Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

who is responsible for the London attacks?

editor said:
I'll hold on for crazy reckless things like waiting to hear all the suspected bombers' testimony and for the results of forensic tests and the CCTV footage analysis to be published.
Click to expand...
Well I share with you the desire to see such evidence. And I applaud that you say you do not have firm conclusions about the nature of the July attacks until we have that evidence.
 
DrJazzz said:
Well I share with you the desire to see such evidence. And I applaud that you say you do not have firm conclusions about the nature of the July attacks until we have that evidence.
Click to expand...
Thing is, that hasn't stopped you posting up a stream of often research-untroubled, wild, groundless speculation including a mystery reference to a Filipino senator which you still haven't adequately explained.
 
His website provided a credible account of the facts of the Meiring affair seeing as it was taken from his official business. I was hardly making a big deal about it. It's just occurred to me that you probably missed post #1069.
 
DrJazzz said:
His website provided a credible account of the facts of the Meiring affair seeing as it was taken from his official business. I was hardly making a big deal about it. It's just occurred to me that you probably missed post #1069.
Click to expand...
Ah, that'll be around where you were boldly asserting that none of the bombers made a cry before detonating the bombs only for Badger Kitten to correct you.
 
DrJazzz said:
His website provided a credible account of the facts of the Meiring affair seeing as it was taken from his official business. I was hardly making a big deal about it. It's just occurred to me that you probably missed post #1069.
Click to expand...

There are cunts.

And there are shitcunts.

Guess which one you are, my friend.
 
editor said:
I'll hold on for crazy reckless things like waiting to hear all the suspected bombers' testimony and for the results of forensic tests and the CCTV footage analysis to be published.
Click to expand...

Are you sure about this editor?

I mean, I really would have sworn that you were pretty sure the July bombers were all suicide terrorists. :confused:
 
There are degrees of being 'sure' about something: you can have a gut feeling, you can be inclined to put money on something being true and so forth. What distinguishes you tho' Jazzy baby is the way you claim things are true and argue for whole versions of events that run way beyond any actual reports. You take the merest speculations and elevate them to the same status as reports by witnesses, investigators and seasoned observers. You tell yourself that this is a good thing because you are 'kicking against the mainstream' and providing an alternative perspective.

Where this argument falls down is that in seeking to do so you throw away logic or the requirement to separate fantasy and dreamt up theories from anything with proof, evidence and facts. In doing so you do a disservice to the cause of 'kicking against the mainstream' and providing an alternative perspective.

In doing so you are also taking us for idiots.

A couple of days ago you used the phrase "that is one of the possibilities that I am considering..."

If you actually phrased some of you posts in these terms: as possibilities or ideas - then people (including myself) who not get half as angry at you as they do, and you would still be able to su8ggest everything you already do. It is not the content of what you post but the way you post and the flawed argument you deploy that is your biggest weakness IMO.
 
So you aren't sure they are all suicide terrorists either TeeJay?

Blimey, this is a bonanza!
 
you throw away logic or the requirement to separate fantasy and dreamt up theories from anything with proof, evidence and facts.

In doing so you do a disservice to the cause of 'kicking against the mainstream' and providing an alternative perspective.

In doing so you are also taking us for idiots.
Click to expand...

Teejay hits the nail more than adequately on the head, right here.

Doing more harm than good in the struggle for truth.

I'd say he's a "disinformationist" - seeking to muddy the water and provide enough confusion and information mayhem to give the real bad guys enough time to cover their tracks.

Which is why the work of the conspiranoid, in my eyes, is cunt's work, plain and simple.
 
On the flour thing...

Someone reminded me last night that, like custard powder, flour is quite a nasty material when ignited - apparently it tends to explode violently and stick to you inna napalm stylee...kinda like custard powder as well.

So he's not really doing himself much good is he?
 
NYPD release details of July 7 bombs

New York City Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly told private security officials that while it was initially thought the bombers used high-end military explosives, it was "more like these terrorists went to a hardware store or some beauty supply store."

Through a law enforcement source, CNN confirmed the information was disclosed during the meeting between NYPD officials and security heads from an array of organizations, including financial institutions, hotels and schools.
...
In London, Deputy Chief Constable Andy Trotter of the British Transport Police said the release of the information was "unhelpful" to the ongoing investigation in Britain.
...
The U.S. briefing was based partly on information learned by NYPD detectives dispatched to London after the bombings to monitor the investigation, the law enforcement source said.
...
British investigators also believe the bombs were transported in coolers carried by two cars to the outskirts of London, according to the NYPD, and the bombs were detonated by using alarms on cell phones that were set to go off at 8:50 a.m. BST (0750 GMT).

