who is responsible for the London attacks?

[Loki]

Just because the BBC (or any other media outlet) says "Police have confirmed ..." does NOT mean that it is an official police statement. If it is then the quote will almost always be attributed. Otherwise it may be the media using unofficial police sources (who may, or may not, know what the investigating officer is thinking), it may be some comment taken out of context or it may be the media going ahead with unconfirmed comment (safe in the knowledge that the dead can't sue).

I'm fairly sure the BBC only report officially approved sources and not unofficial, but "reliable" ones like say Sky and CNN, which is why the BBC has been slower to report events than them.

 

[laptop]

I'm fairly sure the BBC only report officially approved sources and not unofficial, but "reliable" ones like say Sky and CNN, which is why the BBC has been slower to report events than them.

Given that the question has been very publicly raised, I'd also expect the BBC to give a little more detail if there had been an official statement, like the name of the officer.

If it had been in a tabloid, I'd expect the full report (not published) to read "I bought the officer 8 pints and he said 'Yesh, I think it wash thach." For the BBC to run with it, it'd be "I bought the DAC lunch at the Ivy and he said... "

Oddly, the only other sources I can find saying this are Xinhua/China Daily (back on 14 July) and the Boston Globe (on 15 July).

Edited to add: but no, it'd be utterly irresponsible of the BBC to report only "offcial sources". That'd be boring, and they'd end up reporting lies rather too often. Recall that we're talking about post-Hutton guidelines which I interpret as "hold off a while if it stops you getting it embarassingly wrong.

 

[editor]

From today's Scotsman. They seem to be sure that the official line is that they were suicide bombers.

THE four bombers who attacked trains and a bus in London almost certainly triggered their explosives by hand, knowing their deaths were certain, investigators have concluded.

Reinforcing the picture of the four men as committed terrorists fully aware of their actions, the huge police and intelligence inquiry has also cast doubt on earlier reports that they were supported by a fifth man during the attacks or by an international mastermind who flew out of Britain hours before the blasts.
Officers who reviewed CCTV footage of the four bombers as they travelled to London from Luton had noticed another man of Asian appearance nearby the group, leading to speculation that a fifth terrorist had been present.

But The Scotsman understands that man has been identified, investigated, and found to have had no association with the four bombers...

There had been suggestions that the bombers could have been tricked into carrying the backpack bombs without realising they would explode.
Among the evidence put forward for this theory is the fact that when they travelled to London they bought return tickets and made sure their rented car was properly parked and ticketed.

But in the apparent absence of any sort of automatic detonators, the "working assumption" among detectives and intelligence officials is that the four men knew they were on a suicide mission.

"What no-one can explain is how three bombs could go off within 50 seconds of each other unless the people carrying them triggered them intentionally," said a source close to the investigation.

http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=1648232005

So with no automatic detonators found, that appears to be the end of the 'duped drug mules' theory, no?

 

[editor]

And from the Independent:

Forensic analysis has also failed to find timers at the blast sites, suggesting that the bombers detonated the explosives by hand.
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/article300076.ece

It's quite an interesting article, btw.

 

[Loki]

Recall that we're talking about post-Hutton guidelines which I interpret as "hold off a while if it stops you getting it embarassingly wrong.

Yeah that's sort of what I meant but I didn't say it very well. Given the scale of the incident the BBC is being ultra cautious here to only report solid information, not information from unofficial sources that may or may not be true. Sky for example got its information wrong several times by using unofficial sources.

 

[bigfish]

Yeah, actually, I was listening to an interesting piece on C-SPAN on the subject recently, and I've been paying attention to all the other sources in the past. I'll try to dig up some links on this particular issue.

