Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Democratic? No public enquiry on the 7/7 bombings.

Jazzz

You point to just one of the many many inconsitencies in the official narrative (or the official conspiracy theory) that would have the state running scared of any independent public inquiry into the events in London on 7/7/05.

How about an independent people's inquiry?

As for Laptop's assertion that the Luton train could have been the Mainline train to St Pancras (a completely different station and that no news report has ever mentioned), why was the `dummy dummy` run on 28/6 showing the Thameslink station? Why did the BBC2 Horizon programme trace the journey via Thameslink? Where are all the CCTV images from the day?

The questions are endless...and somewhere in the answers to these questions lies the truth.

To quote George Orwell "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act".
 
Jazzz said:
The 7.40am train, as we know, never existed, and the 7.48am would have been too late. So, the 'official story' as it stands, is clear bunk; and until the day we can establish a simple detail like that one what confidence can we have in any aspect of it?
Click to expand...

Perhaps the bombers took the 7.30 train (that was running late). The trains in and around London have be known to be late. Oh, and journalists get facts wrong as well.

99% of the time people are organised enough to do conspirancies, just screw enough to make conspira-loons think there's a case...
 
jæd said:
Perhaps the bombers took the 7.30 train (that was running late). The trains in and around London have be known to be late. Oh, and journalists get facts wrong as well.

99% of the time people are organised enough to do conspirancies, just screw enough to make conspira-loons think there's a case...
Click to expand...

Yes of course trains run late all the time, which is precisely what happened at Luton on 7/7.

The 7.30 train left Luton at 7.42 and arrived Kings X Thameslink station at 8.39.

The eastbound circle line train left Kings X underground station at 8.35.

How do we place these 4 young men on a train from Luton that arrived 4 minutes after the circle line train left Kings X?

Just one image released of these 4 young men together on that morning? From all the CCTV cameras at stations and on platforms?

I am surprised that in the light of the government announcing no public inquiry, that more citizens and survivors are not asking these questions, and demanding the answers, independently of whether or not the government thinks an inquiry should be held.
 
Prole said:
Yes of course trains run late all the time, which is precisely what happened at Luton on 7/7.

The 7.30 train left Luton at 7.42 and arrived Kings X Thameslink station at 8.39.

The eastbound circle line train left Kings X underground station at 8.35.
Click to expand...
Please provide a source for these pieces of information.
 
Prole said:
Yes of course trains run late all the time, which is precisely what happened at Luton on 7/7.

The 7.30 train left Luton at 7.42 and arrived Kings X Thameslink station at 8.39.

The eastbound circle line train left Kings X underground station at 8.35.

How do we place these 4 young men on a train from Luton that arrived 4 minutes after the circle line train left Kings X?
Click to expand...

Perhaps someone, somewhere has recorded a train wrong... ? Yep, a public inquiry would probably settle inconistencies but I can't see it doing much else...
 
It does raise some interesting questions though.

I think the reply on another blog sheds some light:
"The only evidence introduced to date regarding these men's travel from Luton is a CCTV still which shows their arrival time at 7:21.

Your timetable of actual departure times from Luton Station reveals that had these men caught the next train to Kings Cross which left at 7:25am they would have arrived at Kings Cross at 8:23am in time to catch all the respective trains at 8:35, 8:42 and 8:48."

Conspiracy over?
 
TAE said:
It does raise some interesting questions though.

I think the reply on another blog sheds some light:
"The only evidence introduced to date regarding these men's travel from Luton is a CCTV still which shows their arrival time at 7:21.

Your timetable of actual departure times from Luton Station reveals that had these men caught the next train to Kings Cross which left at 7:25am they would have arrived at Kings Cross at 8:23am in time to catch all the respective trains at 8:35, 8:42 and 8:48."

Conspiracy over?
Click to expand...
7.21 and 54 seconds. If not physically impossible to make the 7.24, it's certainly cutting it extremely fine, even without buying tickets source.
 
