Readers, as we are all stunned and shocked by the recent terrible events in London.... while listening to GEORGE NOORY last night, I, too, and others, were asking questions as to the nature of the 'terrorist' bombings, and what was being achieved in England, and in the United States.
More police reactionary measures are underway, possibly only going to last several days here, unless more threats become apparent.
Are the London bombings related to the recent grand economic meetings in Scotland -- to institute the New World Order's grand designs for a one-World government?
Could it be about the reactions of those finding more violence propelled in two nations, Afghanistan and Iraq, and fears of more violence brewing in Iran and Syria?
Are the bombings the reactions of mad-men regarding the invasions of two sovereign nations?
Could there be elements of fascism on the rise, as seen within the nefarious connections of Banna Nazi -- go to Google, in-put the words 'Banna Nazi', and see the realities of long-term Muslim fascism unfold with connections to German Nazis.
So, if tyranny comes to America, will it be brought here solely by terrorism? And what about the Oklahoma City bombing, and exposes presented by author JAYNA DAVIS, in her incredible book, 'THE THIRD TERRORIST'? Were we told the truth about that big one, either?
Ninerism
Is it really more TERROR in London, or something else going
Moderator: Super Moderators
9er ol'man... let's be painfully paranoid here for a moment shall we??
reviewing the days up until the tragedy...
Downing Street Minutes growing stronger
Miller/Cooper going to Jail
Cooper giving up his source
Rove being implicated in a Federal Crime (called 'the Highest form of Treason' by Poppy Bush)
Blair standing firm on Global Warming at G8.
Chimp in free-fall in the polls.
42% of the American People favoring impeachment at first survey (vs 30% at max on Clinton).
TERRA-TERRA-TERRA!!! Be afraid!!!
you connect the dots.....
remember, if we don't fight them there we'll fight them... er... oh.. well.. ahh.... TERRA! TERRA! TERRA!
reviewing the days up until the tragedy...
Downing Street Minutes growing stronger
Miller/Cooper going to Jail
Cooper giving up his source
Rove being implicated in a Federal Crime (called 'the Highest form of Treason' by Poppy Bush)
Blair standing firm on Global Warming at G8.
Chimp in free-fall in the polls.
42% of the American People favoring impeachment at first survey (vs 30% at max on Clinton).
TERRA-TERRA-TERRA!!! Be afraid!!!
you connect the dots.....
remember, if we don't fight them there we'll fight them... er... oh.. well.. ahh.... TERRA! TERRA! TERRA!
Republican - re·pub·li·can (r-pbl-kn) - political party, which will control part of Congress 2011-2012, undermining the strength of the country - on purpose, in public, without apology or shame - simply for a campaign advantage in 2012.
What's Behind the London Attacks?
The bombing of the London Underground was a false-flag operation designed to keep the West mired in war. Don't believe otherwise.
By Matt Hutaff Jul 7, 2005
Only one word sprang to mind when I heard about the bombings that claimed the lives of dozens of Londoners today – convenient.
Is there anything convenient in death, or in thousands of lives destroyed from catastrophe? No – and words cannot express the sorrow I feel for the men and women changed by today's events. But governments with skeletons in their closets have a great deal to gain from a national tragedy bolstered by "terrorism."
As I sit in my office today, I hear the whispers of co-workers now utterly convinced our war on terror must continue. Despite American and British involvement in the Middle East birthing wave after wave of rebel forces, the Bush doctrine is now justified in the minds of millions. Petty grievances such as the Downing Street Minutes, the President's flagging support and Karl Rove's treasonous outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame are unimportant. A shadowy conglomeration is out to kill us.
Sound familiar? It should – the same emotional ploy was used to great effect on Americans in the wake of September 11th. Question nothing, particularly your cries for vengeance or that nagging feeling in the back of your head. Justice delayed is justice denied.
Unlike four years ago, however, I refuse to accept that the attack on London was anything less than a false-flag operation designed to enrage Western "civilization" against the Middle East. Why? Because there is no reason for "terrorist" groups to attack England. As recently as this week, the Ministry of Defense announced that plans were being drafted that would pull British armed forces from the quagmires in Iraq and Afghanistan. With the British effectively admitting they're throwing in the towel, the only motivation to stay could come from an attack that compels the forces to stay and fight "global terrorism."
Think about it. The attack only benefits empires desperate to maintain a foothold in the Middle East without further eroding public opinion. Will Parliament shrug their shoulders and push their soldiers into longer tours of duty because of this? Obviously it's too early to tell, but if that happens, insurgents and rebels will have lost more than they could have ever possibly gained in destroying part of the Underground.
Brian Kilmeade of Fox News agrees, claiming the sabotage "works to ... [the] Western world's advantage, for people to experience something like this together." It doesn't just make "terrorism" an American problem. It makes it a worldwide problem. The Number One problem.