Certainly the idea of them being born of "crippling poverty" is not true; http://www.news24.com/News24/World/Londonattacks/0,,2-10-1854_1737098,00.html

Thanks for that, it's an interesting read. My main point, that most of the Palestinian suicide attackers have been young unmarried men, appears to be confirmed by the article. It tells of youths as young as 14 and 15 engaging in suicidal attacks on Israeli settlements and puts the average age of Palestinian suicide attackers at 20-21. Strictly speaking, the suicide attackers may not all come from the most deprived layers of Palestinian society, but the fact of their social being reflects the impoverished conditions impacting on the broad mass of the Palestinian people and the bankruptcy of Arab bourgeois nationalism. Ever since September 2000, Israel has been slowly strangling the occupied territories with a near total economic blockade and travel ban, robbing hundreds of thousands of Palestinians of their livelihoods and turning the West Bank and Gaza into virtual prison camps.

 

[slaar]

That may well be true WRT Israel-Palestine, bigfish, but it certainly is not true of the London bombers which this thread was about. They sound far from poor, far from marginalised. Brainwashed to turn into suicidal maniacs, for want of a better description.

 

[editor]

Thanks for that, it's an interesting read. My main point, that most of the Palestinian suicide attackers have been young unmarried men, appears to be confirmed by the article.

What a deceitful wriggle.

You claimed that most of the suicide bombers in Palestine were from social backgrounds "mostly of crippling poverty and despair". Do you now withdraw that claim or will you be challenging the findings of the research?

 

[Juice Terry]

Thanks for that, it's an interesting read. My main point, that most of the Palestinian suicide attackers have been young unmarried men, appears to be confirmed by the article. It tells of youths as young as 14 and 15 engaging in suicidal attacks on Israeli settlements and puts the average age of Palestinian suicide attackers at 20-21. Strictly speaking, the suicide attackers may not all come from the most deprived layers of Palestinian society, but the fact of their social being reflects the impoverished conditions impacting on the broad mass of the Palestinian people and the bankruptcy of Arab bourgeois nationalism. Ever since September 2000, Israel has been slowly strangling the occupied territories with a near total economic blockade and travel ban, robbing hundreds of thousands of Palestinians of their livelihoods and turning the West Bank and Gaza into virtual prison camps.

What about the two suicide bombers from the UK, one of whom recently blew himself up in a bar in Israel, the other running away and drowning himself when his bomb failed to go off. Kind of proves that suicide bombers can come from a reasonably comfortable background in the UK doesn't it?

edited to add: he was happily married as well, Omar Sharif from Derby

British Suicide Bomber

Sharif had sent his wife an e-mail saying: "We did not spend a long time together in this world but I hope through Allah's mercy... we can spend eternity together."

 

[fela fan]

... Kind of proves that suicide bombers can come from a reasonably comfortable background in the UK doesn't it?

No. Coming from a reasonably comfortable background is not at all certain just coz you live in UK. Plenty of grinding poverty around.

But relatively the same, at the bottom of the rungs of their society.

What is the life of an educated 'middle-class' asian like living in british cities? Within their own communities, maybe well-off, but compared to the population at large?

 

[editor]

What is the life of an educated 'middle-class' asian like living in british cities? Within their own communities, maybe well-off, but compared to the population at large?

Here's a crazy idea: why not research it yourself?

 

[fela fan]

...

In 911 the situation is different - the official CT is riddled with holes. If you want to see a fact-free conspiratoid document that could rival anything* that Joe Viall's has produced, read the official government investigation into 911. Yet people denounce me when I point this out.

Why is this? Because everything the US government says is the gospel truth? 100,000 people are dead in Iraq on the basis of a lie conciously told to the people of the UK and US to further these governments interests. Is it really out of all possibility that they could lie about other things for their own benefit?

*well nearly

Good words mate. Indeed discussion of the government version of events on 9/11 seems not up for discussion in many places, in fact hardly anywhere. This of course is a different discussion entirely to the one about the validity or otherwise of the 'conspiracy fans' theory.

This discussion would seek to question the US government on the many many fallacies and failures that exist in their version of events. It would ask the USG to provide proof and evidence for its version of events, for the public good, and just as importantly in honour of the victims' family members and friends left behind.

Same now in london, discussion and disagreement within boundaries decided by politicians and media barons is fine. Go outside of it, and you are seen off by the demand for evidence and proof.

As you say mate, they brazenly lie and the result of their deliberately thought out actions is thousands of deaths of innocent family members going about their lives, or attempting to.