Similar explosive compounds were used in four attempted transport bombings in London on July 21, although the detonators used in the second set of attacks were activated by hand, rather than timed, according to the NYPD.
Click to expand...

CNN
 
kyser_soze said:
OK, so tell me how you get a cell signal on the Picadilly line, 100ft under London's streets?

You can't.
Click to expand...
Alarm clock KS :p (Same method as used in Madrid)

I think this is the first time i've agreed with bigfish's post... worrying isn't it! :D
 
On the BBC news they said that the Met were getting increasingly annoyed at the information coming from the US, saying not all of it is accurate.
 
editor said:
On the BBC news they said that the Met were getting increasingly annoyed at the information coming from the US, saying not all of it is accurate.
Click to expand...

I agree. It looks like the yanks are pulling out all the stops to sell us the homemade explosives yarn.
 
bigfish said:
I agree. It looks like the yanks are pulling out all the stops to sell us the homemade explosives yarn.
Click to expand...
If it's the truth or not i don't think the US police or FBI should be the one deciding what's released and what isn't.
As to if it is home made or not: even if it were a conspiracy the perpetrators would have made it far more convincing to have used improvised explosives wouldn't they?
 
Flour can explode but it will need to be dispersed as a cloud first

flour bomb

if the 21/7 bombs were made out of flour, then they were meant to 'puff'.
 
more from Osman

The suspect in the failed Shepherd's Bush Underground bombing was also quoted as saying: "If I could, I'd turn the clock back and I wouldn't do it again."

According to Italian newspapers, he claimed not to have planned to kill anybody in the attack, "let alone myself".

"I value life too highly," he said. "I've never thought of dying. Just the thought of it terrifies me. It was a demonstrative action. In that backpack there was a detonator, but the rest was flour. It was only supposed to go bang, and frighten people."
Click to expand...
Telegraph
 
Tanweer and Khan did not visit madrassa in Pakistan

tanweer2.jpg

It made the front page of newspapers in Pakistan but didn’t merit a mention in Britain or the United States: Shahzad Tanweer and Mohammed Sidique Khan, the alleged suicide bombers of July 7, didn’t visit a madrassa, or Islamic religious school, in Pakistan, according to Pakistan’s education minister Javed Ashraf Qazi. Moreover, contrary to sensationalistic news reports in the wake of the attacks, the Pakistanis insist no madrassas provide “military training to students.” As the BBC notes, citing a Pakistani newspaper, “there are today around 1.7m students” enrolled in madrassas. “The reasons for the huge growth in the number of madrassas dates back to 1979, when the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan led to large amounts of money flowing into Pakistan from the West and countries in the Gulf. Much of this money was directed towards madrassas, and was used by anti-Soviet Mujahideen groups to provide religious and military training for thousands of young fighters prepared to fight the Russians.”

The CIA spent over $3 billion to finance Islamic groups and individuals, including the Taliban and Osama bin Laden. In other words, the CIA and Pakistan’s ISI, and also Saudi Arabian intelligence (the Istakhbarat), created what is now called “Islamic terrorism.”
...
[A]ccording to Shahzad Tanweer’s family, the supposed suicide bomber was “proud to be British” and “had everything to live for,” according to the New Zealand Herald. “He was intelligent. He went to university. His plan was to go into sports,” said Shahzad’s uncle, Bashir Ahmad. And yet we are told Tanweer was a crazed suicide bomber, a characterization that does not make sense to his family. Initially, we were told Tanweer and the other alleged bombers were brainwashed in a Pakistani madrassa, but this now turns out to be nonsense.

Shahzad Tanweer wasn’t a suicide bomber. He was a patsy set-up in a collaborative effort engineered by a British-American and possibly Israeli intelligence elements with a shared interest in perpetuating murder and chaos and blaming it on a shadowy network of terrorists, thus portraying Islam as a renegade and recalcitrant religion, outside the pale of civilized nations and peoples.
Click to expand...

Kurt Nimmo
 
DrJazzz said:
very comprehensive debunking of Richard Jones, the solitary eyewitness report of a 7/7 bomber.
Click to expand...
Not really, how many of those papers/news sources interviewed him? Or were they all based upon a couple of different statements?

You abuse the news sources for being gulliible puppets of the lizard men ( :p ) yet you expect them to be utterly competent in everything else?

It's another person taking the news papers and then assuming they got it perfect, thus any inconsistencies are obviously those of the witness and that witness is probably a plant!
 
Bob_the_lost said:
Not really, how many of those papers/news sources interviewed him? Or were they all based upon a couple of different statements?

You abuse the news sources for being gulliible puppets of the lizard men ( :p ) yet you expect them to be utterly competent in everything else?

