am simply asking you to verify it.

 

[Jazzz]

It seems two bombers were identified, Tanweer & Lindsay (Lindsay by DNA). No bodily trace of Khan or Hussain.

 

[Lock&Light]

It seems two bombers were identified, Tanweer & Lindsay (Lindsay by DNA). No bodily trace of Khan or Hussain.

Could the other two have been American servicemen, perhaps? You know, like during Soham?

 

[Jazzz]

My god you're funny.