who is responsible for the London attacks?

[Jazzz]

That photo was 15 minutes before the bomb went off, it's not rocket science to suppose people got on bearing in mind the bus was heading towards the centre of town. As for the second point, if you had read any of the news on this, rather than making up stories, you'd know he left the bomb on a timer and got off the bus.

Facts please.

Well here's a fact that's going to surprise you slaar, as you are so well read on this - the bus, with its empty top deck - was heading OUT of town! From that it's very hard to assume his aim was to kill anyone. And we don't know whether his bomb was capable of killing anyone anyway.

 

[Jazzz]

Also slaar, I can't find a link to say there was a timer, can you show me where you read it?

 

[slaar]

Hmm, thanks for pointing that out. That raises the chance of it being a symbolic gesture, but setting off bombs is still a big crime in the current climate, and nobody is suggesting the others weren't intended to kill (or are you?) As for the timer, that was speculation too, perhaps he bottled it like the fifth guy.

 

[slaar]

http://www.tvnz.co.nz/view/page/423466/598673

The British people aren't stupid, and a majority were against the war in the first place.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

Also slaar, I can't find a link to say there was a timer, can you show me where you read it?

Did the bomb go off? If so there was a timer. My god that was simple ! I presume that it did go off (or the detonators did), although i'm not 100% sure about all the bombs for 21/7 so correct me if i'm wrong.

 

[maomao]

Did the bomb go off? If so there was a timer. My god that was simple

That's not only not true it directly contradicts things you've said on other threads regarding the need for policemen to kill suspected suicide bombers. A bomb can be set off by a button or switch.

 

[Jazzz]

Did the bomb go off? If so there was a timer. My god that was simple ! I presume that it did go off (or the detonators did), although i'm not 100% sure about all the bombs for 21/7 so correct me if i'm wrong.

No, you are jumping to conclusions (unless someone can provide me a link to say there was a timer) along with slaar who, wouldn't make a very good cricket umpire as he gets out and in mixed up. Here's the excerpt from the Met press conference

"The second man also went into Stockwell underground station. He was seen walking towards the platforms. We know that at 12.53 he got on a number 26 Bus in the Bank area of the City. He was carrying a grey & black rucksack and sat on a seat towards the back of the bus with the bag next to him. He too tried to set off a bomb. He got off the bus in Hackney Road at about five past one."

So he tried to set off a bomb on the empty top deck of a bus. A while later there was some sort of an explosion. No mention of a timer, and presumably if there was one, they would have told us. Isn't it dangerous to revisit a firework once lit?

 

[Bob_the_lost]

That's not only not true it directly contradicts things you've said on other threads regarding the need for policemen to kill suspected suicide bombers. A bomb can be set off by a button or switch.

What the name of fucking jezus christ kind of idiot are you exactly?

That photo was 15 minutes before the bomb went off, it's not rocket science to suppose people got on bearing in mind the bus was heading towards the centre of town. As for the second point, if you had read any of the news on this, rather than making up stories, you'd know he left the bomb on a timer and got off the bus.

and just for completeness

Also slaar, I can't find a link to say there was a timer, can you show me where you read it?

The bloke left the bomb on the bus, if it then went off after he left then he obviously set it off with a fucking timer you prick. Oh maybe he used a radio device! Odd, you didn't think of that either. You've no idea what you're going on about.

1) Bomb goes off, man not nearby
2) Thus Man did not press button for instant death and destrucion.
3) NONE of this stops you having different means of initation.

You are the missing link, never speak again.

Idiot.

 

[slaar]

Dr Jazz, that's about the only thing you haven't muddled up on this thread.

Do you have a point, or are you going to keep asking silly questions?

 

[Bob_the_lost]

"The second man also went into Stockwell underground station. He was seen walking towards the platforms. We know that at 12.53 he got on a number 26 Bus in the Bank area of the City. He was carrying a grey & black rucksack and sat on a seat towards the back of the bus with the bag next to him. He too tried to set off a bomb. He got off the bus in Hackney Road at about five past one."

So he tried to set off a bomb on the empty top deck of a bus. A while later there was some sort of an explosion. No mention of a timer, and presumably if there was one, they would have told us. Isn't it dangerous to revisit a firework once lit?