TAE said:
that blog said:
Your timetable of actual departure times from Luton Station reveals that had these men caught the next train to Kings Cross which left at 7:25am they would have arrived at Kings Cross at 8:23am in time to catch all the respective trains at 8:35, 8:42 and 8:48.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Not to mention that someone doing the journey next Thursday could catch the 07:29 Midland Mainline, arriving St Pancras 07:59, leaving plenty of time for the schlep from the arse end of the gasworks down to King's Cross. Or even 07:56 arr 08:24.

This is from the winter timetable; the above means it's hardly worth digging up the summer timetable though.
 
laptop said:
Not to mention that someone doing the journey next Thursday could catch the 07:29 Midland Mainline, arriving St Pancras 07:59, leaving plenty of time for the schlep from the arse end of the gasworks down to King's Cross. Or even 07:56 arr 08:24.

This is from the winter timetable; the above means it's hardly worth digging up the summer timetable though.
Click to expand...

I'd be more than happy to view ANY source that mentions them taking the Luton to St Pancras train that morning.

Surely the biggest murder inquiry in history would require this fact to be made public in an honest quest for witnesses?
 
Prole said:
I'd be more than happy to view ANY source that mentions them taking the Luton to St Pancras train that morning.
Click to expand...

Or, for that matter, any that says what station it was they arrived at, and is more than mere "musta'been" by journos.

Prole said:
Surely the biggest murder inquiry in history
Click to expand...

Short memories. Even if you're parochially restricting it to England, there'd be the search that turned into the Balcombe Street affair... bigger because they were still at large and very active.

Prole said:
would require this fact to be made public in an honest quest for witnesses?
Click to expand...

Why? It's a murder inquiry; and more significantly it's a search for live associates. If there were CCTV of them meeting with others, revealing that fact (or precisely when and where it was taken) would not be helpful. If there were not, there'd be little point in appealing for witnesses who could provide only a little extra detail and many red herrings.

It's not being done for the benefit of your curiosity.
 
*headdesk*

WHY is everyone so obsessed with what train they got? The trains were all over the shop that day ( which is not that unusual for the Piccadilly, Northern and Thameslink lines I can tell you, having used them for years).

I want to know what alternative theories the people who go on about the train times 'cover up' are positing... I keep reading stuff about ''the alleged bombers''. There's no ''alleged'' about it. Germaine Lindsey got on the second set of double doors of the first carriage at Kings Cross. About 7-10 feet away from me, who was by the forst set of doors.30 -60 or so seconds later a bomb was detonated inside the carriage and 26 people died. And lots more had their legs and arms blown off, and were badly hurt.

I know he flipping well got on, because J, one of the passengers in my survivor group was standing behind him and he tried to get on as well, but it was too full so he went down the train and got into carriage 2 instead. And survived. J recognised him from the paper and the news. And felt pretty sick when he did. And since Jamie and I were actually there, and I am in contact with 90 other people who were there, including the police officer first on the scene and the train driver, all this conspiracy theory stuff fucks me off oto the point that I am about to put my head through the monitor. :mad:

Come on, conspiracy theorists, are you actually denying that the bomber bombed the train or not?

Out with it.
 
badger kitten,

Clearly you are very emotional about the whole thing and no-one would blame you for that. Nor is anyone suggesting that your train was not bombed.

Your report of the sighting of Germaine Lindsay is only the third identification of a bomber on the day - an astonishingly small number - I am aware of, and of those three one has been discredited. I cannot say whether it is true or not, I honestly don't know. But more to the point it is not for me to. Nor is it for you, laptop, or any of us. This is the job of the public enquiry. One assumes that it should be very easy to establish the route of the bombers along their way, as there was CCTV all over the place.

And you do have to be careful with witness sightings because they tend to adjust to what we are told happened. Note how after the shooting of Charles de Menezes witnesses came forward supporting the police account immediately after the shooting, they saw him with olive skin, they saw him jump the barriers, they saw him wearing a thick coat etc. Yet that was all nonsense. So no, your fellow victim's identification doesn't settle the issue from where I am. If that offends you I regret that. Doubtless it must be unsettling for him to think that he was rubbing shoulders with the chap.

