GWAN! Burn the witch!
Claim of responsibility 'contains errors'
- Thread starter Jazzz
- Start date
Exchanges Sabrina tape while patiently waiting for Ed to respond...
I do have a life! 
Actually, Im listening to Mishelle Ndegechello...
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
Burn the witch!Raisin D'etre said:
So here you go...
Jerusalem Post
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
So in other words, there's no evidence for any sort of warning to the israeili embassy (before the bombs), merely a rather effective security service working on damage limitation?Raisin D'etre said:
Yesterday evening watching BBC News, I was stunned to hear that only after the third explosion did the London police decide that a bomb attack was underway and shut down the system. Until that point they had been theorizing that the train had experienced "a power surge."
* 8.49am (GMT): An incident on the train line between Liverpool Street and Aldgate is reported to British Transport Police.* 9.15am: Media reports emergency services called to London's Liverpool Street station after an explosion.
* 9.24am: Police say the incident was possibly caused by a collision between two trains, a power cut or a power cable exploding. Police report "walking wounded".
* 9.33am: Passengers told that all underground train services are being suspended because of a power fault across the network.
* 9.33am: Reports of another incident at Edgware Road station.
* 9.40am: Police say power surge incidents have occurred on Aldgate, Edgware Road, King's Cross, Old Street and Russell Square stations.
* 10.02am: Scotland Yard says it is dealing with a "major incident".
* 10.09am: Witness Christina Lawrence, who was on a train leaving King's Cross, tells BBC: "There was a loud bang in the tunnel and the train just stopped and all of a sudden it was filled with black, gassy smoke and we couldn't breathe."
* 10.14am: A witness says that a bus has been ripped apart in an explosion in central London.
* 10.21am: Scotland Yard reports "multiple explosions".
* 10.23am: Police confirm an explosion on a bus in Tavistock Place.
* 10.25am: The BBC's Andrew Marr, with Prime Minister Tony Blair in Scotland, says the PM is "still unsure" whether the explosions are a terrorist attack.
* .... 10.53am: Home Secretary Charles Clarke makes a statement outside Downing Street about "dreadful incidents" causing "terrible injuries". He says Mr Blair has been informed and advises the public not to make unnecessary journeys.
* .... 11.18am: London's Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair tells the BBC he knows of "about six explosions", one on a bus and the others at train stations.
* 11.26am: The president of the European Parliament, Josep Borrell, blames terrorism for a "co-ordinated series of attacks".
This, of course, immediately puts into question the assertion that the Israeli embassy was alerted after the first explosion. What was the notification? That there had been an explosion caused by a power surge?
The second issue raised by the timeline is the level of ineptness and unpreparedness. That the London Transport Police had no way to distinguish between a bomb and a power surge is simply incredible.
The third issue is the parallel with the timeline of 9/11 wherein authorities failed to act on information they already had to prevent the second attack on the World Trade Center and on the Pentagon. The media are comparing this event with the Madrid bombings when they should be comparing it with 9/11.
The fourth issue is what the loss of liberty that the British have already suffered—and which the British government is in the process of augmenting—has done to make the British public safer.
Here we go
editor
hiraethified
Sorry. Is that story supposed to prove something?Raisin D'etre said:
Perhaps you might explain what you think it means and whether you go along with whatever source-free claims are contained therein?
It would be awfully nice if you could actually articulate a fucking opinion here.
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
Raisin D'etre said:
That's all assuming one thing, that the police were infact telling the public what they thought was true at the time. Considering you're willing to accept the police or security services blew up the trains themselves, merely lying to prevent a panic is pretty small change.
Alternative theory
They knew it was a bomb within minutes, they put out the electrical problems report to get people off the train network without a panic. Then when the truth was impossible to hide, and the risk of mass panic lessened they released the accurate information.
Larry O'Hara
Well-Known Member
Raisin D'etre said:
The one factual kernel here is that Netenyahu received a warning from the Israeli Embassy after the first bomb. This would be consistent with the report I read elsewhere that Scotland Yard passed the warning on to the Embassy.
This fact doesn't tell us anything at all about Israel, but an awful lot about the British police/spooks, who were prepared to dosclose their immediate suspicions to some people, but not others (ie the mass of commuters). In no way does this point to any Israeli complicity or such. The point is to look at each event on a case by case basis--I somehow feel if this had been a qwarning passed to an Australian minister, say, then it would not have been thought worthy of comment.
None of this is to deny Isrraeli dodgy doings
--in the occupied territories
--even probably bombing their own UK Embassy in 1994
...It is just that unless I'm missing something, the only body to come badly out of this are the police.