You've got it there, "a while later there was some sort of an explosion". The other devices failed in the same way, a bang as the dets blew then a fizzle for the main charge. There is no mention of a loud bang as the det went off before he left the bus, the only reports are that it went off afterwards. Thus it detonated/triggered after he left. Thus it was either remote controled (They damn well would have mentioned that and it's unlikely to say the least) or put on a timer.

Jumping no, walking hand in hand with the police report yes.

 

[TeeJay]

People weren't voting on the Iraq war alone. However, there hasn't been a single poll in the past year or 2 showing more people for the Iraq war than against.

I can see at least 8 listed here alone: http://pollingreport.co.uk/iraq.html

And here is an ICM/Guardian poll from 18th April 2003 (just after the invasion on March 20th 2003): http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/reviews/2003/guardian-bombingiraq18-april-2003.htm

Do you approve or disapprove of the military attack on Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein?
Approve 63%
Disapprove 23%
Don't know 14%

edit: and here are some more poll results with a 12 out of 30 polls having more in favour than against: http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/reviews/vote-intention-reports/bombing-iraq.asp

 

[maomao]

What the name of fucking jezus christ kind of idiot are you exactly?


and just for completeness


The bloke left the bomb on the bus, if it then went off after he left then he obviously set it off with a fucking timer you prick. Oh maybe he used a radio device! Odd, you didn't think of that either. You've no idea what you're going on about.

1) Bomb goes off, man not nearby
2) Thus Man did not press button for instant death and destrucion.
3) NONE of this stops you having different means of initation.

You are the missing link, never speak again.

Idiot.

So how does that prove it was a timer and not, for instance, a lit fuse? (like the one used by Richard Ried).

And stop swearing at people. You were asked for a link to show it was on a timer. You still haven't provided this or proved your point.

 

[TeeJay]

Highly unstable chemicals left in a smoldering bag? Maybe they ignited later "by themselves" as it were? Has anyone actually got any reliable reports or evidence about the bomb or are we all playing a guessing game here?

 

[Bob_the_lost]

So how does that prove it was a timer and not, for instance, a lit fuse? (like the one used by Richard Ried).

And stop swearing at people. You were asked for a link to show it was on a timer. You still haven't provided this or proved your point.

A lit fuse it a timer, that's how you put a time delay on explosives when not using electircal detonation. HOW do we know it's not a fucking space alien coming down in thier saucer to blast it with thier death rays? About as reasonable as a lit fuse for fucks sakes.

1) Unreliable, can go out
2) Lit fuse in a nylon bag? How fucking stupid is that?
3) Fuses give off a hell of a lot of smoke
4) What happens if the bag was moved?
5) Why a fire based means of detonation, it's not quick enough for the other attacks so it'd have to be a completely seperate system
6) You just need an alarm clock and some wires so it's far easier than getting fuse cord.

It had to be a timing device or remote detonation. Remote could have been Radio based, but you'd need line of sight to ensure detonation and to do that on a moving bus would be tricky to say the least and overcomplicated. Telephone is the other, but also excessivly complex and risks lack of signal or jammers. Remote is a bad idea and very unlikely.
So it's a timer, it could be electronic or fire based, fire is about as stupid as you can get so it'll be electronic. Ii'm not going to waste time spelling out why something so bloody obvious is impractical when i can rely on the normaly intelegent U75 population to work it out themselves, i forgot about you obviously.

It's not proven, then again it's not proven that you have more than three brain cells, both may well be wrong.

As for swearing, piss off dickhead. You're making allegations you can't prove and can't justify, if you want me to point out each one in detail for you then just ask.

(Sorry mods, but there's just something about idiots that tend to rub me up the wrong way)

 

[maomao]

Bob, you're a cock.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

Highly unstable chemicals left in a smoldering bag? Maybe they ignited later "by themselves" as it were? Has anyone actually got any reliable reports or evidence about the bomb or are we all playing a guessing game here?

Nope, mostly guessing game, although some guesses are safer than others. I'd put my life on the detonation being electrical timer based, it's the simplest and fits all the known facts. (can be listed if you want)

 

[Bob_the_lost]

Bob, you're a cock.

And you're as thick as two short planks, get the fuck off this thread if you can't keep up.

I'm not going to waste my time on you again.

 

[maomao]

I'd put my life on the detonation being electrical timer based, it's the simplest and fits all the known facts.

Passing off opinion as facts again eh.

