astro3
Suspended
Joined: 28 Jul 2005
Posts: 274
Location: North West London
|
 Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 1:49 pm Post subject: Canary Wharf Executions and Muad’Dib’s Conjecture |
 |
|
The Canary Wharf Executions and Muad’Dib’s Conjecture
We all like to be told a story; but are liable to complain if too much by way of interpretation is offered. A fairly plausible scenario, which we may call Muad’Dib’s Conjecture, (1) released on November 5th 2007, has pulled together several threads, and suggests what may have been the doom of the four young men, who were cut down in their prime. Three anonymous alleged suicide bombers were executed outside Canary Wharf at 10.30 in the morning of July 7th – an event gaining a brief coverage on the morning ITV news but never repeated and then airbrushed out of history, discussed in no UK national media.
The four young men, in Muad’s narrative, had been roped into Peter Power's 'mock' terror drill. This simulation of a terror attack upon London, which involved a thousand people (as Power stated) would have needed four persons acting as the mock terrorists. The 30-year old Mohammed Khan had come to have a certain trust for the police, as indeed he ‘was regularly called upon by them, to help them to sort out gang-rivalry problems. Mohammed was also taken on a tour of the House of Commons by a Leeds MP, who befriended him,’ to quote Muad’Dib. And so they agreed.
The four purchased return tickets from Luton to King’s Cross that morning, for their day-outing: however, due to the delay of all trains that morning, plus the cancelled 7.40 train, they arrived in London too late to be on the tube trains they were supposed to be on. If we suppose they caught the delayed 07.30, which actually left at 07.42, they would have arrived at King’s cross Thameslink at 08.39 - way behind its scheduled arrival time of 08.04. The three tube trains they had been told to catch left King’s Cross at 8.35, 8.42 and 8.48 am (and there is a walk of not much less than ten minutes to get over to these platforms). But, soon they get to hear of the bombs going off as mass panic starts to swirl around them at King’s Cross, and the horrible truth starts to dawn upon them: they had been set up, and therefore - not being familiar with London, and with the phones not working - they try to escape via Canary Wharf. This excludes Hasib Hussein: ‘Hasib Hussain splits off from the other three at King’s Cross Thameslink station, because he still has time to catch the number 30 bus, as his part in the mock-terror exercise.’
As the four gradually apprehend their dire predicament, in a city London with which they are not too familiar, they make the decision to flee eastwards, towards the City. Then mobile phone networks around the City are closed down, and remain closed for an hour or so. The question has to be asked:
| Quote: | | The mobile phone networks did not work in the first hours after the bombings ... Were the networks deliberately closed down? |
(2)
That statement was made by Rachel North, and as such it is worth a great deal, as she has been in the think of things, and is the last person who could be suspected of endorsing views here expressed (See also Gareth's testimony, below). For one answer to her question, we could turn to a discussion on the on the Mayor of London’s forum, 'Mobile Phone Networks Access Overload Control in the aftermath of the July 7th 2005 terrorist attacks in London':
| Quote: | | What is not acceptable is the apparent lack of coordination between the Metropolitan Police "Gold Command" who were nominally in charge of the emergency, and the City of London Police (presumably one of the "Silver Commands"), who for their own understandable reasons got the O2 mobile phone network to implent Access Overload Control (ACCOLC) , in an area of about 1 kilometer around Aldgate Tube station i.e. covering much of the City of London, in spite of the decision by Gold Command not to impose ACCOLC in the same area at the request of the London Ambulance Service. |
(3)
One had gained the impression that, in the wake of the bombings, London’s mobile phone systems soon crashed out due to general overload. But, we here learn that what happened was rather different. The City of London Police decided to implement a procedure around the City of London, which closed down mobile networks, admittedly somewhat later than the time when (in Muad’s story) three of the four young men apprehended what had happened and three of them decided to flee, going Eastwards. This probably had to last an hour or so, until they were gone.
They are shot, and the reported time of their shooting, 10.30 am, will just about fit in with the lads emerging from King's Cross Thameslink and missing their assignments. The journey to Canary Wharf from King’s Cross normally takes around one hour, 15 minutes, by bus. As to why they chose to head out East, Muad explains:
‘ | Quote: | | At the Canary Wharf Docklands site there are media companies, for the Muslim patsies to have told their story to and cleared their names, if they could, and two possible escape routes, via air from the nearby London City Airport, that has flights to 34 destinations in the U.K. and Europe, and, if they couldn’t fly out, there was the possibility of getting a boat across the channel to France.’ |
The Independent newspaper was just around the corner. On one of the early TV news broadcasts that day, a newsreader announced that a report has come in, that three of the terrorists involved in the bombings have been shot and killed, by the anti-terrorist branch of the police, at Canary Wharf, in the Docklands area of London’s East-end. Clearly the ‘suicide-bombers’ could not have survived the tube-train bombings, and then been in the Docklands to be shot. A story appeared in the New Zealand Herald, concerning how two 'apparent suicide bombers' were shot outside the HSBC tower at Canary Wharf in London.
Until about 11 am, the story announced concerns a ‘power surge’ on the London Underground (4). That is a whole hour after the bus has blown up in Tavistock Square. Why would they keep on reporting such an odd story? One could say that, the authorities were not willing to start the ‘bomber’ story until the four ‘patsies’ had been terminated and were not liable to speak to anyone.
