The 7/7 Report

[editor]

And unsurprisingly she has scarpered. Why she even bothers coming on here I do not know. It's not as if she gets many converts. Though there was zArk, I suppose.

Thing is, I've still got an open mind on these emails.

Maybe they were sent from Hudson at Thameslink (who could have just got his facts wrong, cocked up or not bothered properly checking - or they've been fiddled about with), but if she's going to make bold claims about them being "sent to an independent researcher and verified by another independent researcher," I want to see who these people are and I want to see their methods and qualifications.

It's hilarious to note that when 'truth-seekers' are challenged to produce the kind of evidence that they demand off others to back up their claims, they squirm, they wriggle, and they act like shifty fuckers with something to hide.

So, how about you lead by example and finally name these people, Prole? I've asked over 20 times now.

If you refuse to back up your own claims any longer, I can only conclude that you are a liar - and I'm sure that won't do your reputation amongst the truth seeking cognoscenti - or your entire campaign - much good at all.

Release the evidence or be branded a liar!

 

[Prole]

Thing is, I've still got an open mind on these emails.

Maybe they were sent from Hudson at Thameslink (who could have just got his facts wrong, cocked up or not bothered properly checking - or they've been fiddled about with), but if she's going to make bold claims about them being "sent to an independent researcher and verified by another independent researcher," I want to see who these people are and I want to see their methods and qualifications.

It's hilarious to note that when 'truth-seekers' are challenged to produce the kind of evidence that they demand off others to back up their claims, they squirm, they wriggle, and they act like shifty fuckers with something to hide.

So, how about you lead by example and finally name these people, Prole? I've asked over 20 times now.

If you refuse to back up your own claims any longer, I can only conclude that you are a liar - and I'm sure that won't do your reputation amongst the truth seeking cognoscenti - or your entire campaign - much good at all.

Release the evidence or be branded a liar!

i don't care what you brand me or my 'reputation', I cannot give you names because it is not my right to do so, I post here in a personal capacity as Prole not as the J7 Truth Campaign. Is that allowed. I don't come here to give evidence, it is not a court, although often feels like a trial.

What did you think of poor Mr Hussain having seen no evidence of his son's involvement? Now that is something worth discussing.

 

[jæd]

i don't care what you brand me or my 'reputation', I cannot give you names because it is not my right to do so, I post here in a personal capacity as Prole not as the J7 Truth Campaign. Is that allowed. I don't come here to give evidence, it is not a court, although often feels like a trial.

So... You have evidence but you can't show it to us...? You can't even send to the Editor on anyone else in a Private Message...? Can you not even post it on your "Truth" Campaign board...?

So... I call "BULLSHIT" on your theories. Either post your evidence somewhere, PM'it, of give us a link... Either that or be branded a bullshitting fruitloop-loony consiparaloon by all and sundry on this board..!

What did you think of poor Mr Hussain having seen no evidence of his son's involvement? Now that is something worth discussing.

You are pathetic...!

 

[Prole]

Mr Hussain told Mr Ali. "Every day we are ... in the dark, not understanding what has happened and why we are in the dark, looking for answers."

Independent

 

[JHE]

I think it must have been somebody else on the bus.

Do you agree with him, Prole?

 

[editor]

i don't care what you brand me or my 'reputation', I cannot give you names because it is not my right to do so,

Right. So it's all a secret, is it?

I don't suppose the deep, deep irony of a self-declared "truth seeker" such as yourself refusing point blank to produce important evidence when asked registers with you, does it?

On the one hand you're demanding that the evidence be "released" and a full open independent enquiry set up, while you keep the sources for your claims a big hush-hush secret.

Do you know what I think? I think you made it up.

I suspect that the two supposed 'independent researchers' are none other than the highly partisan Princess Di swoonin' astrologist and the UFO-loving conspiraloon charity charlatan with the talking terrier - and you're simply too fucking dishonest to admit it.

But I challenge you once again to prove me wrong. Show me the evidence!

 

[A Dashing Blade]

. . .
The Hussain family were never allowed to identify their son before burial either.

