The 7/7 Report

[editor]

There are some of us left. So no, I'm not middle-class. although I'd guess the majority of you are.

Ah great. So it's a class issue now, yes?

And I suppose that your hippy dippy, astrology-loving, Princess Di-celebrating, crop circle admirin' '"independent researcher" is the salt of the earth gawd blimey guvnor working class lad, yes?

But why do you think the "majority" of people here are "middle class" please? What are you basing this on?

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

But why do you think the "majority" of people here are "middle class" please? What are you basing this on?

it's the posh accent's and the way we know which fork to use, clearly...

 

[Prole]

Ah great. So it's a class issue now, yes?

And I suppose that your hippy dippy, astrology-loving, Princess Di-celebrating, crop circle admirin' '"independent researcher" is the salt of the earth gawd blimey guvnor working class lad, yes?

But why do you think the "majority" of people here are "middle class" please? What are you basing this on?

Becuase I believe that the way the evidence & the government are viewed also include class. The middle-classes have more at stake and hence more to lose. Therefore it is incumbent on you to want to believe the 'official report'. The working class have always known what governments are like and whose interests they serve, and how every small victory whether in wages or conditions has been gained through their own blood sweat and tears. They also do not have to ride on the backs of anyone.

I have more in common with a Muslim worker living in Beeston than I do with the likes of many of you. These are called class interests. They still exist y'know.

 

[TAE]

Where is the electronic version with all the audit trail stuff?

What are you talking about? It's got the full email header. What else were you expecting?

 

[Prole]

That's just a transcript. Anyone could put that together. Where is the electronic version with all the audit trail stuff?

Anyway, if you claim to have published everything needed to verify it as genuine, won't you reveal the findings of the independent expert who has already done so?

It's not me who's saying "Look, look, this is genuine". It's you. YOU are trying to convince ME. So go ahead. Don't expect me to.

And anyway, why should I harass Chris Hudson (my first move would be establish (a) does Cris Hudson exist; (b) whether the e-mail was sent as claimed; (c) whether the reproduced data is accurate and, if so, (d) more detail about where HE got it from - what sources, how they operate, any info. re reliability of data, etc.) if someone already has and I can just review their work?

Check out Nafeez Ahmed's book where it is verified with Marie Bernes of Thameslnk

http://nafeez.blogspot.com/

 

[kyser_soze]

The middle-classes have more at stake and hence more to lose.

But...aren't some of the families of the dead describably as 'middle class'? Surely they want to know 'the truth' as well?

I have more in common with a Muslim worker living in Beeston than I do with the likes of many of you.

HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA.

 

[jæd]

Hasib's own father has said he has been shown no evidence. The videos do not make the claim that they carried out these atrocities though. CCTV, well if only!

Oh, so have you asked Hasib father where his son is...? He hasn't been seen since last year...

There's CCTV footage of the bombers at various points in the journey from Luton to Kings Cross...

Fourth, the language he uses is that of the dedicated al-Qaeda fighter. He calls himself a soldier and speaks about his religious and political motives. His religious motive is seen in a passage that ends: "I ask you to make du'a [a supplication] to Allah Almighty to accept the work from me and my brothers and enter us into gardens of paradise."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4208250.stm

What do you make of this then, Going to Kew Gardens, was he...? To look at the roses...?

No further explanation of what these explosives were, just baseless and incredible supposition that they may have been for 'self-defence'. Now that is novel, a suicide-bomber requiring self-defence?

Um... How can it be more than supposition...? Going to ask one of the suicide bombers what is was for...? Unless someone wrote "This is for self defence, signed Suicide Bomber 1" on it it will always be a best-guess...

 

[editor]

Becuase I believe that the way the evidence & the government are viewed also include class. The middle-classes have more at stake and hence more to lose. Therefore it is incumbent on you to want to believe the 'official report'.

Exactly how do you know my class background?

Is this another example of your amazing 'research' in action?

Back it up now please.

 

[Prole]

jaed:
There's CCTV footage of the bombers at various points in the journey from Luton to Kings Cross...

Is there, because the public have only ever been shown one image, outside Luton, 30 miles from London of the 4 together. Only 1 of the 4 faces is even identifiable as a face, let alone evidence that they then travelled to London.

If the cctv sequence from Luton & London were released, and I see no argument for them not being released, then this will surely decide their guilt? Until then, we cannot categorically state that these men are guilty of these atrocities.

