The 7/7 Report

[Jazzz]

BB was referring to post #235 (too kind!)

 

[Jazzz]

So you're accepting Jazz "magician" analogy - which implies (again by analogy with the trick) that the bombers were already in London, and that their apparent presence in Luton was misdirection?

You are misinterpreting the analogy which was simply made to counter yours and show that things may not be what they seem at all.

 

[ZAMB]

Witnesses are notoriously poor Editor, that is a well known fact, 10 people seeing the same event will give wildly different accounts of what happened.

The reasons for doubting his word is perhaps because he was involved in a massive traumatic event and while he may believe totally what he says, that doesn't particularly mean that his version of what happened is accurate. If he was told this guy set off a bomb, perhaps his mind is filling in gaps, perhaps he looked at this guy and then a bomb went off, and his mind fills in the gaps that make it seem to him that this guy set off the bomb.

Do you remember the day that Brazilian boy was murdered by the security forces on the tube. We were given all sorts of 'eye-witness' stuff that later proved to be completely untrue. I don't remember it all, but there was something about a heavy jacket, jumping the turnstile, wires hanging underneath his jacket etc. which was all supposedly from eye-witnesses and proved to be a load of BS. And this was from people who hadn't been blown up, operated on etc. I'm not saying I believe the conspiracy theories - I'm saying that evenually there'll come a time when people will demand a proper more independent inquiry.
Remember what happened here with Bloody Sunday - the government issued a report which was unacceptable to the people here - and eventally, years later, had to open a new enquiry at much greater expense than if it had been done right the first time.

 

[TAE]

I'm not asking for speculation.

I'm simply asking for a credible means that the bombers could have physically got to London within that time frame that morning.

If you can't think of any possible human means (I certainly can't), that's fine.

How about: It wasn't them in the photo?

 

[Badger Kitten]

Oh FFS, I and many other families and survivors ARE calling for an independent enquiry, and have been for months, and finally we are all over the papers and media saying it, hooray. Our calls are being heard. I've even got the Sun to run my petition ffor one. But our case is not helped by the hi-jacking of our case by conspiraloons, which means we run the risk of being tarred with the same brush,

so. mindful of this, I have done my damndest to counter this....


WHICH IS THE ONLY REASON WHY i HAVE ENGAGED WITH THESE FUCKWITS FOR THE LAST 10 MONTHS, preparing for this time and to counter the argument '' oh, the only people who want an enquiry are conspiracy theorists''.

I considered it my tiresome duty, it involves being trolled and harrassed and called a shill, a liar and a team of M15 agents, but it is worth it if it seperates the genuine and sensible demands for answers and learnings from 7/7, from these paranoic apologists for mass-murderers, who I find deeply, deeply offensive. At least nobody can say '' oh, the woman who started the petition for a public enquiry, she is a conspiracy theorist''. And thank god for that.


Anyway, independent enquiry, bring it on.

WE're getting there, the pressure is mounting....

 

[TAE]

So you're accepting Jazz "magician" analogy - which implies (again by analogy with the trick) that the bombers were already in London, and that their apparent presence in Luton was misdirection?

Not misdirection, just that the people in the CCTV image at Luton were wrongly identified. Need not be a conspiracy.

As I said earlier, I think it was them and that they caught an earlier train which was running late.

I would find it very disappointing if the narrative was indeed full of inaccuracies, but given that the covering letter to the PM states the attacks took place in 2006, what can you expect these days?

 

[Greebozz]

I am very worried about what this thread actually means, in terms of the bigger picture. I feel Prole and Jazzz's posts will be music to the ears of radicalized Islam. Those in the Islamic community, instead of having to face the difficult issue of extreme teachers influencing and radicalizing the young, would probably love to believe and probably many do believe the theory you both are promoting.

I assumed that you were a Muslim because during a Muslim conference one of the Mullahs cast doubt that those accused had actuary blow up the trains. I assumed it was due to a lack of understanding of forensic science. No disrespect, but a Teacher coming direct from rural Pakistan my not fully understand modern investigative procedures.

And finally I think the reason you have both met such hostility is because your theory is very offensive indeed. It is like saying that the Jews gassed themselves to make the Nazis look bad. Your theory is not only offensive but dangerous as well.