Wouldn't have thought there was much to identify. But never let Occam's Razor stand in the way of a good conspiracy eh Prole?

 

[editor]

The Hussain family were never allowed to identify their son before burial either.

Still waiting for a source for this please.

 

[jæd]

So... You have evidence but you can't show it to us...? You can't even send to the Editor on anyone else in a Private Message...? Can you not even post it on your "Truth" Campaign board...?

So... I call "BULLSHIT" on your theories. Either post your evidence somewhere, PM'it, of give us a link... Either that or be branded a bullshitting fruitloop-loony consiparaloon by all and sundry on this board..!

Got an answer for this...?

The Hussains' struggle to accept that Hasib blew up the bus has been compounded by telephone conversations they have had in the past 12 months with conspiracy theorists who claim the London attacks were a "black psy-ops" mission organised by the security services to test London's defences, or to foment anti-Muslim feeling.

Been spreading your bullshit far-and-wide have...? You and your kind are miserable excuses for human beings, Prole...! Do you realise that you are probably more responsible for 7/7 attacks (or any future ones) than Blair is...?

 

[squeegee]

Been spreading your bullshit far-and-wide have...? You and your kind are miserable excuses for human beings, Prole...! Do you realise that you are probably more responsible for 7/7 attacks (or any future ones) than Blair is...?

Outrageous Utter bollocks as well. What do you say to Muslim youth (and adults for that matter) who openly discuss conspiracy and confuse genuine concerns with wild disinformation? The more the mainstream stonewall, the more these theories foment and get mixed in so no one knows what the fuck's going on. I wonder who that benefits?

Do you openly insult them like this? Do you even talk to them? Or are the Muslims you talk to all level-headed people who, like you, believe that the gov fucks up but is genuinely trying its best and working with intelligence services who have never done anything underhand and never would do?

Or do you think that all the suspicious stuff is the intelligence working on our behalf and we should all just keep schtum and let them do their job.

Careless talk costs lives, eh

I don't really believe you believe this. But that's how it looks on this thread. You slip and slide like a slippy-slidy thing and never deal with the bigger picture always side-tracking the argument in bold statements to try and hide the fact that your questions are rarely on message and often irrelevant to the argument.

 

[editor]

Careless talk costs lives, eh

Talking of which, what do you think of Prole's 'verified email' claims?

Do you believe them, and if so, why?

 

[jæd]

Outrageous Utter bollocks as well. What do you say to Muslim youth (and adults for that matter) who openly discuss conspiracy and confuse genuine concerns with wild disinformation? The more the mainstream stonewall, the more these theories foment and get mixed in so no one knows what the fuck's going on. I wonder who that benefits?

So are you agreeing with me or not about conspiraloons fueling terrorism...?

 

[Prole]

Talking of which, what do you think of Prole's 'verified email' claims?

Do you believe them, and if so, why?

I posted the email verifying the info on the website and it was taken down I couldn't pm it because it was too large for this facility.

I have nothing to prove. I have never been a self-declared truthseeker. i just have a heart and I believe a good soul, which I suspect many of you on here, despite the abuse, realise.

"But we are decent people. I worked hard all my life. Please, please, please don't say it's something to do with me, or that I knew, my son knew, my wife knew. We are very, very decent people. I think it must have been somebody else on the bus. Not Hasib. He was a good boy. There's not a shred of evidence that he was involved in it.

I admire the Hussain family's courage, they are right to not accept what their hearts tell them is not true. They have seen no evidence, we have seen no evidence.
Was 1930's Germany a similar place to live I wonder? Or Stalinist Russia?

 

[Prole]

I am after a smart inquiry, last time I looked I wasn't campaigning to repeal the Inquiries Act 2005, even though I disagree with it, because you have to work with what is currently possible according to the laws of the land.

Is this the view of KCU and other survivor's and bereaved families, or are you expressing a personal view when you state that: I am after a smart inquiry?

 

[JHE]

I admire the Hussain family's courage, they are right to not accept what their hearts tell them is not true. They have seen no evidence, we have seen no evidence.