No longer do we need to concern ourselves with two world leaders (who have spawned more worldwide terrorism than any fanatical religious organization) going unquestioned in their lies that started a war. We can cast off our sluggish economies, lack of freedoms and pitiful descent into draconian law. Terror is on the rise.
I feel like I'm sitting in my apartment watching the World Trade Center collapse all over again.
Everything is the same, right down to the previously unheard of Islamic group (The Secret Organization of al-Qaida in Europe? Are you kidding me?) taking credit – even though the translation falls apart under scrutiny and the Q'uran is improperly cited. Considering the only Al Qaeda cell to ever be uncovered was a front for the Mossad, you'd think the perpetrators could at least come up with a clever new booga-booga name to grab headlines. Their arrogance is startling.
As is the ever-present Israeli connection, a staple among false flag operations. Before today's attack, the Israeli Embassy in London was notified an attack was forthcoming. As a result, former Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu remained in his hotel room rather than head towards a nearby hotel where he was to address an economic summit.
The embassy denies it had any prior knowledge, of course, but the story has changed dramatically in the process. If, as they say, Netanyahu was not warned, how did he know to stay in his room? How did he know the danger was so severe that he dare not venture out of the hotel?
Oops! The story's changed again – here Netanyahu says that British police had warned the Israelis (but not the rest of the city?) of a pending attack. Scotland Yard denies this; Israel's reply was to say Netanyahu received his warning after the first blast. How? It was initially reported as a power surge for hours. What is being hidden here? And why isn't there an investigation into these obvious discrepancies?
It's enough to make your head spin and your eyes cross with rage.
Regardless, I am making an appeal to Britons who are understandably wracked with grief at the moment – don't buy into the hatred the way we Americans did. Don't ignore the obvious evidence that this whole affair was orchestrated by your own government. Most importantly, don't let the deaths of the few, however tragic, plunge your nation into another fit of war and civic clampdowns.
Toying with your emotions is expected. Don't fall prey to ignorance. See the attack on your home for what it really is – a distraction that will keep your money, resources and troops mired in ceaseless battle for an ideology that betrays your democratic and civilized tenets.
Honor your dead with tears, not a cry for war or praise for a disgraced leader.
http://www.thesimon.com/magazine/articl ... tacks.html
The bombing of the London Underground was a false-flag operation designed to keep the West mired in war. Don't believe otherwise.
By Matt Hutaff Jul 7, 2005
Only one word sprang to mind when I heard about the bombings that claimed the lives of dozens of Londoners today – convenient.
Is there anything convenient in death, or in thousands of lives destroyed from catastrophe? No – and words cannot express the sorrow I feel for the men and women changed by today's events. But governments with skeletons in their closets have a great deal to gain from a national tragedy bolstered by "terrorism."
As I sit in my office today, I hear the whispers of co-workers now utterly convinced our war on terror must continue. Despite American and British involvement in the Middle East birthing wave after wave of rebel forces, the Bush doctrine is now justified in the minds of millions. Petty grievances such as the Downing Street Minutes, the President's flagging support and Karl Rove's treasonous outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame are unimportant. A shadowy conglomeration is out to kill us.
Sound familiar? It should – the same emotional ploy was used to great effect on Americans in the wake of September 11th. Question nothing, particularly your cries for vengeance or that nagging feeling in the back of your head. Justice delayed is justice denied.
Unlike four years ago, however, I refuse to accept that the attack on London was anything less than a false-flag operation designed to enrage Western "civilization" against the Middle East. Why? Because there is no reason for "terrorist" groups to attack England. As recently as this week, the Ministry of Defense announced that plans were being drafted that would pull British armed forces from the quagmires in Iraq and Afghanistan. With the British effectively admitting they're throwing in the towel, the only motivation to stay could come from an attack that compels the forces to stay and fight "global terrorism."
Think about it. The attack only benefits empires desperate to maintain a foothold in the Middle East without further eroding public opinion. Will Parliament shrug their shoulders and push their soldiers into longer tours of duty because of this? Obviously it's too early to tell, but if that happens, insurgents and rebels will have lost more than they could have ever possibly gained in destroying part of the Underground.
Brian Kilmeade of Fox News agrees, claiming the sabotage "works to ... [the] Western world's advantage, for people to experience something like this together." It doesn't just make "terrorism" an American problem. It makes it a worldwide problem. The Number One problem.
No longer do we need to concern ourselves with two world leaders (who have spawned more worldwide terrorism than any fanatical religious organization) going unquestioned in their lies that started a war. We can cast off our sluggish economies, lack of freedoms and pitiful descent into draconian law. Terror is on the rise.
I feel like I'm sitting in my apartment watching the World Trade Center collapse all over again.