No one is blinkered but buy God, to make the claim you have, you had better have some very good evidence, and motive, to back up your theories. There is a reason why people are not believing you both, trust their judgment.

 

[detective-boy]

Unless I am much mistaken you voiced significant doubts about the official story.

You have no trouble holding that position and attacking 'conspiraloons' at the same time because you are a hypocrite.

Why are having "significant doubts about the official story" and "attacking conspiraloons" mutually exclusive?

To take Prole's approach to events of 7 July as an example, you could, quite easily, have significant doubts about the precise details of the train caught by the bombers in Luton and it's respective departure, journey and arrival times ... but that does NOT necessarily mean that you have to immediately subsribe to the view that the therefore could not have done it.

Even if, on examining the actual source data, there are some ACTUAL inconsistencies, there are any number of alternative explanations for them which would NOT lead you anywhere near the conspiracy theory constructed.

I am increasingly convinced that there is a wiring problem in the brains of the (relatively few) people who construct and support theories in this way.

 

[Badger Kitten]

Conspiracy theories are meat and drink to those who want to act as apologists for mass-murderers. Whcih is why I find Prole and her ilk so offensive. If you knew what had gone on in that carriage, you would know the bomb was NOT under the train and that the 4 bombers were NOT innocent. They sought 'martyrdom' and were careful, especially in Khan's case, to identify themselves. They were mass murderers and people who say they never did it are enormously, grossly offensive to me, like Holocaust-deniers.

 

[detective-boy]

Go on - somebody ask me for the 'Primary Source' on that.

I don't understand why would be at all surprised if someone did. It is a basic rule of investigative theory that you check the reliability of your facts before you build them into some theory of what happened or why. Before you know the reliability of your facts any theory based upon them can only be speculative.

Your approach is, sadly, increasingly used by the media, albeit on a smaller scale as it were. I am referring to things such as the fairly regular "EU bans bent bananas" type stories. Things worthy of comment, criticism and ridicule indeed ... until you check the facts and find that the EU have not, actually, done any such thing.

 

[Fong]

Laptop and Editor,

You both seem to be arguing a very ass about face debate here.

You want to force Prole to speculate on something that they couldn't possibly know, then no doubt lambast them for speculation.

Prole has not said he knows how they got to London, he has merely stated that they could not have caught the 7.40 train that was cancelled and therefore couldn't be in London by 8.23 as specified.

Now Prole doesn't want to speculate, but I will quite happily for you if you MUST know how they could have got to London.

They caught the 7.58 train and arrived in London at 8.40, far too late to catch the underground trains.

There I have speculated, no great conspiracy, no teleportation devices, no magic time travel machines involved, just pure speculation that if they didn't get a cancelled train they got to London on a different one.

To put it into perspective.

If the information that the 7.30 train was cancelled is true, which I don't know. The onus is NOT on Prole to provide information on how they could have got to London.

The onus is on the authorities to explain how they got to London in time to catch the Underground trains.

Forcing Prole to answer a question that they couldn't possibly have an answer for, just because they point out an error with a cancelled train is madness.

It is like asking Copernicus how the universe was created because he notes that the planets don't circle the earth.

Just because he can see that the Planets don't circle the earth, doesn't mean that all of a sudden he has the entire knowledge of the universe at his fingertips.

 

[detective-boy]

All I know is that the official report has them on the 7.40 train that was cancelled.

No. The official report has them on a train which left Luton at 7.40am.

And, so far as most people are concerned, there is sufficient evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that they were the bombers and that, broadly speaking, the account of their journey is accurate.

You will stand absolutely NO chance of persuading any significant number of people to your cause with such leaps of logic and with such bizarre and (entirely) unevidenced alternative theories.

There ARE holes and inadequacies in the official narrative. It is not as complete as it could have been. It is, in my professional opinion, a far, far too brief summary of what is undoubtedly a huge mountain of evidence. All you will do with your stance is make it LESS likely that any sensible calls for additional information will be acceded to.

 

[Fong]

No. The official report has them on a train which left Luton at 7.40am.

And, so far as most people are concerned, there is sufficient evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that they were the bombers and that, broadly speaking, the account of their journey is accurate.

You will stand absolutely NO chance of persuading any significant number of people to your cause with such leaps of logic and with such bizarre and (entirely) unevidenced alternative theories.