Establishing the facts - as a public enquiry should seek to - is unfortunately something that must be done dispassionately and without prior assumption. May I remind you that you earler took extraordinary offence at my suggestion that the 21/7 bombers may not have been suicide bombers with ties to those of 7/7. In fact you screamed blue murder in my direction, much like your post now. However I believe the police now make no claim of any such link nor it is clear the 21/7 bombers actually intended to harm anyone let alone kill themselves. As far as I know the claim that the bombs contained flour could well be true.

To answer your question, which I do reluctantly, there are basically two alternative theories to the official story which I personally consider credible. One is that the bombs were not carried by the alleged bombers (if they weren't held as dead, we would all have to call them that) but were installed under the trains, and either some or all of the bombers weren't actually there. The other is that they did carry the bombs, but unwittingly.

I know you won't agree with that assessment but you must recognise that it it is the role of public enquiries we both call for establish these and all other details pertaining to the tragic event.
 
The 21/7 intended murder, that is not in doubt acc. to the police I have spoken to.

And I am not 'screaming blue murder', nor am I 'very emotional 'about the whole thing, FFS, , before you all rush to pat the poor 'ickle victim girlie on the head and hand her a hankie. I am however understandably fucked off with pointless conspiracy theorising which I know to be a pack of fucking lies.


As to my level-headedness or (your suggestion) otherwise, my ability to co-ordinate successful media campaigns to find other survivors and provide answers and comfort for them, write for national newspapers and magazines, give interviews on TV, run a survivor group, a website, assist the police with their enquiries and hold down a fairly tough job all at the same time - 'highly emotional' is not the word. For christ's sake, I was back on the damn tube on the 12th July. 'Very much in control' is a damn sight more accurate.

Don't you patronise me, either with this crap about bombs exploding under trains - or dupes - or missing bombers - or hysterical emotional victims. I can see where the hysteria and the emotional drivel is coming from, and it ain't from over here.

I'm not the only one who has had it up to here with conspiracy theorising, in fact I have seen the editor bollock you for it on numerous occasions.

One of the reasons I want a public enquiry is to put a sock in this conspiraloonacy once and for all. Which is yet another reason why the petition was started yesterday.

I'm sure you mean well but you have no idea how annoying all this crap is. The truth was shocking and horrible enough, it really is insulting to have to invent lies about it. That is why I am angry with you.

Anyway, public enquiry, bring it on. I'm glad I started the petition, but the irony that all the conspiracy theorists that fuck victims off so much are signing it is not lost on me. :rolleyes:
 
Actually Jazzz it is likely that the witnesses quoted in the press after the killing of Charles de Menezes only said what they actually saw. A man wearing a thick coat leaping the barrier followed by others who started to don caps with police on them and carrying guns. The bloke they said they saw was almost certainly a copper and not a figment of their imagination.

The press wrapped their account around the police statements put out in an effort to justify the shooting. That is why the man leaping the barrier got more initial coverage than the fact that the police held him down while they shot him.

I would favour a public enquiry on the events of 7/7 as that is the most democratic method of analysing the events, but I really don't think there is any value at all to wild supossition of the kind you endulge in, Jazzz. The World would be a much simpler place if all the bad things that happened were instigated by the CIA/lizards or whatever, but it aint like that.

Of course no public enquiry will ever convince conspiracy theorists. I'm always amazed by the plucking of wild theories out of the skies and the attempts to straight-jacket the facts to fit the theories. Rigorously questioning the official line is necessary - surely though to drop all critical faculties when it comes to wild alternative theories is just silly. It does a disservice to those who genuinly seek to question the actions - and the lies - and yes, sometimes the cover-ups of the rich and powerful. But not everything is a cover up and conspiracy.
 
Conspiraloons:

1. Just 'cos no-ones told you doesn't mean that no-one knows. There are many, many reasons to restrict facts reaching the public domain during an ongoing criminal investigation.

2. Just 'cos only a small amount of CCTV footage has been released to the public domain doesn't mean that it is the only CCTV footage available.

3. Learn to challenge things which you are told by others. You challenge everything any official body says, transfer some of that scepticism to things told you by other conpiraloons. (In the meantime, can I have that £20 back I lent you ...