Point out where I support those conspiracies. That's all I am asking you to do. Your supporters talk of lizardism etc. if you had any honour you would acknowledge that, if you had any integrity you would acknowledge this.editor said:
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
Larry O'Hara said:
How do the police look bad here? You want to get on loudspeakers and tell the packed london underground that there may be a bomb sitting next to them? You'd have people crushed to death in seconds, instantly uncontrolable situation.
However they could warn embassy personel, which are the most likely to be targets, to stay away. While the police deal with the incident as best they can.
Alerting 20 embassys takes only a few people, and can't cause an imediate stampeed. Alerting a million people on a tube network that they are in grave danger of being blown up is slightly different.
Larry O'Hara
Well-Known Member
Raisin D'etre said:
1) Most likely, the Israeli Embassy was told there was a power surge that could be a bomb.
2) I am not surprised London Transport Police couldn't tell a power surge from a bomb--they have neither electronic sensors nor seismographs in the tunnels, & certainly no bomb specialists on hand at each station. Fatuous to expect them to.
3) The bombings are compared with Madrid because of the MO--unlike 9/11 (arguably) there is no real evidence of foreknowledge. Or if there is, you haven't produced it. I say this as somebody who in the real (as opposed to internet) world has taken/is currently taking MI5 to task for various bombings where foreknowledge was possessed. But I repeat, where is the fore-knowledge in this case??
4) On the loss of liberty, I agree with you.
editor
hiraethified
Excuse me? What "supporters"?Raisin D'etre said:
It would considerably help your credibility if you could provide some actual examples where I've recently - if ever - accused you of supporting "Lizardism" or "Planet Nibiru".
Trying to somehow connect me with whatever entirely unrelated posters have said about you is utterly irrelevant and downright dishonest, so fucking cut it out now.
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
Raisin D'etre said:
"supporters", "honour"? WTF are you on about, this is the internet not Samurai era Japan!
It's not a case of two sides cheering on thier champions, i don't care what the ed thinks about these theorys of yours, i can tell they are flawed myself.
Oh do shut up!editor said:
Larry O'Hara
Well-Known Member
Bob_the_lost said:
You may well have a practical logistical point here. Nonetheless, it is interesting that various people were given 'privileged' information, & others not. Perhaps I should rephrase it to say the people about whom potential criticisms could, arguably, be made, were the police.. But as criticisms go, not a strong one, on current information. For the sad fact is that if more people had left the underground earlier, more might have been on/near that bus & killed by the bus bomb. I myself, when in London, often use that no 30 bus for precisely the journey it was being used--between Kings Cross & Central London.
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
95% agreement, (no one's perfect). Something that should be discussed yes, but if they turned out to have lied to the public over the inital cause of the problems i wouldn't hold it against them.Larry O'Hara said:
That's a fine post squeegee (or at least it was)... well said (then). and about time too. This site is becoming an increasingly intolerant place as it steadily drifts further and further to the right. In a WP forum poll taken 9 months ago 45%, the largest block, considered the US administration had a hand in the 911 attacks. It's truly a sad state of affairs when such a large section of the Urban community wanting to discus their suspicions about 911 and other related issues on this forum are forced to run the gauntlet of a continuous barrage of intimidation, insults and banning threats made by a handful of professional thread wreckers under the stewardship and encouragement of the editor himself. Post up a thread about any aspect of 911 and it is guaranteed to be trolled into oblivion by a handful of intellectual cripples and then binned.
In answer to the recent poll question: "Did Rumsfield and Chums want and allow 9/11 to happen?"
45.65% answered - Yes, quite possibly
11.96% answered - More lizards please
4.35% answered - No he wouldn't do such a thing
38.04% answered - All this bonkers 9/11 conspiracy stuff is fucking irritating and further threads repeating the same thing and should be binned.
Incidentally, the last option was an added cuckoo option not in the original poll. The editor is obviously so desperate to impose his viewpoint that he will even resort to gerrymandering forum polls to try and get the result he wants. I mean, how credible is that?
In answer to the recent poll question: "Did Rumsfield and Chums want and allow 9/11 to happen?"
45.65% answered - Yes, quite possibly
11.96% answered - More lizards please
4.35% answered - No he wouldn't do such a thing
38.04% answered - All this bonkers 9/11 conspiracy stuff is fucking irritating and further threads repeating the same thing and should be binned.
Incidentally, the last option was an added cuckoo option not in the original poll. The editor is obviously so desperate to impose his viewpoint that he will even resort to gerrymandering forum polls to try and get the result he wants. I mean, how credible is that?