Yeah, it was just an amazing fuckin' co-incidence that he and his 'slamist chums were in exactly the places where the fuckin' bombs went off.

Or...if not mere co-incidence: It must have been a pixie plot to discredit peace-loving 'slamists who were just innocently carrying bombs on London Transport.

 

[Prole]

Yeah, it was just an amazing fuckin' co-incidence that he and his 'slamist chums were in exactly the places where the fuckin' bombs went off.

Or...if not mere co-incidence: It must have been a pixie plot to discredit peace-loving 'slamists who were just innocently carrying bombs on London Transport.

Hussain was apparantly on a bus although the only eye-witness, Richard Jones, described someone who didn't fit Hasib's description, although this is quoted in the official report as evidence.

Imagine yourself as a Muslim father whose son has been portrayed around the world as a heinous murderer, who has been shown no evidence? I can't imagine how utterly terrible that must be for this family.

If there is evidence that Hasib has committed this crime then it should be shown to his family, the public and to a fully Independent Public Inquiry, only then can anyone decide Hasib's guilt.

 

[editor]

I posted the email verifying the info on the website and it was taken down I couldn't pm it because it was too large for this facility.

You claimed that the emails had been "verified" by two "independent researchers".

Was that a big fat stinking lie, then?

I note you've just dreamt up a brand new excuse that the email was "too large" to be sent by PM. I'm not quite sure how that is possible because the emails I've seen have been short, but it's rather strange that it's taken you over a week to mention this fact.

But no matter - feel free to email it to me at mike = at = urban75.com.

But first I'd like you to name these "independent researchers," please. I can't think of any reason why "independent researchers" would want their identity to remain secret, so please name them now.

 

[editor]

Imagine yourself as a Muslim father whose son has been portrayed around the world as a heinous murderer, who has been shown no evidence? I can't imagine how utterly terrible that must be for this family.

What do you think of those cunts ringing up the family spinning out fact-free yarns that their son was supposedly involved in a false flag operation with no evidence?

I can't imagine how utterly terrible it must be for this family to be given false hope by fruitloops bothering them with evidence-untroubled stories.

What do you think, Prole?

 

[TAE]

But no matter - feel free to email it to me at mike = at = urban75.com.

Prole, if I may suggest - you can 'attach' the thameslink email to the email you send to editor, that way all the header info will stay intact.

 

[editor]

Prole, if I may suggest - you can 'attach' the thameslink email to the email you send to editor, that way all the header info will stay intact.

Thing is, an email sent as a text document could be forged so easily as to render the thing totally meaningless unless it's been properly verified by a suitably qualified third party.

It's a piece of piss to forge email headers or to change the content.

But seeing as Prole assured me that the emails were "sent to an independent researcher and verified by another independent researcher," I want to know who these people were, what their qualifications are and how they 'verified' the emails.

Without that, the emails are meaningless and only a complete fucking idiot would base a conspiracy theory around unchecked, unverified, easily forged emails, wouldn't you say?

 

[jæd]

Hussain was apparantly on a bus although the only eye-witness, Richard Jones, described someone who didn't fit Hasib's description, although this is quoted in the official report as evidence.

Please provide a link or any another evidence of...

Imagine yourself as a Muslim father whose son has been portrayed around the world as a heinous murderer, who has been shown no evidence? I can't imagine how utterly terrible that must be for this family.

And where's *your* evidence...?

If there is evidence that Hasib has committed this crime then it should be shown to his family, the public and to a fully Independent Public Inquiry, only then can anyone decide Hasib's guilt.

What about the big explosion, the fact he was seen wearing a backpack and travellelled in a car (later found to have explosives in it) from an explosive factory you fruitloop moron...? You don't bother about evidence, so why should we you inane nutjob...?

 

[squeegee]

So are you agreeing with me or not about conspiraloons fueling terrorism...?

Nice general statement. Like you can lump every doubt, suspicion and search for truth under "conspiraloon". The only thing that fuels terrorism is a misguided belief that violence is the only solution to the barely masked imperialism meted out by our western governments on the rest of the world.