 

[TeeJay]

Just because something is stupid doesn't mean it wasn't used. Didn't the shoebomber use a lit fuse? The guy who ran away to Italy was tracked using his mobile phone. Surely everyone by now knows that mobile phones can be tracked? Why didn't he just use a phone box or buy a new phone?

 

[maomao]

And you're as thick as two short planks, get the fuck off this thread if you can't keep up.

I can keep up thanks. Maybe if you didn't waste so much energy helping me keep up you'd be doing a little better academically you lazy thick gobshite. My point is you don't know what happened, you have an opinion. It may well be an informed opinion but the minute you start passing that opinion off as truth and ramming it down the throat of anyone who disagrees with you it turns into a pile of bullshit and gets in the way of all of us finding out what actually happened.

 

[exosculate]

The Tory vote stayed the same in % terms i.e. 33% as in 2001.

But under the Straight Vote electoral system, a party can gain seats as a result of a split vote between other parties. Hence, a rise in the Liberal Democrat vote at Labour's expense, puts Conservatives in Parliament, without the latter increasing their vote.

An electoral system (STV-PR) like the Irish one is much fairer.

Back in relality the Tory vote increased from 31.7 to 33.2 between 2001 and 2005.

Which makes you wrong on that count.

And makes my original point stand that you are not making sense on this.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

TeeJay:The shoe bomber may or may not have used a lit fuse, i don't know. HOWEVER the four bombers on 7/7 did not use fuses, we know that from the times of detonation, to close together for a start. If that is in any doubt after a bit of thought then i give up.

While it's not proven that 21/7 was the same group odds are better than even that they are related if the means of detonation had been fire rather than electrical then it would have been announced by now as the groups would have been completely unconnected to each other (I'm not going to spell that one out for anyone in detail so don't ask). None of the reports state the bombers were burning or smelling of burning before hand, nothing at all implies that the detonations were caused by anything other than electrical systems. That it was electrical cannot be in any reasonable doubt at the moment, the point of making a remote detonator for a bomb where a timer is more reliable, easier and more failsafe is slightly ridiculous. The idea of leaving such a device on a moving vehicle and then leaving it, hopping in a car/taxi to catch up with it and detonate it is ridiculous. Mobile phones are NOT good devices for setting off bombs (except for use as timers! ala Madrid)

(Edit: Thus we can see that it's not proven that the detonators were electrical timers, but the odds are so heavily stacked for them it would be rather foolish to say that they weren't or to work on any other basis)

 

[Jazzz]

Bob the Lost, the police have NOT said that the bus bomb was on a timer, rather they say that Muktar Ibrahim attempted to set it off while he was with it. And it went off later (perhaps, for all I know, because bombs can go off unpredictably).

Why have they got it wrong? Are they thick too?

 

[Bob_the_lost]

Bob the Lost, the police have NOT said that the bus bomb was on a timer, rather they say that Muktar Ibrahim attempted to set it off while he was with it. And it went off later (perhaps, for all I know, because bombs can go off unpredictably).

Why have they got it wrong? Are they thick too?

Where is the source for that, as it contradicts all the other reports and information given. The point of failure was the main charge, the detonators worked fine. So it should have been audible when the detonator went off, a loud (look at the other reports for just how loud it was) bang, you quoted a comment saying that the bang happened after he left the bus.

I think misinterpretation is happening here, he set the timer or triggered the timer, thus attempting to detonate the bomb, then left.

They may well be thick too, i don't know them and haven't spoken to them. The thing that really irritated me was the comment about how anything i said here contradicts what i've said on suicide bombers, it doesn't but hey, who cares?

 

[Jazzz]

I am basing my comments on the source in post #1147.

I said "the police have NOT said the bomb was on a timer" because as far as I am aware they have not. Again, if you have a link to say there was one, please provide it.

Anyway, timer or no timer, this bomb was on a completely empty upper deck on a bus travelling out of town, so it's hard to see that murder was the objective for that attack.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

I said "the police have NOT said the bomb was on a timer" because as far as I am aware they have not. Again, if you have a link to say there was one, please provide it.

You said...

rather they say that Muktar Ibrahim attempted to set it off while he was with it. And it went off later

Based upon...

" He too tried to set off a bomb. He got off the bus in Hackney Road at about five past one."

You're reading too much into the statement, your interpretation is possible. However it does not exclude my interpretation either. The other information given elsewhere however shows that the bomb did not go off untill after he left the bus. From that alone we can tell that you are probably wrong, that the device was based upon a time delay. Ie a timer.