Cheers Bigfish. Missed you out. Don't know how you guys have survived all these months with the sick and ignorant abuse you get. Needed to get all that out but then realised that it wouldn't change a damn thing. Appreciate the support anyway. Good luck to all you open-minded people out there. There are more of us than would seem on these boards or the corporate (all of 'em) media. The truth will out. I wish sooner than later.
squeegee said:
Thanks squeegie. Objectively speaking, what keeps me going, is knowing that the resort to threats, intimidation, insults, abuse, bans, the kitchen sink, etc., etc., by a handful of demented, semi-illiterates, is nothing more than the external reflection of their internal theoretical bankruptcy. Unable to debate or even count, all that's left for them to do, is keep moving the goal posts and howl down their opponents.
Oh, I don't know so much. I was about to go out before I read your fine words, but they made me linger just a while long to write my appreciation. The point I think I'm trying to make, is that every little helps. I would urge you in the most friendly way to repost your comments so that others might gain something from the unique insights you bring. After all, it's not every day that we get the chance to hear from someone who has seen behind the big media vail as you have. But its your call squeegie and I certainly wont press you further.
I won't go on with what I posted earlier. But what gets me mad about successful journalists, is their success comes cos they don't ask the difficult questions. These are some of the questions I would ask:
Why would an Islamic group bomb during the G8 and then make no reference to it?
Who benefits from the total media coverage of the bombings and almost total marginalisation of the G8 debate?
If these supposed terrorists, who wish to kill as many people as possible, exist, why not bomb Live8 or the Olympic celebrations?
It would seem that the casualties while kept considerably lower thanks to the excellent work of the emergency services, were also kept low (use of only 10llbs explosives, in the past much higher) deliberately by the terrorists.
Why would this be the case?
My suspicions:
Whovever did this wanted to take the spotlight off Edinburgh and the insulting conclusion to G8. Media were beginning to focus on the various anarchist groups, which was getting higher on the news agenda, thanks to the public demand for it. At first they were described as only violent.
But a day or two before the bombings I saw a short BBC news piece where they described who the Wombles, the Rebel Clown army etc were. They still didn't say too much, but it would have been inevitable that the public would have been intrigued enough to demand more info.
Once the majority of people get to read websites such as Dissent and G8 Alternatives, Wombles, even Indymedia and heck even Urban75, many would see that their analysis of the G8 proves that corporate capitalism can NEVER end poverty in Africa. It in fact depends on keeping Africans and the developing world poor for its own profit.
Then there's ID cards and total surveillance. Despite the corporate media and Blair saying this is popular with the people, it patently is not. Speak to many on the streets of London and they know that this will not provide security but will usher in a centralised surveillance society. Now with this bombing, emergency powers will be rushed through and with blanket big media push, may make it a reality sooner rather than later. The Olympics will be used as excuse. It almost makes me thing that London was always destined to get it. Yes the elite can manipulate anything for their ends, which is a global police state. And the IOC are certainly not people's champions, I think most would agree.
The media is full of willful incompetence. In my deleted post I mentioned Gavin Esler on Newsnight refer to the Madrid bombings as the terrorists succeeding in forcing Spain out of Iraq. Aside from the very credible information that suggests the bombers had links with the Spanish secret service, the reason Aznar lost was because he tried to pin the bombing on ETA and the public saw through it, voted him out and voted in a socialist government committed to pulling troops out anyway.
If a "top" broadcaster like Esler can make such a misleading statement, imagine how the rest of the corporate media pans out. I've seen first hand the dunderheads who get the writing assignments (and believe me it makes no difference whether the Times, the Guardian or the Sun or the Mirror). Trust me they're not very bright, but smart enough to steer clear and warn others if a bigmouth starts asking difficult questions and won't accept the bullshit. They write what's expected of them, they don't even need to be told.
It is important not to treat speculation as fact. But in the absence of facts all humans piece together clues and make educated guesses. My educated guess is these bombings are the work of those behind Bliar, as 911 was the work of those behind Bush. Who is behind them, I don't know. Maybe Illuminati with numerological obsessions (7/7/2005). maybe just corporate gangsters with a gun to his head. But the timing is crucial. Blair and the G8 benefited most from this. No one is talking about the derisory "aid not trade" deal. Another £20 billion into the pockets of the corporate elites corrupt friends in Africa.
