The 7/7 Report
- Thread starter TAE
- Start date
jæd said:
pk said:
just to confirm the above. Badgerkitten was on the train from luton?
Prole was talking about the train times from Luton to KingsCross wasnt he?
and why Prole has now linked the Luton train and ADdgate train explosion i have no fucking clue.
What has happened during the last page?
editor
hiraethified
Try reading the fucking thread.zArk said:
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=4730477&postcount=1283
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
The objections to the offical report are as follows:
1) Train time discrepancies
2) Photographs of the bombers not having a time stamp.
3) The drill held on the day by a private company for a private company.
4) Allegations that the explosions were located under the trains.
That's it.
Each and every one of these issues has been delt with (excepting possibly 1, for which it has not been possible to confirm or deny the sole source on a very unreliable website). Why the fuck are we still here?
1) Train time discrepancies
2) Photographs of the bombers not having a time stamp.
3) The drill held on the day by a private company for a private company.
4) Allegations that the explosions were located under the trains.
That's it.
Each and every one of these issues has been delt with (excepting possibly 1, for which it has not been possible to confirm or deny the sole source on a very unreliable website). Why the fuck are we still here?
editor said:
i have read the fucking thread and it went like this
prole
jaed
pk
prole
It doesnt follow. The two points converge somehow and now Prole is being accused of
First you laugh at survivors of terror attacks, then you call them liars, then you get laughed at, then you get hospitalised with any luck...
Whats happened through the above posts????
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
But heaven forbid that you discuss the topic, oh hell no.
i thought perhaps the Guardian article would encourage some of you to think a bit more about these issues, obviously not.
I am a great believer in Truth and Justice, neither of which have been served yet to my satisfaction.
If I have to accept that they must have been on a train that either didn't run or arrived too late to board the underground trains to be able to believe everything that we are told, then I'd be a fool.
I am a great believer in Truth and Justice, neither of which have been served yet to my satisfaction.
If I have to accept that they must have been on a train that either didn't run or arrived too late to board the underground trains to be able to believe everything that we are told, then I'd be a fool.
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
Train times issues:
1) Source location, we know that the owner of the site is at best sloppy with his use of language and is it seems a jibbering fruitloop (see his application for registered charity status).
2) Confirmation, we can't get any, it's a single source with no independant verrification.
3) Even assuming that the email posted is a fair reproduction how do we know that the orriginal source of it was correct? I trust rail company time keeping about as far as i can throw a railway sleeper.
4) The four were there for the explosions, as such they must have got there somehow. Thus throwing doubt upon the already dubious source.
All in all you're just wasting everyones' time here.
1) Source location, we know that the owner of the site is at best sloppy with his use of language and is it seems a jibbering fruitloop (see his application for registered charity status).
2) Confirmation, we can't get any, it's a single source with no independant verrification.
3) Even assuming that the email posted is a fair reproduction how do we know that the orriginal source of it was correct? I trust rail company time keeping about as far as i can throw a railway sleeper.
4) The four were there for the explosions, as such they must have got there somehow. Thus throwing doubt upon the already dubious source.
All in all you're just wasting everyones' time here.
I don't understand what's with this thread? Surely it's in everybody's interests to have a full public enquiry into 7/7? Closed government enquiries haven't exactly a good name for truth in the past - the bloody sunday enquiry was a total coverup which had to be reopened years later - the David Kelley enquiry looks like it's heading the same way.
There will be conspiracy theories for as long as all the facts aren't available to the public - it's not as if *this* government hasn't lied to us before. People need closure - and closure demands that the whole truth is told.
Meanwhile, I am disappointed at all the name calling in this thread - what is wrong with people wanting all the facts? In 'Manufacturing Consent', Noam Chomsky defines 'conspiracy theory' as - "a term that's used to discourage institutional analysis." Maybe we should all be 'conspiracy theorists' to the extent that we demand the whole truth from our government? Don't we have the right to it?
There will be conspiracy theories for as long as all the facts aren't available to the public - it's not as if *this* government hasn't lied to us before. People need closure - and closure demands that the whole truth is told.
Meanwhile, I am disappointed at all the name calling in this thread - what is wrong with people wanting all the facts? In 'Manufacturing Consent', Noam Chomsky defines 'conspiracy theory' as - "a term that's used to discourage institutional analysis." Maybe we should all be 'conspiracy theorists' to the extent that we demand the whole truth from our government? Don't we have the right to it?
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
THERE IS NOTHING TO SUGGEST A NEED TO WASTE TIME AND MONEY ON A PUBLIC ENQUIRY INTO WHAT HAPPENED
Some like badger kitten want a more open analysis of what went right and what went wrong in terms of the disaster management procedures, but there is nothing at all to justify an enquiry into what exactly did happen which is what zARK and Prole seem to want.
Some like badger kitten want a more open analysis of what went right and what went wrong in terms of the disaster management procedures, but there is nothing at all to justify an enquiry into what exactly did happen which is what zARK and Prole seem to want.
An Inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005?
If The State will go to such great lengths to prevent an inquiry into one brutal killing 16 years ago, it may be sensible to consider to what lengths the state will go to prevent further inquiry into the brutal murders of 56 in London on July 7th 2005.
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGEUR450102005?open&of=ENG-317
If The State will go to such great lengths to prevent an inquiry into one brutal killing 16 years ago, it may be sensible to consider to what lengths the state will go to prevent further inquiry into the brutal murders of 56 in London on July 7th 2005.
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
Christ on a cross, this is beyond a joke now.Prole said:
Everybody seems to be having fun shitting on Prole no matter what she says ...
You mean in the Guardian? Yeah, I noticed that too. It's a shame really because she could have pointed out that there is only one source (the thameslink employee - assuming the email is real) for the cancellation claim. Oh well.Prole said:
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
What a complete waste of time you are.Prole said:
I have the emails, with headers. Also independently verified by Nafeez Mosaaddeq Ahmed in his new book:TAE said:
The London Bombings An Independent Inquiry
http://www.independentinquiry.co.uk/
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
No proof, just an assertion.Prole said:
No attempt to adress the points i laid out earlier.
What an utter waste of time this thread is.
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
No because otherwise the shit that is spouted gets free reign.zArk said:
If we're messing about with quotes:
"All it takes for evil to prosper is for good men to do nothing"
(Again no attempt to counter the points i so consideratly numbered for you)
Similar threads
- Locked