As to his intent to kill people, i think he did, but it's not going to be determined based upon his use of a timer

I've said it once and i'll say it again, it's massivly unlikly that no timer was used, however there is no statement as of yet that shows that one MUST have been used.

We can wait if you want and i'll say "i told you so" in the largest letters i can find. Or you can look at the situation and agree that it's a logical deduction based upon the availible evidence.

 

[editor]

I am basing my comments on the source in post #1147.

For the last time before I get annoyed, what's the Filipino guy got to do with the London bombings, please?

 

[EuroDude2006]

I can see at least 8 listed here alone: http://pollingreport.co.uk/iraq.html

And here is an ICM/Guardian poll from 18th April 2003 (just after the invasion on March 20th 2003): http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/reviews/2003/guardian-bombingiraq18-april-2003.htm

Do you approve or disapprove of the military attack on Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein?
Approve 63%
Disapprove 23%
Don't know 14%

edit: and here are some more poll results with a 12 out of 30 polls having more in favour than against: http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/reviews/vote-intention-reports/bombing-iraq.asp

Yes that was in March 2003. When people were told there were definitely WMD. Now we know there isn't. And before the endless killings and the seemingly endless occupation. 1 million demonstrated against the Iraq war in 2003. Polls have long since shown up to 66% of British people to be opposed to the war.

The miniscule rise in the Tory vote is greatly outweighed by the fall in the Labour vote. The British electoral system meant that if you voted for the Liberal Democrats, then you could inadvertedly let the Tories take the seat and this is likely to have prevented the Labour vote falling even further.

Anyway, the 12 you mention were all in 2003. So for the past 2 years, the British people have opposed this illegal war. They realise they were had. Told there were "Weapons of Mass Destruction". Told about the "links to AQ". They will never trust Bush again. The British thought they would be rewarded for involvement in Iraq with contracts. Instead, they all went to US companies like Halliburton. Blair only managed to hold on by the skin of his teeth and the collapse in the Labour vote from 41% to 36% can be attributed largely to Iraq.

In so far as the Tory vote rose (slightly), it was almost entirely due to immigration, which they made a big issue. But you are entirely wrong if you are suggesting that Iraq was the only issue they voted on.

 

[Jazzz]

For the last time before I get annoyed, what's the Filipino guy got to do with the London bombings, please?

That's about the FIFTH time you've asked that utterly tedious question as to Senator Pimentel's account of the Michael Meiring affair! I do hope it's the last time, or you will start to annoy me. I do not consider it worthy of reply, and I'm sure you wouldn't deny it's a loaded prelude.

But actually, there is something I should alert you to. Just as the CIA/FBI asset Meiring was obviously implicated with bombing in the Phillipines (by blowing his own legs off), it seems we have a CIA/MI6 asset implicated as a possible mastermind in the London bombings. Check out
this thread

 

[maomao]

W The thing that really irritated me was the comment about how anything i said here contradicts what i've said on suicide bombers, it doesn't but hey, who cares?

Well, I thought it did originally but you steamed in with the insults rather than explaining my one little mistake. The following points remain true.

1. Police sources have not confirmed the point of failure of the bombs though it is widely believed to have been the main explosive mix. It would be very stupid of the police to release what the actual fault with the bomb was as other bombers may have made the same mistake.

2. There has been no confirmed use of electronic timing mechanisms on any of the bombs. The simultaneous explosions on the first three tube bombs could just as easily have been achieved by all three bombers looking at their watches and indeed this would further explain how the bus bomber got his bomb to go off 40 minutes later. A further point is that it would seem strange from an operational poiont of view to mix suicide bombs with non-suicide bombs on timers. In fact the police have said that all 5 bombs found this time were the same (though there has been no direct reference to the trigger mechanism)

3. The only bomb made by a UK jihadist that we actually know enough about to comment is the shoe bomb of Richard Reid which required lighting with a match.

4. (to clear up the police shooting point) There is no evidence that any of the bombs have been button triggered. Reports of the first bus bomber indicated that he was rooting around in his bag before the explosion. ie. no evidence of anything like the Israeli bomb belts which caused the Israeli army to develop the technique of completely shutting down the central nervous system immediately to prevent immediate explosion.

5. You still don't know the difference between an opinion and a fact.