Everything is the same, right down to the previously unheard of Islamic group (The Secret Organization of al-Qaida in Europe? Are you kidding me?) taking credit – even though the translation falls apart under scrutiny and the Q'uran is improperly cited. Considering the only Al Qaeda cell to ever be uncovered was a front for the Mossad, you'd think the perpetrators could at least come up with a clever new booga-booga name to grab headlines. Their arrogance is startling.
As is the ever-present Israeli connection, a staple among false flag operations. Before today's attack, the Israeli Embassy in London was notified an attack was forthcoming. As a result, former Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu remained in his hotel room rather than head towards a nearby hotel where he was to address an economic summit.
The embassy denies it had any prior knowledge, of course, but the story has changed dramatically in the process. If, as they say, Netanyahu was not warned, how did he know to stay in his room? How did he know the danger was so severe that he dare not venture out of the hotel?
Oops! The story's changed again – here Netanyahu says that British police had warned the Israelis (but not the rest of the city?) of a pending attack. Scotland Yard denies this; Israel's reply was to say Netanyahu received his warning after the first blast. How? It was initially reported as a power surge for hours. What is being hidden here? And why isn't there an investigation into these obvious discrepancies?
It's enough to make your head spin and your eyes cross with rage.
Regardless, I am making an appeal to Britons who are understandably wracked with grief at the moment – don't buy into the hatred the way we Americans did. Don't ignore the obvious evidence that this whole affair was orchestrated by your own government. Most importantly, don't let the deaths of the few, however tragic, plunge your nation into another fit of war and civic clampdowns.
Toying with your emotions is expected. Don't fall prey to ignorance. See the attack on your home for what it really is – a distraction that will keep your money, resources and troops mired in ceaseless battle for an ideology that betrays your democratic and civilized tenets.
Honor your dead with tears, not a cry for war or praise for a disgraced leader.
http://www.thesimon.com/magazine/articl ... tacks.html
July 8, 2005; 5:30 AM ET: Just a few short hours before the first explosion ripped through London, there was a significant sell-off or “selling short” of the British Pound in the financial market. This activity took place absent of any economic news or other known market-driven factors that would sufficiently explain the sell off. This activity also occurred without the normal corresponding pricing action in the other major currency pairs. In summary, a large amount of GBP was sold to liquidate a “long position” and secure profits, or to take a “short position” to profit from an anticipated drop in the value of the British Pound. In either case, the market activity warrants further investigation.
http://www.cloakanddagger.de/
http://www.cloakanddagger.de/
A silent mouth is sweet to hear. Irish saying
-
Fred_Vobbe
- Pirate
- Posts: 1564
- Joined: 03-22-2005 03:08 PM
Bellisima wrote: This activity took place absent of any economic news or other known market-driven factors that would sufficiently explain the sell off. This activity also occurred without the normal corresponding pricing action in the other major currency pairs.
It's too bad the world could not discover whom it was that traded on prior news of an attack. I would think that it might spark some to deal with the cads as someone might deal with rabid dogs.
scientia quod ethics super ususfructus
I noticed, while listening this evening to news coverage of the London bombings, that the media, the fascist-directed media, are becoming more cautious about ascribing the bombing directly to Al-Qaida. Hell, if Al-Qaida does not have a monopoly on terrorism but is actually just the prototype for a terrorist franchising operation, then you can just forget about "de war on terra" as the first order of business. It's like trying to eliminate a cockroach infestation by stepping on the little buggers in a midnight raid on the kitchen.
I have not made up my mind about the provenance of this particular attack, but I invite the conspiratorially-minded to take their best shot. Either they will prove their case or, in failing to prove their case, will raise the curtain on other atrocities that Amerika and Britain are committing in connection with this event.
But this is all beside the point. Bush and Blair already have so much blood on their hands that it really doesn't matter the proverbial tinker's damn whether they are as pure as the new-fallen snow in this particular attack. They are going to hang for this anyway, one way or the other.
I have not made up my mind about the provenance of this particular attack, but I invite the conspiratorially-minded to take their best shot. Either they will prove their case or, in failing to prove their case, will raise the curtain on other atrocities that Amerika and Britain are committing in connection with this event.
But this is all beside the point. Bush and Blair already have so much blood on their hands that it really doesn't matter the proverbial tinker's damn whether they are as pure as the new-fallen snow in this particular attack. They are going to hang for this anyway, one way or the other.
"Fuggedah about it, Jake --- it's Chinatown!"
If operating under the premise of 911 being a domestically or alternatively co-oped scenario staged by countries other than fundamental Islamists or a puupeted action of said groups, which I think most of us would generally fall into this category, and being that most of us are very weary of the NWO scenario and the ultimate conglomeration of the tea party of the 13.
Introduce into thought the effects and counter moves that could be put in to play to reshore support for the EU Constitution intto this scenario.