4. A credible source is a first hand source or some fact (e.g. a scientific finding). It is NOT a reference to the same thing on another conspiraloon site.

And, by the way, a public enquiry doesn't actually investigate much at all. They look at statements and other material already gathered together and then summon the witnesses and cross examine them. So it makes sense for the actual investigation to take place first, followed then by an assessment of the outcome and the need (or otherwise) for a public enquiry.
 
(to badger kitten)

I don't doubt for a second that you are extraordinarily capable badger kitten. I applaud all the efforts you have made.

I have no desire to patronise you. I admire you greatly. But why I posted the above was because you do however forcefully make emotive arguments. You are making it very clear the extent to which people who do not accept the official version of events are displeasing you. As I said, I don't blame you for that.

As far as public enquiries go it's really no irony that we are on the same side, because we aren't really on different sides anyway. We both want to publicly establish all truth about the event so that society may take the best course of action to prevent it happening again.
 
I just prefer to make up my own mind about what happened that day thanks, and I'll do that based on the facts. I have no 'theory', just questions about the events of that day. If I intuitively don't trust the existing narrative it is partly because we have all been lied to many times. How many poor souls are now dead based on the lie of WMD? As for the police, of course there is Jean Charles de Menezes, but also the Guildford 4, the Birmingham 6 and Maguire 7.

It does surprise me, as I am new on this forum, how a clear assesment of the known facts and independent research, leads to accusations of 'conspiraloonacy'.

I am only interested in the truth.
 
Groucho said:
Actually Jazzz it is likely that the witnesses quoted in the press after the killing of Charles de Menezes only said what they actually saw. A man wearing a thick coat leaping the barrier followed by others who started to don caps with police on them and carrying guns. The bloke they said they saw was almost certainly a copper and not a figment of their imagination.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid this isn't the case. For example Mark Whitby refers to an 'Asian Guy' who was a 'cornered fox' wearing a 'padded coat'. In fact his account is so far off the mark you have to really wonder if it is misinformation.

It's not just him. In the same BBC article you find

"I saw this guy who appeared to have a bomb belt and wires coming out and people were panicking and I heard two shots being fired."

That's without all the people who made the connection that the man they saw jumping the barriers was Charles De Menezes.

Ask yourself - where were the witnesses who maintained a proper account - what happened to them? In fact, there was only one member of the public I'm aware of who came out at the time with an account that later proved wholly accurate - and that was <real name removed: editor>
wikipedia article on De Menezes
 
Badger Kitten said:
I'm not the only one who has had it up to here with conspiracy theorising, in fact I have seen the editor bollock you for it on numerous occasions.

One of the reasons I want a public enquiry is to put a sock in this conspiraloonacy once and for all. Which is yet another reason why the petition was started yesterday.
Click to expand...

Hi BK

1) The fact that the editor doesn't like what he and you patronisingly refer to as conspiraloons means precisely nothing. If you hate being patronised yourself, you should try not patronising others.

2) Whilst you (and fellow survivors) may have some evidence that supports the official 'narrative' that in no way answers all the questions

3) Although 7/7 MAY turn out NOT to have been another example of false flag terrorism, there are numerous examples of previous false flag terrorism involving HMG. So to hold suspicions and demand answers to awkward questions does mean you believe ALL 'conspiracy theories' or make you a 'loony'.

4) To take a similar event, 9/11. The fact that the Kean report was IMO a complete cover-up and whitewash, does not mean that it was a waste of time. By forcing the US state to make their case and expose the weaknesses, omissions and contradictions of their evidence, the 9/11 truth movement strengthened. So whilst I have no expection that a public inquiry would be independent and honest, I would still welcome one
 
sparticus said:
2) Whilst you (and fellow survivors) may have some evidence that supports the official 'narrative' that in no way answers all the questions
Click to expand...

I can't be arsed to go into a huge rebuttal, I will simply say that having been there and having read a lot of the crap and speculation posted by people who weren't, i am inclined to believe the evidence of my senses, rather than the wild theorising of a bunch of people who have an agenda to wilfully disbelieve the 'official' version because of... I don't know.