There ARE holes and inadequacies in the official narrative. It is not as complete as it could have been. It is, in my professional opinion, a far, far too brief summary of what is undoubtedly a huge mountain of evidence. All you will do with your stance is make it LESS likely that any sensible calls for additional information will be acceded to.

Aye I have not read the entire thread, and really the ONLY piece of information that is relevent at this stage is:

Was the only train available for them to travel on cancelled.

That is the only piece of information that needs to be proved at this time, because without that, there is no conspiracy at all.

If that can be proved then it raises a lot of other questions, but I have yet to see it as an accepted fact.

 

[detective-boy]

What the fuck has happened to our minds that we need a story - a cohesive narrative that accounts for all known facts and disinformation - before we can point at inconsistencies or disinformation and call them for the shit that they are?

But it is the likes of you who demand from the authorities an inconsistency free, cohesive account ... or else you point to the inconsistencies and shout "Look, this is unexplained!! It's a conspiracy!!" ...

I, and many others, have repeatedly pointed out that life is NOT like that. You rarely, even in simple investigations, tie up every loose end. Some simply cannot be tied up no matter what you do. Other's just aren't worth the time and effort because, in the bigger picture, they are irrelevant.

 

[detective-boy]

You never seen a magician perform the 'bullet catch' laptop?

You see the bullet loaded into the chamber.

Then you see the gun fired.

Then it appears in the magician's mouth!

Of course, as you remark with your analogy, there can't be any other explanation than that the magician has cheated death by catching the screaming projectile with his teeth.

* Makes note to ring defence solicitors for those accused of the murder of Sharon Beshenivsky to make sure they haven't overlooked the fact that she may not, in fact, be dead at all and it is all a conjuring trick ... *

 

[detective-boy]

We were given all sorts of 'eye-witness' stuff that later proved to be completely untrue.

And do you remember who from?

The media. Who are not, by and large, trained in any investigative interview techniques. Who are not, by and large, trained to do anything other than to record whatever anyone says to them. And who, by and large, are simply interested in getting whatever they have on to the screen (entirely regardless of it's reliability, it's impact on victims, the public or any subsequent investigation and prosecution) as soon as possible and certainly before anyone else does ...

Whilst the comments made later by Ian Blair did not raise any questions about the accounts being transmitted, and his actions are, quite rightly, the subject of investigation, do not lose sight of the fact that those accounts were NOT put into the public domain by the police or any official body.

Oh! Too late - you already have done ...

 

[Badger Kitten]

Anyone who uses Thameslink knows that the timetables are all too frequently all over the shop; trains turn up going to London, you get on them, off they go. Whether they are on time, or late trains or early trains doesn't matter, you just get on the next train, and if you miss it, another one comes along between 5 and 10 minutes later. They are on CCTV at 7.21 heading for the Kings X Thameslink. The train leaves at 7.40, and arrives at 8.23. they are caught again on CCTV at 8.26am on the concourse of the Thameslink and heading in the directin of the LU system. ''At around'' 8.30am, 4 men fittting their description are seen 'hugging, happy, even euphoric'. Thery then split up. Wearing rucksacks containing 2-5 kg of explosives, having got out of a car which is full of bombs, having left a flat full of bomb making materials and their fingerprints and DNA all over them.

They then go onto kill themselves, the bombs exploding IN the carriages and on the bus and killing 52 other passengers and injuring 700 people.

Source; Narrative. And at this point I am going to fucking well lose it with you, Bridget.

WILL YOU FUCKING WELL STOP TRYING TO MAKE OUT THEY WERE INNCOCENT DAY TRIPPERS IT IS INDESCRIBABLY OFFENSIVE AND YOU ARE A DELUDED FOOL AND AN APOLOGIST FOR MASS MUDERERS, PROLE. NOW CLEAR OFF AND STOP SPREADING YOUR LIES ALL OVER THE FORUM AND LET PEOPLE DISCUSS THE GENUINE SHORTCOMINGS OF THE NARRATIVE WITHOUT YOUR DRIVEL AND LIES ALL OVER THE BLOODY THREAD.

I have had it with you people. The re are not words to describe the depth of my contempt for your armchair ghouls who give succour to those who would deny murder. Conspiracy theories featured prominently in the radicalisation of these young men; that makes YOU part of the fucking problem as far as I am concerned.