 

[Prole]

Exactly how do you know my class background?

Is this another example of your amazing 'research' in action?

Back it up now please.

I guessed.

 

[jæd]

Is there, because the public have only ever been shown one image, outside Luton, 30 miles from London of the 4 together. Only 1 of the 4 faces is even identifiable as a face, let alone evidence that they then travelled to London.

Strange. This BBC article references at least *two* pieces of cctv footage released.

Hussain was initially captured by CCTV footage at 0720 BST setting off from Luton station. ... At 0826 BST, the four, all wearing rucksacks, are pictured together at King's Cross before splitting up.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4685825.stm

If the cctv sequence from Luton & London were released, and I see no argument for them not being released, then this will surely decide their guilt? Until then, we cannot categorically state that these men are guilty of these atrocities.

So... You would decide someones guilt soley on the fact that they were travelling together, looking foreign and wearing backpacks. I'm glad that the police, etc, have decided on the fours guilt based on (a) dna & personal effects at the explosion sites (b) having explosives in their car (c) coming from an explosives factory (d) the bombers being in videos linked to a terrorist organisation *and* (e) being seen on cctv with backpacks

Whose "evidence" is looking shaky now...?

 

[jæd]

And Prole, you never answered my question about which other Bulletin Boards you posted on... You know, the bulletin boards who don't give you a hard time. Are you posting all your evidence and links to independent researchers on there...?

 

[Prole]

Strange. This BBC article references at least *two* pieces of cctv footage released.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4685825.stm



So... You would decide someones guilt soley on the fact that they were travelling together, looking foreign and wearing backpacks. I'm glad that the police, etc, have decided on the fours guilt based on (a) dna & personal effects at the explosion sites (b) having explosives in their car (c) coming from an explosives factory (d) the bombers being in videos linked to a terrorist organisation *and* (e) being seen on cctv with backpacks

Whose "evidence" is looking shaky now...?

Surely you have first to prove that they were actually AT the scene of the crime? There has only ever been one image as I said released, why is this?

How do we know that the 'bomb factory' wasn't to make the unidentified explosives found in the car?

How does the official report explain that Khan's property was found at the scene of 3 of these explosions?

WHY only one image of the 4?

Why no further arrests? There were 43 detained after 21/7 and 17 awaiting trial, all for no-bombs bombers who killed or injured precisely no one. Yet 12 months later not one person has been arrested or awaits trial for the 7/7 - no trial, no public inquiry ergo no evidence in the public domain. Interesting.

 

[Prole]

And Prole, you never answered my question about which other Bulletin Boards you posted on... You know, the bulletin boards who don't give you a hard time. Are you posting all your evidence and links to independent researchers on there...?

Where else do you post jaed?

Interestingly, BK has always arrived at the places I post on, so no, I don't get an easy time!

 

[jæd]

Surely you have first to prove that they were actually AT the scene of the crime? There has only ever been one image as I said released, why is this?

There has been dna evidence and personal effects retreived from the bomb sites...

How do we know that the 'bomb factory' wasn't to make the unidentified explosives found in the car?

No-one has ever questioned this... Please provide a link that shows that the explosives in the rucksacks and the explosives in the car were different.

How does the official report explain that Khan's property was found at the scene of 3 of these explosions?

Link, please that states this...

WHY only one image of the 4?

Where is your evidence that states there is only one image...? Just because it hasn't been released doesn't mean it isn't there...

 

[jæd]

Where else do you post jaed?

Ho-hum... I'm asking where you post up your conspiracy theories... Either post the forums or I will take you don't post anywhere else...

 

[Prole]

Ho-hum... I'm asking where you post up your conspiracy theories... Either post the forums or I will take you don't post anywhere else...

I don't have conspiracy theories though. And I am asking you to tell me where else you post, thanks.

here's one:

http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh/index.php?act=idx

 

[jæd]

I don't have conspiracy theories though. And I am asking you to tell me where else you post, thanks.

here's one:

http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh/index.php?act=idx

For the *third* time of asking... Prole, which *credible* web forums do you post your theories on...?

Personally, I do not post any conspiracy theories on any web based forums.

 

[Prole]

There has been dna evidence and personal effects retreived from the bomb sites...



No-one has ever questioned this... Please provide a link that shows that the explosives in the rucksacks and the explosives in the car were different.



Link, please that states this...