As this is a strike against one of the more powerfull members of the continent and an advocate against its installation.
This is not a debunking theory but rather an additive to put in play that will reveal some very interesting ties in subversive geopolitics that will be completely overlooked by the disinfomedia and the domestic powerbrokers, but not the financial cabals and the cartels who ultimately have their hands in every last bit of it.
Especially with the latest turns against Syria and Egypt and the forging of Iraqi anmd Iranian co-affairs, and the reconstitution of the bear and the dragon.
Eurasia is going to get hot.
fab
Introduce into thought the effects and counter moves that could be put in to play to reshore support for the EU Constitution intto this scenario.
As this is a strike against one of the more powerfull members of the continent and an advocate against its installation.
This is not a debunking theory but rather an additive to put in play that will reveal some very interesting ties in subversive geopolitics that will be completely overlooked by the disinfomedia and the domestic powerbrokers, but not the financial cabals and the cartels who ultimately have their hands in every last bit of it.
Especially with the latest turns against Syria and Egypt and the forging of Iraqi anmd Iranian co-affairs, and the reconstitution of the bear and the dragon.
Eurasia is going to get hot.
fab
Ah drrr drrr drrr
Confusion and Contradiction: What Really Happened In London?
Steve Watson July 8 2005
Yesterday morning, just as I was preparing breakfast in my North London home, my phone rang and my plans for the day radically altered. The voice on the other end was a very familiar one telling me that she had had to evacuate her train at Kings Cross Station and had heard a very load explosion just seconds earlier. She was confused and wanted me to clarify what was happening by turning on the TV.
Instinctively switching to the BBC, the bold headline read "POWER SURGES ON LONDON UNDERGROUND" and the scene was crawling with police, emergency services and people evacuating the station. I immediately knew what was really going on and told her that there were almost certainly bombs on the tubes and that she should get away from the station.
How did I know this? Because for weeks and months I have watched as the fearmongering in London has risen. I have analyzed the Stasi-like "anti-terror"campaigns, the fake and sometimes unannounced terror drills, the house arrests where all are subsequently released, the press conferences where The Police Commissioner and the Mayor have explicitly told us we would be attacked soon and there's nothing we could do about it.
I have rode on the tube at the rush hour as people nervously pack onto the trains and try not to reveal their anxiety. I have witnessed the antiwar marches and the NO ID campaigns, the tension that surrounded the general election in London, the Live 8 circus and the Olympics farce. I have spoken to Londoners on a daily basis and I have felt the tension rise in this city to a point where we were prepared to be shown the feature presentation, "ATTACK ON LONDON"
So I put the call in to my brother and we were covering the incident, trawling the news wires, watching the live broadcasts within minutes of the first explosion, because that's what we do. We have watched relentlessly as the official story has been pieced together, and this looks, smells and tastes like another government operation. Already, within hours, there are multiple inconsistencies and contradictions which must be highlighted now before they disappear down the memory hole.
ADVANCE INTELLIGENCE
The first inconsistency to emerge, and to date the most compelling, is that of advance warning and prior knowledge. The police and the government have said unequivocally that there was no advance warning or indicative intelligence and that the attacks came "out of the blue". Yet early AP and Israeli radio reports clearly stated that Scotland Yard had given warning to the Israeli Embassy in London that an attack was imminent BEFORE any explosions had taken place.
The Israeli National News quickly went off-line completely after the publication of this story, but has since returned with the original article still available.
The Embassy warned Finance Minister and former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to stay inside his London hotel. For an hour after the first blast, the government and the news media were reporting that the cause was an electrical power surge. If the government knew bombs were going to go off before they did, why did they report for an hour that it was an accident? Were they trying to bide time so they could get their story straight? The same thing happened on 9/11 with the first plane strike.
Both Scotland Yard and the Israelis have since denied that they had any foreknowledge of the attack.
Since the original report, major TV news networks have been completely silent on the Netanyahu story. They are just repeating claims that there was no prior knowledge.
About an hour after the story broke, Associated Press started altering their online news stories, stating that Netanyahu got the warning after the first blast and not before. Haaretz is now reporting the same thing. It seems as if they are scrambling to coordinate their cover story. Either there were no warnings or the warning was after the first blast. The dithering seems to suggest there is some confusion on how to successfully hide the smoking gun, the fact that Netanyahu was warned before the first explosion.
Why didn't the people on the trains and buses get the same warning?
In a further development The Jerusalem post has reported that Israel have ordered their officials not to speak to the media about the bombings, suggesting a lock down on any potential leaks.
DOWNGRADING ALERT LEVEL
On June 7th, MI5 downgraded the London terror alert from its second highest level “severe general” to a lower category of “substantial”. One month before the World's leaders were to gather in Britain, bringing in an influx of protesters and activists, why would this be a logical course of action?