They lie on so many occasions. That is the fundamental reason for my remaining unconvinced about who is behind all this terrorist stuff, from 911 on. I have no idea who is actually responsible, the best i can do is make an educated guess.

And with america's track record, along with the UK's, who the fuck knows what's going on anywhere? When leaders start leading, and stop dividing and killing, then progress from this violent century may occur.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

As a public service i've decided to rephrase felan's post:

USG lied about 911.

Unreasonable demands are being made for evidence.

Iraq war bad.....

Lies lies and damn statistics

US of A bad, all going to die.

This can be interpreted again to see how relevant any of that was to the thread at hand...

Unreasonable demands are being made for evidence.
Lies lies and damn statistics

Or in other words, people are badgering you for proof and you think that the governments of the UK and USA are evil.

 

[Juice Terry]

No. Coming from a reasonably comfortable background is not at all certain just coz you live in UK. Plenty of grinding poverty around.

But reasonably comfortable when compared to growing up in the Gaza strip no?
Anyway that wasn't my main point. You consiraloons were disputing the fact that a happily married muslim man living in the UK could be motivated to carry out a suicide bombing attack. The case of Omar Sharif clearly proves that it is possible. As my quote above demonstrates he was hoping to live for all eternity with his missus, allah willing. No doubt the london bombers believed they would meeting up with their wives and/or children in paradise as well.

The fact someone has a wife or child does not preclude them from carrying out a suicide attack END OF.

 

[fela fan]

As a public service i've decided to rephrase felan's post:



This can be interpreted again to see how relevant any of that was to the thread at hand...



Or in other words, people are badgering you for proof and you think that the governments of the UK and USA are evil.

colourful take on things there bob.

Incidentally that post was relevant to the thread. Try again.

 

[fela fan]

But reasonably comfortable when compared to growing up in the Gaza strip no?
Anyway that wasn't my main point. You consiraloons were disputing the fact that a happily married muslim man living in the UK could be motivated to carry out a suicide bombing attack. The case of Omar Sharif clearly proves that it is possible. As my quote above demonstrates he was hoping to live for all eternity with his missus, allah willing. No doubt the london bombers believed they would meeting up with their wives and/or children in paradise as well.

The fact someone has a wife or child does not preclude them from carrying out a suicide attack END OF.

On what do you base calling me a conspiraloon? I'm nothing of the sort thank you. Nor did i have a clue what the profile of the bombers was.

The only thing i ever dispute is offical US or UK government lines. The rest don't really matter. History is littered with conniving sorts who hold power. Same now. Whatever people are doing to people, check out the skipper's actions to get an idea why.

But checking them out seems not to be discussed anywhere much.

And, of course, anyone with any background could be a suicide killer. Goes without saying. All members and all sections of society commit suicide, so why not suicide bombers of any persuasion?

 

[Bob_the_lost]

colourful take on things there bob.

Incidentally that post was relevant to the thread. Try again.

Thank you.

Relevant: yes, of any real merit: not really. There is nothing that shows a flaw such as those percieved in the 911 report here. None.

If you disagree then a bulletpoint list of inconsistencies/problems with a brief note as to what these are would be nice so we can move on?

 

[Donna Ferentes]

It won't be brief.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

A risk i'm willing to take

 

[detective-boy]

From today's Scotsman. They seem to be sure that the official line is that they were suicide bombers.


http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=1648232005

The Scotsman article is an excellent example of the point I was making about reading such articles carefully:

The headline is in inverted commas: London bombers 'knew they were on a suicide mission'. As there is no such quote in the article, the use of the inverted commas strongly suggests it is not a definitive statement.

Phrases like: "almost certainly"; "cast doubt"; "all but certain"; and "working assumption" say all that is necessary to show that the police have suicide bombers as their most likely hypothesis at present but they have still NOT stated that they were.

 

[editor]

And, of course, anyone with any background could be a suicide killer..

Phew! Cutting edge analysis there.

 

[kyser_soze]

Bigfish - my hypothesis is that 3 men got on tubes and one got on a bus for reason or reasons unknown and blew bombs up. This is convoluted and would make Occam turn in his grave? Or is 'crumbling'? Hmmm...