I am hardly big mates with the government, but I have read that the bombs were under the trains ( they weren't) , they didn't go off - it was power surges ( crap) and that the man who boarded my train and attempted to kill us is a fucking figment of my imagination and wasn't even there. Crap. Crap. Crap. And I am sorry for using emotive arguments, sheesh, but my patience with this insulting shite is at an all time low. Christ, you try getting off a bombed train and then have peopel tell you it didn't fucking happen. And I ask you, how much patience you'd display under the circs.
 
Jazzz and sparticus - you are both tin-foil hatters as you have proved time and time again on these boards. I would like it if you took your deeply offensive shite elsewhere. You have a habit of, in effect, accusing vast numbers of honest and decent people of being liars, murderers, corrupt or fools. The "truth" is that you are at least two of these things, along with deluded and extremely annoying. In fact some of the best explanations for a lot of the things you talk about are not to be found in any public enquiry (whatever its other merits may be) but here: http://www.mind.org.uk/Information/Booklets/Understanding/Understanding+paranoia.htm
and here: http://skepdic.com/confirmbias.html
 
sparticus said:
By forcing the US state to make their case and expose the weaknesses, omissions and contradictions of their evidence, the 9/11 truth movement strengthened.
Click to expand...

And this is precisely why I said earlier the consparanoids want an inquiry - because they believe it will give them more nits to pick, poring over the texts in the comfort of their attics.

They don't do evidence.

The whole point of being delusional is not to do evidence.

In a past age, the brighter among them would have been bad "theologians", picking nits over whether Beëlzebub had fingernails or cloven hands. The world would be a better place if they retired to monasteries now...
 
BK You say in your article in the Sunday Times:

"People later asked me what it was like. They said they couldn’t imagine it. For a long time I couldn’t say. It was like a dream you can’t remember, a puzzle you can’t solve. But then I saw a television documentary about the bombings. Immediately I began to have flashbacks."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2092-1892288_2,00.html

Someone else who was there: "Blue Watch relive the bomb hell inside carriage 346A"

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1588239,00.html

"It was a routine call out - but within minutes firefighter Aaron Roche and his colleagues were plunged into the carnage of the 7 July bombings. For the first time, they tell their stories"

In this article firefighter Aaron Roche tells us 11 times that the carriage he enters on the Piccadilly line is number 346A. He is also the first person to enter the carriage at 10 am. There are still injured people on the train. "Blue Watch dragged six people alive from carriage 346A, some with miraculously minor injuries. The elderly woman sustained only a sore ankle."

"It had just turned 10am when Roche began striding along the dark tunnel towards the stranded train. No one had a clue what had caused its sudden breakdown. Roche had begun to fear the worst, though, as he came across a bedraggled string of passengers, their blackened, bleeding faces almost invisible in the choking clouds of smoke"

Suspicious of why a carriage number should be mentioned in a headline and in a story so many times, I checked this carriage number with Clive D W Feather of Davros fame http://www.davros.org/rail/culg/
I wrote:
>> The Observer carried a long article quoting firemen who attended the
>>scene on the Piccadilly line and going into carriage 346A, are the
>>carriages numbered differently to the trains?
He wrote:
The Piccadilly Line train consisted of the following vehicles:

166-566-366-417-617-217

Car 166 was the one holding the bomb.

No mention of a carriage 346A.

Another survivor story on the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4659293.stm

"But then it sounded like another train had come up behind us and the carriage filled with smoke again and people became really, really frightened."

As I have already indicated, these are just a few of the many inconsitencies in the official narrative.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

DrRingDing
King Abdullah accused the UK of ignoring Saudi's forewarning of the 7/7 bombing.
Replies
24
Views
3K
selamlar
S
C
What no 7/7 bombers release video tape thread?
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
maldwyn
maldwyn
I
  • Locked
7/7 - The London Bombings, Islam & the Iraq War
Replies
4
Views
1K
editor
editor
T
The 7/7 Report
103 104 105 106 107
Replies
3K
Views
79K
detective-boy
D
B
7/7 Home Office 'narrative' leaked: Iraq led to July 7
23 24 25 26 27
Replies
806
Views
29K
jæd
J
Back
Top Bottom