Why did they do this, was somebody lowering the guard
ARMY ON THE STREETS?
Several foreign news reports stated that at 11:20 the Army were dispatched onto the streets of London. If this actually happened, were we under martial law? and why were the British people not informed. I have not heard or seen any eyewitness accounts stating the presence of soldiers on the streets, but no one is denying it occurred either.
MOBILE NETWORK SHUTDOWN?
The Police have said today that the mobile phone networks were not shut down as this would have caused public panic. (The Madrid Bombings were coordinated with the use of mobile phones). "We did consider it. We do have that ability," Blair said. But he said commanders considered how that would affect public confidence, and decided not to do it.
OK so why is the British media reporting that networks were shut down under a program called Access Overload Control , and why could I not make any calls for at least two hours? When the network is busy you get told that it is busy, my calls were instantly intercepted and failed immediately with no such message.
Furthermore, Whilst some "investigators" are saying timers WERE used to detonate the bombs, the Police are saying there is no evidence that timers were used.
REMOVING BODIES OR NOT?
During the same press conference the Police Commissioner also indicated that there were still bodies in the train between Russell Square and Kings Cross that are not yet being retrieved due to dangers of the tunnel collapsing. Yet the BBC had reported minutes earlier that police at the scene were saying they were in the process of carrying out forensic work in that carriage and the bodies were being retrieved. Which is true?
It is clear that the officials are not getting the official story straight.
HOW MANY DEAD?
The police will only go as far as saying at this point that "more than 50" are dead. Of these 50 officially only 2 died on the bus. The scene where the bus was blown apart has been completely cordoned off with screens. It is clear that more than 2 people died on the bus just from the pictures that have been released and the eyewitness accounts, so why are we still being told only 2 people are dead?
The Bombs also "held less than 10 pounds of high explosives" (about rucksack size). Are we to believe that this amount of explosive material on 3 different trains and 1 bus has not killed more than 50 people? The carriages at that time are absolutely packed with people, you have to literally stand nose to nose. I know, I was on a train at that time on the same line just the previous day.
Again the authorities are hiding the real facts, why?
More people are killed in car accidents every week in London than in this "major terror attack" yet the repercussions are likely to vastly bolster the police state grid.
SUICIDE BOMBERS? CCTV?
The media is in a frenzy over whether the bombs were let off by suicide bombers. The Police have said there is no evidence of suicide bombers and that there are many CCTV tapes to trawl through in order to uncover the facts. All London Buses have CCTV cameras on them, why don't they just watch the one video from the one bus that was attacked and find out if there was a suicide bomber?
The answer seems to be that if there were indeed suicide bombers, then the fear level is diminished because the perpetrators are not "still out there" lurking, waiting to strike again.
London has around 4 million surveillance cameras, there are thousands on the underground, yet we are now being told that they are absolutely useless. If they neither prevent such attacks nor help in the aftermath, then what is the point in them?
HOW MANY BOMBS?
Initial reports suggested there were up to 8 bombs on the underground and 3 on buses. This was later scaled back to 3 on the underground and one on a bus. So there were 7 incidents that never actually happened. Police have said that this confusion can be attributed to the fact that people were coming out of different stations. Furthermore the other bus incidents were "controlled explosions". Controlled explosions of what?
Could it be that the attack was supposed to be larger in scale but further incidents failed to make the right impact?
STATEMENT CLAIMING RESPONSIBILITY
The "Al Qaeda" Statement claiming responsibility for the attacks is being hyped by the media. Just like on 9/11 no one has officially claimed that they carried out the attack. It says:
"The heroic mujahideen have carried out a blessed raid in London. Britain is now burning with fear, terror and panic in its northern, southern, eastern, and western quarters."
You have to actively assume that this group are writing in the third person about themselves in order to come to the conclusion that they are claiming responsibility. The same goes for Bin Laden's video in which he "claimed responsibility" for 9/11.
The fact that anyone could have posted this statement and it came from "Arab Sources" is secondary to the fact that it claims nothing. This will not matter though as over time it will be repeated again and again in the media. The government don't even have to officially announce "Al Qaeda" is responsible.
Furthermore MSNBC TV translator Jacob Keryakes, has pointed out that the claim of responsibility contained an error in one of the Quranic verses it cited. That suggests that the claim may be phony..
"This is not something al-Qaida would do," he said.
THERE IS NOTHING FOR "AL QAEDA" TO GAIN FROM THIS
The Financial Times of London reported on the 6th of July that we were pulling a significant number of troops out of Iraq, then 'Al-Qaeda' bomb us, so the troops stay, how does that benefit 'Al-Qaeda'?