Fela - Pakistani Muslims are one of the poorest groups in UK society...but then there are also a large number of Asian millionaires too. Educated, middle class asians are as well off as their white counterparts...Asian Lawyers, Drs and accountants don't get paid less because they're Asian you know...

As to who would and wouldn't carry out a suicide mission...What about Mr Shoe bomber from California? Why do you assume that someone with wife and kids, with a life wouldn't want to die for their religious beliefs? Or is that too great a leap for you all?

 

[fela fan]

Thank you.

Relevant: yes, of any real merit: not really.

Well, that's up to you mate. From my angle i'm just a poster adding his voice to the debates that go on here.

If you want me to just say the same things as you, let us know and i'll see what i can do about it.

 

[fela fan]

It won't be brief.

Oh i see! Well, two lines brief or not mate?

 

[fela fan]

Fela - Pakistani Muslims are one of the poorest groups in UK society...but then there are also a large number of Asian millionaires too. Educated, middle class asians are as well off as their white counterparts...Asian Lawyers, Drs and accountants don't get paid less because they're Asian you know...

As to who would and wouldn't carry out a suicide mission...What about Mr Shoe bomber from California? Why do you assume that someone with wife and kids, with a life wouldn't want to die for their religious beliefs? Or is that too great a leap for you all?

Erm, mate, yes i'm aware they don't get paid less (unless their an asian female...?). My line of questioning on your example: how do asian lawyers and drs and so on get on with life in british cities. More of a race angle than a financial one.

For your last bit, i do trust you weren't addressing that to me?! I've clearly posted what my thinking is.

 

[kyser_soze]

Erm, mate, yes i'm aware they don't get paid less (unless their an asian female...?). My line of questioning on your example: how do asian lawyers and drs and so on get on with life in british cities. More of a race angle than a financial one.

For your last bit, i do trust you weren't addressing that to me?! I've clearly posted what my thinking is.

Women get paid less generally - that isn't an ethnic-specific inequality as you well know, and the phrasing you used above

What is the life of an educated 'middle-class' asian like living in british cities? Within their own communities, maybe well-off, but compared to the population at large?

Implies that you're talking about relative wealth, esp the last line which clearly reads as 'well they might be weel off within their community, but how does this compare to the rest of society', hence my confusion.

Are you asking 'How well are Asian professionals integrated into business society in London/UK' in your second point? Just checking before I answer and you change your mind about what question you were asking.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

Well, that's up to you mate. From my angle i'm just a poster adding his voice to the debates that go on here.

If you want me to just say the same things as you, let us know and i'll see what i can do about it.

So you have no problems with the general consensus theory at the moment of four suicide bombers? The question was raised as to what your objections were after all...

 

[fela fan]

So you have no problems with the general consensus theory at the moment of four suicide bombers? The question was raised as to what your objections were after all...

I've got no problems with anything mate. Taking it easy.

Anybody can conjecture what they like, no-one's gonna be providing any proof, and without that i find it difficult to take what my government say seriously.

I'm not really that interested in the details so much any more mate, i just look at the general picture. After all, it's rare when anything really new comes along.

And that general picture tells me that blair has a great deal of responsibility for what happened in london, irregardless of who pulled what trigger, and whatever their family background was.

 

[fela fan]

Implies that you're talking about relative wealth, esp the last line which clearly reads as 'well they might be weel off within their community, but how does this compare to the rest of society', hence my confusion.

Are you asking 'How well are Asian professionals integrated into business society in London/UK' in your second point? Just checking before I answer and you change your mind about what question you were asking.

I wasn't too clear. I wondered what it's like to be a dr or lawyer of pakistani descent, and whether the massively overt racism i remember as a kid still lingers in a manner that causes aggro to these people going about their daily lives.

I was talking about british cities, not just london.

 

[kyser_soze]

i find it difficult to take what my government say seriously.

Not surprising given where you live - Shinawatra makes Blair look like a candidate for sainthood when it comes to dodginess...