It's another person taking the news papers and then assuming they got it perfect, thus any inconsistencies are obviously those of the witness and that witness is probably a plant!
Click to expand...
Well who knows. But if I was RJ, and reputable news sources were misquoting me, I would be very keen to set things straight, wouldn't you?

The point is, we can only judge what is in front of us. In the case of the Richard Jones testimony, it's a complete mess.
 
DrJazzz said:
Well who knows. But if I was RJ, and reputable news sources were misquoting me, I would be very keen to set things straight, wouldn't you?

The point is, we can only judge what is in front of us. In the case of the Richard Jones testimony, it's a complete mess.
Click to expand...
How exactly does he do that he's going to take them to court over misquoting him in a manner only noticed by odd people who surf the web for too long!

You're making the mistake of confusing testimony and interviews, i think your source is an interesting literary analysis of the problem, but utterly irrelevant in the end. Base your work on crap and that's what you'll get, base your enquiry on hour long interviews on tape and you might get something worth working with.
 
Bob_the_lost said:
How exactly does he do that he's going to take them to court over misquoting him in a manner only noticed by odd people who surf the web for too long!
Click to expand...
Who said anything about court? You just pick up the phone to the Times and go, look this is how it was. These are reputable news services! Maybe one might make an error. But so many carrying different conflicting accounts? What is astonishing is that they all carried this 'I saw the bomber' story, yet none have followed up the fact that he can't seem to say whether he saw his face, what sort of bag it was, whether he got off the front or back doors, etc. it seems to be a difference story for each newspaper.

This eyewitness report is not worth tuppence and is one of the 'vanishing stories' of 7/7
 
DrJazzz I agree that the reports are confused and contradictory - the guy sounds like he is in shock and maybe mixing up stuff. Having said that he also mentions the videotape of people with rucksacks - the video only appeared some days afterwards didn't it? Were all these statements given by the same person at the same time?

Ultimately this doesn't matter anyway: the police never claimed that they were relying on this guy to identify anyone. They also never claimed that he was the only one who saw anyone - this all the newspapers. We all know how the tabloids often report hearsay as testimony and even make up juicy details themselves to dramatise things.

This guy may well have seen someone else entirely - someone wearing different clothes and standiong downstairs (rather than upstairs where the bomb went off).

The police only ever mentioned finding id of the bombers. I am not sure if they also identified any DNA. They probably also interviewed all the survivors from the buses, but they haven't released all these details of evidence: they never do in investigations unless there is some reason, such as appealing for help from the public to identify someone or asking about a specific detail.

I don't really see what your point is here. You can pick apart press reports till the cows come home, but that doesn't invalidate the evidence used by police to identify the bombers. And it certainly doesn't back up any CIA/Mossad/MI6/Lizard conspiracy theory that you may dream up.
 
DrJazzz said:
... This eyewitness report is not worth tuppence and is one of the 'vanishing stories' of 7/7
Click to expand...

You're right there Doc. But let's not forget that the object of the exercise was a big success, at least initially, i.e., the Jones account(s) managed to propagate the "rucksack bomb" meme in record time. After the Jones account came the CCTV image of the 4 Muslim guys carrying rucksacks into Luton station (anyone seen CCTV images yet of any of the 4 men at Xcross or on any of the 3 targeted trains? No, me neither.) Then the French threw a fucking great spanner in the works by placing in the public domain infromation that the explosive used was a military type, probably sourced from "Eastern Europe or the Balkans" and indicating that "the explosives were placed on the ground, perhaps under the seats". Around the same time, an eyewitness account given by Mr Lait telling of what he saw before and after the Aldgate bombing was published in the regional press and began circulating the blogosphere.

Obviously, the old rucksack bomb and the fit up yarn was beginning to unravel. So what to do? It seems to me that a really good way of bolstering the crumbling story, would be to unleash yet another wave of attacks using, wait for it... that's right, rucksack bombs! Only this time round the events were turned into a rip roaring live on the telly manhunt for the fugitive "rucksack bombers" at large in the city. That way, the rucksack bomb yarn could be multiply reinforced and public attention discouraged and deflected from further scrutiny of the 7/7 attacks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

friedaweed
  • Poll
So 9-11. Who really did it?
2
Replies
42
Views
7K
Crispy
Crispy
S
William Rodriguez talk London Monday July 9
2 3
Replies
69
Views
7K
editor
editor
Badgers
The CIA and FBI were behind the 9/11 attacks
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
Doctor Carrot
Doctor Carrot
I
  • Locked
7/7 - The London Bombings, Islam & the Iraq War
Replies
4
Views
1K
editor
editor
N
London Underground Bombing 'Exercises' Took Place at Same Time as Real Attack
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
196
Views
10K
editor
editor
Back
Top Bottom