And that misguided belief is shared by western governments who meet violence with violence and continue the cycle of madness.

Editor, as I have said I have not checked out the origins of the quotes that Prole is mentioning (apologies Prole, no slight on you as i know your concerns are genuine, but i use up enough energy trying to work out the editor's motives for continually stonewalling so don't feel the need to follow all the links to establish veracity just because the editor demands i do. Life's too short - but as for the suggestion that to deny parents access to see their son is because it would have been too gruesome, surely that's the parents' choice.)

Anyway, I have seen no evidence to show these four alleged bombers are guilty. So from my point of view they are innocent until proven guilty.

Don't you agree with that Ed? Innocent until proven guilty. The cornerstone of our legal system, that you cast aside when it suits you to avoid addressing the issues and questions raised on this thread.

Innocent until proven guilty. Where's the proof?

 

[editor]

Anyway, I have seen no evidence to show these four alleged bombers are guilty. So from my point of view they are innocent until proven guilty.

So you think there's no evidence linking the four bombers with the events of 7/7 at all, yes?

And I'm surprised to see you claim that you haven't bothered to "check out the origins of the quotes that Prole is mentioning" seeing as they're supposedly a major piece of evidence.

So why are you ignoring such an important point?

 

[jæd]

Innocent until proven guilty. Where's the proof?

Thats what we're asking Prole for. She hasn't got any -- have you...?

 

[laptop]

they are right to not accept what their hearts tell them is not true.

You really don't give a flying fuck about the truth, do you?

You're reduced to arguing people's "right" to believe any crap they choose.

And you are defending those conspiraloons who've been preying on the family to feed their own sense of self-importance?

Cunts, the lot of them.

 

[editor]

Breaking news now:

A video allegedly showing London bomber Shehzad Tanweer has been aired on al-Jazeera television.

He says, in a Yorkshire accent: "What have you witnessed now is only the beginning of a string of attacks that will continue and become stronger."

The attacks will continue "until you pull your forces out of Afghanistan and Iraq", he says.

BBC correspondent Frank Gardner, who has seen the video, said it appeared to be genuine.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5154714.stm

 

[squeegee]

Thats what we're asking Prole for. She hasn't got any -- have you...?

You ask Prole to show evidence that the bombers are innocent yet you are willing to accept evidence that they are guilty simply because an official, whether police, government or "experts" that you choose say they are.

Do you not see the paucity of your argument? You have a lot of faith in humanity. That's admirable. But perhaps it's better to be a little more realistic, don't you think?

You and others here are assuming that the four bombers are guilty because a few journalists write about them as if they are. That trashes all over the "innocent until proven guilty" dictum. Are you happy to trash the cornerstone of our legal system?

You agree we cannot know with any certainty whether they are guilty or not, don't you?

 

[squeegee]

BBC correspondent Frank Gardner, who has seen the video, said it appeared to be genuine.

Utterly laughable

It appeared to be genuine? How did he substantiate that solid evidence-based statement? You undermine your whole argument.

 

[brixtonvilla]

That's right, shoot the messenger. Don't comment on the actual video itself, just blame the media as usual. More fucking wriggling...

 

[jæd]

You ask Prole to show evidence that the bombers are innocent yet you are willing to accept evidence that they are guilty simply because an official, whether police, government or "experts" that you choose say they are.

Do you not see the paucity of your argument? You have a lot of faith in humanity. That's admirable. But perhaps it's better to be a little more realistic, don't you think?

You and others here are assuming that the four bombers are guilty because a few journalists write about them as if they are. That trashes all over the "innocent until proven guilty" dictum. Are you happy to trash the cornerstone of our legal system?

You agree we cannot know with any certainty whether they are guilty or not, don't you?

Ok... So if only a "few" journalists have write about the "bombers" being guilty can you show me all of the links I've been missing over the last year. So far all the news reports I've read have been in the majority. Oh, and there's now a tape by one of the bombers available saying there will be more bombs coming our way... You're not very good at this are you...?