We are supposed to believe that Al Qaeda is made up of intelligent well educated, well off individuals who meticulously plan their operations. Are we to believe that they do not comprehend the fact that if they bomb major Western cities they will feel the wrath of both angry Westerners and well meaning peaceful Muslims.
We need to focus on the question of who will gain from these latest attacks and who has gained from the past attacks? Most importantly we must not just accept what we are told because clearly what we are being told does not add up.
JUST THE BEGINNING
One day after the attacks the inconsistencies and contradictions are mounting. In the weeks and months to come more and more will come out as the official story is demanded by the press and the public. Just as now, we will be here reporting them.
http://prisonplanet.com/articles/july20 ... iction.htm
Steve Watson July 8 2005
Yesterday morning, just as I was preparing breakfast in my North London home, my phone rang and my plans for the day radically altered. The voice on the other end was a very familiar one telling me that she had had to evacuate her train at Kings Cross Station and had heard a very load explosion just seconds earlier. She was confused and wanted me to clarify what was happening by turning on the TV.
Instinctively switching to the BBC, the bold headline read "POWER SURGES ON LONDON UNDERGROUND" and the scene was crawling with police, emergency services and people evacuating the station. I immediately knew what was really going on and told her that there were almost certainly bombs on the tubes and that she should get away from the station.
How did I know this? Because for weeks and months I have watched as the fearmongering in London has risen. I have analyzed the Stasi-like "anti-terror"campaigns, the fake and sometimes unannounced terror drills, the house arrests where all are subsequently released, the press conferences where The Police Commissioner and the Mayor have explicitly told us we would be attacked soon and there's nothing we could do about it.
I have rode on the tube at the rush hour as people nervously pack onto the trains and try not to reveal their anxiety. I have witnessed the antiwar marches and the NO ID campaigns, the tension that surrounded the general election in London, the Live 8 circus and the Olympics farce. I have spoken to Londoners on a daily basis and I have felt the tension rise in this city to a point where we were prepared to be shown the feature presentation, "ATTACK ON LONDON"
So I put the call in to my brother and we were covering the incident, trawling the news wires, watching the live broadcasts within minutes of the first explosion, because that's what we do. We have watched relentlessly as the official story has been pieced together, and this looks, smells and tastes like another government operation. Already, within hours, there are multiple inconsistencies and contradictions which must be highlighted now before they disappear down the memory hole.
ADVANCE INTELLIGENCE
The first inconsistency to emerge, and to date the most compelling, is that of advance warning and prior knowledge. The police and the government have said unequivocally that there was no advance warning or indicative intelligence and that the attacks came "out of the blue". Yet early AP and Israeli radio reports clearly stated that Scotland Yard had given warning to the Israeli Embassy in London that an attack was imminent BEFORE any explosions had taken place.
The Israeli National News quickly went off-line completely after the publication of this story, but has since returned with the original article still available.
The Embassy warned Finance Minister and former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to stay inside his London hotel. For an hour after the first blast, the government and the news media were reporting that the cause was an electrical power surge. If the government knew bombs were going to go off before they did, why did they report for an hour that it was an accident? Were they trying to bide time so they could get their story straight? The same thing happened on 9/11 with the first plane strike.
Both Scotland Yard and the Israelis have since denied that they had any foreknowledge of the attack.
Since the original report, major TV news networks have been completely silent on the Netanyahu story. They are just repeating claims that there was no prior knowledge.
About an hour after the story broke, Associated Press started altering their online news stories, stating that Netanyahu got the warning after the first blast and not before. Haaretz is now reporting the same thing. It seems as if they are scrambling to coordinate their cover story. Either there were no warnings or the warning was after the first blast. The dithering seems to suggest there is some confusion on how to successfully hide the smoking gun, the fact that Netanyahu was warned before the first explosion.
Why didn't the people on the trains and buses get the same warning?
In a further development The Jerusalem post has reported that Israel have ordered their officials not to speak to the media about the bombings, suggesting a lock down on any potential leaks.
DOWNGRADING ALERT LEVEL
On June 7th, MI5 downgraded the London terror alert from its second highest level “severe general” to a lower category of “substantial”. One month before the World's leaders were to gather in Britain, bringing in an influx of protesters and activists, why would this be a logical course of action?
Why did they do this, was somebody lowering the guard
ARMY ON THE STREETS?
Several foreign news reports stated that at 11:20 the Army were dispatched onto the streets of London. If this actually happened, were we under martial law? and why were the British people not informed. I have not heard or seen any eyewitness accounts stating the presence of soldiers on the streets, but no one is denying it occurred either.
MOBILE NETWORK SHUTDOWN?
The Police have said today that the mobile phone networks were not shut down as this would have caused public panic. (The Madrid Bombings were coordinated with the use of mobile phones). "We did consider it. We do have that ability," Blair said. But he said commanders considered how that would affect public confidence, and decided not to do it.