 

[editor]

You both seem to be arguing a very ass about face debate here.

She's making bold claims like "the CCTV pics have been Photoshopped" without any evidence whatsoever to support that claim.

Moreover, her claim that the bombers didn't catch the train means that it would have been physically impossible for them to get to London in time.

So it's entirely reasonable to ask for some kind of alternative as to how they did in fact get to London if she's going to keep on insisting that they didn't catch the train.

And I'm still waiting for an explanation for the relevance of the supposed damning evidence of the white carrier bag and different shades of trousers.

Perhaps you've got an idea about that?

 

[Bernie Gunther]

<snip> do not lose sight of the fact that those accounts were NOT put into the public domain by the police or any official body.<snip>

Do we know that for sure? Or were you only talking about via public statements and the like, rather than 'police sources'?

 

[Bernie Gunther]

<snip> There ARE holes and inadequacies in the official narrative. It is not as complete as it could have been. It is, in my professional opinion, a far, far too brief summary of what is undoubtedly a huge mountain of evidence. All you will do with your stance is make it LESS likely that any sensible calls for additional information will be acceded to.

This is the big problem I have with those people who immediately, whenever this sort of stuff happens, start with the assumption that it must be a "false flag" event and try to prove that. While that's never totally out of the question when the state is sponsoring utterly unaccountable spook activity, it's by no means the only possible or even the likeliest explanation for these inconsistencies and for this wriggling to avoid public scrutiny of their actions.

Supressing evidence of incompetence, as in the case of Mr De Menezes, and further discussion of the Iraq war's role in promoting terrorism is far more likely to be the main issue and there should be real public accountability. Conspiracy theorists provide an undoubtedly welcome distraction from serious attempts to achieve such accountability.

 

[editor]

Supressing evidence of incompetence is far more likely to be the main issue.

Yep. But in the <guffaw> 'truth seeker's' world, any minor anomaly - even if it's coming from a train company renown for sloppy timetabling - can only be explained as being an unravelling strand of a massive, state-sponsored, murderous conspiracy involving vast amounts of 100% loyal co-plotters.

Conspiracy theorists provide an undoubtedly welcome distraction from serious attempts to achieve such accountability.

Nail on the head again, squire!

 

[Bernie Gunther]

<snip> a massive, state-sponsored, murderous conspiracy <snip>

The thing is, we already have one of those in plain sight.

We were taken to war on false pretences and almost everyone knows it.

As a direct consequence, our tube system got blown up and people died.

A few days later state security goons shot to death an innocent Brazilian.

Why go looking for extra-secret mystery stuff to hold the lying bastards accountable for when all of the above is right there in plain sight and not seriously in dispute?

Doing so just makes it easier for the lying bastards to avoid being held accountable for the stuff that we all know they actually did.

 

[jæd]

WILL YOU FUCKING WELL STOP TRYING TO MAKE OUT THEY WERE INNCOCENT DAY TRIPPERS IT IS INDESCRIBABLY OFFENSIVE AND YOU ARE A DELUDED FOOL AND AN APOLOGIST FOR MASS MUDERERS, PROLE. NOW CLEAR OFF AND STOP SPREADING YOUR LIES ALL OVER THE FORUM AND LET PEOPLE DISCUSS THE GENUINE SHORTCOMINGS OF THE NARRATIVE WITHOUT YOUR DRIVEL AND LIES ALL OVER THE BLOODY THREAD.

I have had it with you people. The re are not words to describe the depth of my contempt for your armchair ghouls who give succour to those who would deny murder. Conspiracy theories featured prominently in the radicalisation of these young men; that makes YOU part of the fucking problem as far as I am concerned.

Couldn't put it better than that. Oh, and to add it was a really nice evening in town last night. And if you'd rather spend it arguing that Jul7 7/7 didn't occur I really think Prole & Co really need to get out. And have some kind of treatment. Really...!

Is Prole the one who confronted a group of 7/7 survivors and told them it didn't happen...? How come she wasn't carted off to somewhere that could help her there and then...?

 

[editor]

Why go looking for extra-secret mystery stuff to hold the lying bastards accountable for when all of the above is right there in plain sight and not seriously in dispute?

I think it might be because conspiraloons like to feel important and special, like they're smarter than everyone else with their laughable 'truth seeking' antics.