Where is your evidence that states there is only one image...? Just because it hasn't been released doesn't mean it isn't there...

Sorry I don't have time to link to each page of the official report, but page 3 describes the explosives in the car (the images are on the BBC website and were released by ABC news) I also quoted directly from the report. Check for yourself. After all that is the purpose of this thread, rather than conducting a witch hunt against me, check the report that the PTB consider will suffice as explanation & evidence.

The report that was issued in refusal of a public inquiry, a report that has an unnamed author (and you ask me to provide names!) and is based on the police, intelligence and security services investigation. It claims to provide as full a picture as it is possible to at this stage...

 

[Prole]

For the *third* time of asking... Prole, which *credible* web forums do you post your theories on...?

Personally, I do not post any conspiracy theories on any web based forums.

Who decides what is credible? You? It's often that arrogance that is the dead give away.

 

[JHE]

Who decides what is credible? You? It's often that arrogance that is the dead give away.

Gawd... it's like Quasimodo accusing someone else of ugliness!

 

[editor]

I guessed.

Best apologise for getting it wrong then.

Now, if you please.

I know that throwing around unfounded accusations based on nothing more than personal prejudice and loonspud wishful thinking is the modus operandi of people like you, but I'll be fucked if I'm going to let you post up inaccurate personal comments about me, thanks very much.

 

[jæd]

Who decides what is credible? You? It's often that arrogance that is the dead give away.

Look, this is interesting... Your personal profile links to the blog "http://www.bridgetdunnes.blogspot.com/" . And if I go to the forum you mention, I find the sub-forum "Bridget Dunne's Discussion Forum". And there are 13 (of 15) topics started by "Bridget".

Does that sound like an exciting, independent bulletin with lots of members with a high level of debate...? Ie, credible.

For the *fourth* time of asking... Which other, credible, independent forums do you post on...?

 

[KeyboardJockey]

Prole, I looked at the July 7th site that you put up as a link and quite frankly it is full of shit.

As well as the mainstream news orgs referenced there is an awful lot of cack. Can't you see tht if you make a big thing about evidence free fruitloop sites like Prison Planet then it will pull down how credible the other informaton is.

There is a need to debate J7 but referencing PP and info wars etc is not credible and to be honest laughable.

 

[jæd]

Sorry I don't have time to link to each page of the official report, but page 3 describes the explosives in the car (the images are on the BBC website and were released by ABC news) I also quoted directly from the report. Check for yourself. After all that is the purpose of this thread, rather than conducting a witch hunt against me, check the report that the PTB consider will suffice as explanation & evidence.

The report that was issued in refusal of a public inquiry, a report that has an unnamed author (and you ask me to provide names!) and is based on the police, intelligence and security services investigation. It claims to provide as full a picture as it is possible to at this stage...

One car contained explosive devices of a different and smaller kind from those in the rucksacks.

This details the kind of device that the car contains vs the rucksacks, not the type of the actual explosive. Interestingly, from a quick read of the Narrative, I see references to various pieces of CCTV footage, at 06.49, 07.21 and at 08.23 which show all four of them together...

 

[jæd]

So... Prole, please, for the second time of asking, please post a link that shows the explosive devices in the car where not of the same type of explosive made in the bomb factory....

 

[detective-boy]

it's the posh accent's and the way we know which fork to use, clearly...

... the 'orf one, you mean?

 

[aylee]

I guessed.

Conspiraloon in shock admission of source of knowledge!

 

[detective-boy]

What are you talking about? It's got the full email header. What else were you expecting?

Anyone can type up something like that. It is words on a bit of paper.

What it isn't is an electronic entity - a bit of digital memory, a file which has all sorts of stuff (don't ask me what, I just ask an expert if I want to know) which tells more or less about it's history.

It's like if you typed a document on word. What the transcript is is just the words on a page. But the electronic entity, the digital file, presenting the words on the screen, would also enable you to click into the "properties" bit and get basic information (dated created, last edited, etc.) and if you knew what you were doing, and dependant upon the set up, maybe much more.

 

[detective-boy]

Check out Nafeez Ahmed's book where it is verified with Marie Bernes of Thameslnk

There does not appear to be any mention of any verification (in fact there does not appear to be any mention of the e-mail at all) in the link.

And I have no intention of being conned into buying a book to find out the truth. Remember, I don't doubt what happened. You do. YOU are trying to convince ME.