OK so why is the British media reporting that networks were shut down under a program called Access Overload Control , and why could I not make any calls for at least two hours? When the network is busy you get told that it is busy, my calls were instantly intercepted and failed immediately with no such message.
Furthermore, Whilst some "investigators" are saying timers WERE used to detonate the bombs, the Police are saying there is no evidence that timers were used.
REMOVING BODIES OR NOT?
During the same press conference the Police Commissioner also indicated that there were still bodies in the train between Russell Square and Kings Cross that are not yet being retrieved due to dangers of the tunnel collapsing. Yet the BBC had reported minutes earlier that police at the scene were saying they were in the process of carrying out forensic work in that carriage and the bodies were being retrieved. Which is true?
It is clear that the officials are not getting the official story straight.
HOW MANY DEAD?
The police will only go as far as saying at this point that "more than 50" are dead. Of these 50 officially only 2 died on the bus. The scene where the bus was blown apart has been completely cordoned off with screens. It is clear that more than 2 people died on the bus just from the pictures that have been released and the eyewitness accounts, so why are we still being told only 2 people are dead?
The Bombs also "held less than 10 pounds of high explosives" (about rucksack size). Are we to believe that this amount of explosive material on 3 different trains and 1 bus has not killed more than 50 people? The carriages at that time are absolutely packed with people, you have to literally stand nose to nose. I know, I was on a train at that time on the same line just the previous day.
Again the authorities are hiding the real facts, why?
More people are killed in car accidents every week in London than in this "major terror attack" yet the repercussions are likely to vastly bolster the police state grid.
SUICIDE BOMBERS? CCTV?
The media is in a frenzy over whether the bombs were let off by suicide bombers. The Police have said there is no evidence of suicide bombers and that there are many CCTV tapes to trawl through in order to uncover the facts. All London Buses have CCTV cameras on them, why don't they just watch the one video from the one bus that was attacked and find out if there was a suicide bomber?
The answer seems to be that if there were indeed suicide bombers, then the fear level is diminished because the perpetrators are not "still out there" lurking, waiting to strike again.
London has around 4 million surveillance cameras, there are thousands on the underground, yet we are now being told that they are absolutely useless. If they neither prevent such attacks nor help in the aftermath, then what is the point in them?
HOW MANY BOMBS?
Initial reports suggested there were up to 8 bombs on the underground and 3 on buses. This was later scaled back to 3 on the underground and one on a bus. So there were 7 incidents that never actually happened. Police have said that this confusion can be attributed to the fact that people were coming out of different stations. Furthermore the other bus incidents were "controlled explosions". Controlled explosions of what?
Could it be that the attack was supposed to be larger in scale but further incidents failed to make the right impact?
STATEMENT CLAIMING RESPONSIBILITY
The "Al Qaeda" Statement claiming responsibility for the attacks is being hyped by the media. Just like on 9/11 no one has officially claimed that they carried out the attack. It says:
"The heroic mujahideen have carried out a blessed raid in London. Britain is now burning with fear, terror and panic in its northern, southern, eastern, and western quarters."
You have to actively assume that this group are writing in the third person about themselves in order to come to the conclusion that they are claiming responsibility. The same goes for Bin Laden's video in which he "claimed responsibility" for 9/11.
The fact that anyone could have posted this statement and it came from "Arab Sources" is secondary to the fact that it claims nothing. This will not matter though as over time it will be repeated again and again in the media. The government don't even have to officially announce "Al Qaeda" is responsible.
Furthermore MSNBC TV translator Jacob Keryakes, has pointed out that the claim of responsibility contained an error in one of the Quranic verses it cited. That suggests that the claim may be phony..
"This is not something al-Qaida would do," he said.
THERE IS NOTHING FOR "AL QAEDA" TO GAIN FROM THIS
The Financial Times of London reported on the 6th of July that we were pulling a significant number of troops out of Iraq, then 'Al-Qaeda' bomb us, so the troops stay, how does that benefit 'Al-Qaeda'?
We are supposed to believe that Al Qaeda is made up of intelligent well educated, well off individuals who meticulously plan their operations. Are we to believe that they do not comprehend the fact that if they bomb major Western cities they will feel the wrath of both angry Westerners and well meaning peaceful Muslims.
We need to focus on the question of who will gain from these latest attacks and who has gained from the past attacks? Most importantly we must not just accept what we are told because clearly what we are being told does not add up.
JUST THE BEGINNING
One day after the attacks the inconsistencies and contradictions are mounting. In the weeks and months to come more and more will come out as the official story is demanded by the press and the public. Just as now, we will be here reporting them.
http://prisonplanet.com/articles/july20 ... iction.htm
-
Cherry Kelly
- Pirate
- Posts: 12852
- Joined: 07-29-2000 02:00 AM
- Contact:
One of the more "interesting" articles I read on net - sorry didn't grab URL - was that supposedly the third highest ranking Al Qaeda person had told of numerous planned bombings of subways, large gatherings of people in EUROPE as well as USA. This was "planned" and had not happened at the time he revealed the information.