The real conspiracy is staring them in the fucking face but they're too busy looking at train timetables and scooping up mad shite from bonkers websites.

 

[editor]

Is Prole the one who confronted a group of 7/7 survivors and told them it didn't happen...? How come she wasn't carted off to somewhere that could help her there and then...?

Truth seekers are so right-righteous in their near-religious quest to unearth the 'conspiracy' they so desperately crave that it's deemed OK to try and trash meetings of survivors, personally harass survivors, call them liars, defame them in public, pursue their families etc etc.

Sick fuckers.

 

[jæd]

Truth seekers are so right-righteous in their near-religious quest to unearth the 'conspiracy' they so desperately crave that it's deemed OK to try and trash meetings of survivors, personally harass survivors, call them liars, defame them in public, pursue their families etc etc.

Sick fuckers.

Personally, I had gone through 7/7 a lot closer to the bombs, or had lost people that day, and Prole & Gang turned up I'd'v probably given Prole & Gang a good approximation of what a "pretend, imaginary, not-really-there-at-all" bomb might feel like.

(Btw, not a threat to Prole and Co, as I feel that being in the same room as such fuckwittery might be a bit dangerous to ones health...!)

Sick fuckers -- yep, indeedy...!

 

[Badger Kitten]

This is about Prole's ego, nothing more, she is a deluded middle-aged woman who has got an obsessive hobby, and unfortunately her hobby involves attempting to claim that the mass-murderers of July 7th were innocent. It involves disrupting meetings, telling people that survivor groups ''are a means for people to get their stories straight'' and nit-picking over trivia whilst ignoring the fact that what she does is indescribably , breathtakingly offensive to the bereaved and survivors, whom she has the brass neck to claim she undertakes this ''research'' for. Her crap makes it HARDER for us to get a public enquiry, because thanks to her and her ilk, we can be described as conspiracy theorists and mad people.

Which is why I have spent ten months making it 100% clear that I want NOTHING to do with her poisonous drivel, insinuations, smears and bullshit.

You are damaging the camapign for a public enquiry, you are giving succour to those who seek to excuse mass murder and you are a trolling, bothersome, seemingly unstable pest. If you are ill, get help, if you are sane, then you are malicious and I do not forgive you for what you are doing, to me and to others.

You can't even provide a shred of a credible explanation to explain away the men being in London, carrying bombs, made by themselves, on trains and a bus, which then exploded. I am so angry that I can barely type. I am going for a cigarette. I would have liked to have slapped your face when you came up to me in the meeting about 7/7 and the Iraq war which you and your friends disrupted with your bullshit claims; I came home after sitting in the pub with the train driver and other survivors including one woman who lost her legs, and punched a pillow instead. That, Prole, is what i think of you. Go and clutch yourself with happiness that you have provoke dsuch a strong reaction, I am sure that is what you want, you attention-seeking, lying troll.

 

[Prole]

Truth seekers are so right-righteous in their near-religious quest to unearth the 'conspiracy' they so desperately crave that it's deemed OK to try and trash meetings of survivors, personally harass survivors, call them liars, defame them in public, pursue their families etc etc.

Sick fuckers.

None of the above has anything to do with me.

Smears, accusations, abuse, trying to shout me down, are just the tactics you choose to try and dismiss what I say.

The 7/7 report is published.

Now show us the evidence. The CCTV images from Luton and London that the report says they have. It's the only way a possible miscarriage of justice will be averted. I am not saying these 4 men didn't do it, I'm saying one dodgy image from Luton 30 miles from London can surely not suffice as judge and jury. It's the only way truth and justice for each and everyone of us can be ensured. Simple really isn't it.

Release the evidence!

(and before BK starts screaming about images of people exploding, I mean from stations platform etc, as we have already been shown from 28/6 and which the media is dishonestly using to illustrate the events of 7th July).

 

[scalyboy]

I don't know what my 'take' is exactly.

I would just expect something a bit better to come out of what we are told is a narrative based on police, intelligence and security agency reports than these men left Luton at 7.40 and reached KX at 8.23.

They can't have, no train left Luton at that time.

The 7.24 arrived at Kings X at 8.23. Maybe the bombers took that train.

 

[Badger Kitten]

Smears, accusations, abuse, trying to shout me down, are just the tactics you choose to try and dismiss what I say.

Christ, the irony.