I saw Blair's statement after the bombings and even in his long list of fake speeches (Diana's especially, yes that was a secret service job too in my opinion) this capped the lot. Speak, pause for 1.5 seconds, look down, frown, walk away with frown etched onto face like its been painted there....bullshit)
The majority of conspiracy theories are disinformation. But conspiracy is the nature of politics. How anyone can defend Blair's assertions or this bullshit about Al-Qaeda escapes me.
Bigfish, you've drawn me into writing this down again against my better judgement. I accept what you say, but I don't think I have the thick skin that you Fela and Jazz have. I truly commend you for your intelligence and courage in the face of such inexplicable abuse from what is supposed to be a radical website. I keep wishing it was what it seemed to be when I first logged on.
I honestly don't think this will change shit. But hell I had to try one more time.
Peace
Squeegee....your third eye
Why would an Islamic group bomb during the G8 and then make no reference to it?
Who benefits from the total media coverage of the bombings and almost total marginalisation of the G8 debate?
If these supposed terrorists, who wish to kill as many people as possible, exist, why not bomb Live8 or the Olympic celebrations?
It would seem that the casualties while kept considerably lower thanks to the excellent work of the emergency services, were also kept low (use of only 10llbs explosives, in the past much higher) deliberately by the terrorists.
Why would this be the case?
My suspicions:
Whovever did this wanted to take the spotlight off Edinburgh and the insulting conclusion to G8. Media were beginning to focus on the various anarchist groups, which was getting higher on the news agenda, thanks to the public demand for it. At first they were described as only violent.
But a day or two before the bombings I saw a short BBC news piece where they described who the Wombles, the Rebel Clown army etc were. They still didn't say too much, but it would have been inevitable that the public would have been intrigued enough to demand more info.
Once the majority of people get to read websites such as Dissent and G8 Alternatives, Wombles, even Indymedia and heck even Urban75, many would see that their analysis of the G8 proves that corporate capitalism can NEVER end poverty in Africa. It in fact depends on keeping Africans and the developing world poor for its own profit.
Then there's ID cards and total surveillance. Despite the corporate media and Blair saying this is popular with the people, it patently is not. Speak to many on the streets of London and they know that this will not provide security but will usher in a centralised surveillance society. Now with this bombing, emergency powers will be rushed through and with blanket big media push, may make it a reality sooner rather than later. The Olympics will be used as excuse. It almost makes me thing that London was always destined to get it. Yes the elite can manipulate anything for their ends, which is a global police state. And the IOC are certainly not people's champions, I think most would agree.
The media is full of willful incompetence. In my deleted post I mentioned Gavin Esler on Newsnight refer to the Madrid bombings as the terrorists succeeding in forcing Spain out of Iraq. Aside from the very credible information that suggests the bombers had links with the Spanish secret service, the reason Aznar lost was because he tried to pin the bombing on ETA and the public saw through it, voted him out and voted in a socialist government committed to pulling troops out anyway.
If a "top" broadcaster like Esler can make such a misleading statement, imagine how the rest of the corporate media pans out. I've seen first hand the dunderheads who get the writing assignments (and believe me it makes no difference whether the Times, the Guardian or the Sun or the Mirror). Trust me they're not very bright, but smart enough to steer clear and warn others if a bigmouth starts asking difficult questions and won't accept the bullshit. They write what's expected of them, they don't even need to be told.
It is important not to treat speculation as fact. But in the absence of facts all humans piece together clues and make educated guesses. My educated guess is these bombings are the work of those behind Bliar, as 911 was the work of those behind Bush. Who is behind them, I don't know. Maybe Illuminati with numerological obsessions (7/7/2005). maybe just corporate gangsters with a gun to his head. But the timing is crucial. Blair and the G8 benefited most from this. No one is talking about the derisory "aid not trade" deal. Another £20 billion into the pockets of the corporate elites corrupt friends in Africa.
I saw Blair's statement after the bombings and even in his long list of fake speeches (Diana's especially, yes that was a secret service job too in my opinion) this capped the lot. Speak, pause for 1.5 seconds, look down, frown, walk away with frown etched onto face like its been painted there....bullshit)
The majority of conspiracy theories are disinformation. But conspiracy is the nature of politics. How anyone can defend Blair's assertions or this bullshit about Al-Qaeda escapes me.
Bigfish, you've drawn me into writing this down again against my better judgement. I accept what you say, but I don't think I have the thick skin that you Fela and Jazz have. I truly commend you for your intelligence and courage in the face of such inexplicable abuse from what is supposed to be a radical website. I keep wishing it was what it seemed to be when I first logged on.
I honestly don't think this will change shit. But hell I had to try one more time.
Peace
Squeegee....your third eye
Similar threads