This lead me to other speculations about all the events that HAVE been stopped before they happened - the bombs on railroad ties - France, England, other European areas - and yes some that have been removed from similar places here in the US. Stuff we don't get in the major media.
Ergo - the police and security people HAVE had warnings - but specific ones? Its one thing to use hindsight about warnings and say see they had them, but quite another as to specifics - of where, when...
- - -
Terrorists make long range plans that change under circumstances -- we have all heard of this or that type information.
This lead me to other speculations about all the events that HAVE been stopped before they happened - the bombs on railroad ties - France, England, other European areas - and yes some that have been removed from similar places here in the US. Stuff we don't get in the major media.
Ergo - the police and security people HAVE had warnings - but specific ones? Its one thing to use hindsight about warnings and say see they had them, but quite another as to specifics - of where, when...
- - -
Terrorists make long range plans that change under circumstances -- we have all heard of this or that type information.
Wasserman, Senior Analyst, Green Peace International . . .
Harvey Wasserman
July 9, 2005
The horrific terrorist bombings in London are a pale reflection of the terror erupting from George W. Bush's energy plan, which will ultimately kill far more people and wreck far more planetary havoc than four bombs and fifty deaths on a single city's streets.
Amidst Thursday's awful carnage, Bush leapt to deliver his set sermon on good versus evil. But in the same breath he bullied the G-8 nations into groveling at the feet of Big Oil, on whose behalf he is slaughtering thousands in Iraq . . . .
Climate chaos is the ultimate threat to human existence. To impede the very do-able movement to solve CO2 emissions is the ultimate terrorist act.
When it comes to spreading death and destruction, disease and mayhem, Osama bin Laden is a little leaguer compared to George W. Bush.
http://www.freepress.org/columns/display/7/2005/1162
To ALL PIRATES posting your responses here, at first I was reluctant to post my thread, or at least moderate the title, which can be construed as offensive.
However, after reading your posts, and the incredible DATA supplied in your own articles, I am simply stunned to know that my intuition was likely dead-on.
As with our JOE QUINN, we can speculate as to who the actual perp's might be, but we do know that powerful alliances are making WAR PROFITS on these terrible wars which have all the signs of being energy/oil related. It surely ain't the 'al qaeda' makig the WAR PROFITS, is it?!
Certainly, we saw the troubling signs and inaccuracies and distortions concerning 9-11; and some of us might be so bold as to suggest that the horrors witnessed at Oklahoma City was far worse, if we are solely counting bodies in the context of the IMMENSE COVER-UPS about that bombing right here on Amerikan soil. So, that is where I was deriving some of my 'intuition' and bad feelings about the London bombings.
Now, from your postings above, we can see that there are much more alarming realities than my/our intuitive impressions, which are important, yet are underscored and supported by the data. For instance, who was knowledgeable once again that they should invest in BP and sell short, just as some did invest in airline's company just before 9-11 and the Twin Towers were mysteriously toppled, along with another building not even hit by a jet.
My God, some of the startling info presented above ought to make any American question the madness of these neo-con wars that involve so much subterfuge, and the imprints of PNAC, PROJECT FOR A NEW AMERICAN CENTURY.
Thanks all -- your responses are tremendous!
Ninerism
However, after reading your posts, and the incredible DATA supplied in your own articles, I am simply stunned to know that my intuition was likely dead-on.
As with our JOE QUINN, we can speculate as to who the actual perp's might be, but we do know that powerful alliances are making WAR PROFITS on these terrible wars which have all the signs of being energy/oil related. It surely ain't the 'al qaeda' makig the WAR PROFITS, is it?!
Certainly, we saw the troubling signs and inaccuracies and distortions concerning 9-11; and some of us might be so bold as to suggest that the horrors witnessed at Oklahoma City was far worse, if we are solely counting bodies in the context of the IMMENSE COVER-UPS about that bombing right here on Amerikan soil. So, that is where I was deriving some of my 'intuition' and bad feelings about the London bombings.
Now, from your postings above, we can see that there are much more alarming realities than my/our intuitive impressions, which are important, yet are underscored and supported by the data. For instance, who was knowledgeable once again that they should invest in BP and sell short, just as some did invest in airline's company just before 9-11 and the Twin Towers were mysteriously toppled, along with another building not even hit by a jet.
My God, some of the startling info presented above ought to make any American question the madness of these neo-con wars that involve so much subterfuge, and the imprints of PNAC, PROJECT FOR A NEW AMERICAN CENTURY.
Thanks all -- your responses are tremendous!
Ninerism