An ‘Operation Kratos’ killing?
Why dispose of them so dramatically and publicly? One answer here would be, for the same reason that De Mendezes was bumped off so publicly and not bundled away somewhere first – namely, that the Operation Kratos protocol mandates it. It allows certain members of the police to kill ‘suspected suicide bombers,’ but quickly, because the protocol involves shooting them before they have time to detonate their (alleged) strapped-on bomb. Operation Kratos was developed with guidance from the Israeli Defence Force advisers, whereby: ‘a senior officer is on standby 24 hours a day to authorize the deployment of special armed squads, who will track and if needs be shoot dead suspected suicide bombers.’ It was initiated without public consultation. Its protocol mandates that ‘a police officer should not decide to open fire unless that officer is satisfied that nothing short of opening fire could protect the officer or another person from imminent danger to life or serious injury’ (5).
Quoting from the NZ Herald of July 9th, ‘The New Zealander, who did not want to be named, said the killing of the two men wearing bombs happened at 10.30am on Thursday (London time). Following the shooting, the 8000 workers in the 44-storey tower were told to stay away from windows and remain in the building for at least six hours, the New Zealand man said. He was not prepared to give the names of his two English colleagues, who he said witnessed the shooting from a building across the road from the tower.’ That sounds a considerable degree of intimidation, if, even Down Under, a Reuter’s correspondent has to write anonymously and withhold the name of his witnesses.
The story was that the men were ‘wearing bombs’ – one assumes they were no more doing so than was de Mendezes, 15 days later. The ‘tough talk’ of 8000 workers being instructed to stay indoors for the next 6 hours indicates that it was not just the Metropolitain police at work here: the job was done by elite killers, maybe the SRR, Special Reconnaissance Regiment, a branch of the British Armed Forces concerned with counter-terrorism. This was, it would appear, an execution of the highest importance.
The story seems to be authentic: according to the NZ Herald, ‘Canada's Globe and Mail newspaper reported an unconfirmed incident of police shooting a bomber outside the HSBC tower. Canadian Brendan Spinks, who works on the 18th floor of the tower, said he saw a "massive rush of policemen" outside the building after London was rocked by the bombings.’ Another newspaper report tells how the police shot a suicide bomber outside the Credit Suisse First Boston Bank, which is approximately 470 yards, away from the HSBC building. Altogether four newspapers reported the Canary Wharf killings: New Zealand Herald, South London news and Canada's Globe and Mail Newspapers. (6)
The erasure of this story from UK media could suggest that it has considerable importance. Muad’Dib has here put together a plausible scenario. It predicts that Hasib Hussein was really on the 91 bus (for only one or two stops) coming from King’s Cross Thameslink, having separated from the others. ‘Hasib Hussein was the youngest of the four, only eighteen years old, and described, by those who knew him, as a gentle giant. Therefore he was possibly the least worldly-wise, and he was also on his own, in a strange city, and a long way from home. He might not have realized he was in danger of being framed as a patsy, believed all the chaos around that part of London was just part of the mock-terrorism exercise that he was part of, and so just continued with his assigned role, which was to board a certain double-decker bus, at an appointed time, and sit at the back of the top deck.’
The Government's 'Official Report' on 7/7 has Hasib Hussein get onto the 91 bus outside king's Cross Thameslink, and then change when he gets to Euston onto the 30: ‘We are told that Hasib Hussain started from King’s Cross Thameslink station, and was seen on a number 91 bus traveling West along Euston Road to Euston Station, where he caught the number 30 bus, that would have then traveled East, back along Euston Road retracing his steps, back to where he started from at King’s Cross, if it had not been diverted into Tavistock Square. Why would someone carrying a large, heavy backpack do that, unless he was following a script, written by someone who knew, in advance, that that particular number 30 bus, registration LX03BUF, would be diverted into Tavistock Square, and that Hasib Hussain would therefore not be able to get on it at King’s Cross Thameslink, which is where he had arrived at, on the train from Luton? Only someone who is a stranger to London would do that without asking why, because it is a totally illogical thing to do, for someone who knows London, and knows that the number 30 bus goes past King’s Cross Thameslink station, so that they could have caught it there, instead. It would be a complete waste, of time, energy, money, and an unnecessary risk to take.
| Quote: | | The 91 bus, that Hasib Hussain is reported to have taken from King’s Cross, along Euston Road to Euston Station; to board the number 30 bus that got diverted into Tavistock Square; actually goes to Tavistock Square. So, if he wanted to get to Tavistock Square, he could just have stayed on the number 91 bus, and been sure of getting directly to Tavistock Square. The number 91 bus route goes from King’s Cross to Tavistock Square. That is conclusive proof that that particular number 30 bus was part of Peter Power and his customer’s mock-terrorist drill, pre-rigged with explosives, like the three tube-trains, and was pre-planned to be diverted into, and blown up in, Tavistock Square, rather than blown up by a backpack bomb. Whoever planned this, obviously planned to kill Hasib Hussain with that bus explosion, so he could not tell anyone what had happened. |
Here Muad'dib seems to be arguing that H.H. might really have been on the 30 bus. His story has a bit of a problem in getting the group to Canary wharf by 10.30, given that the DLR (Docklands Light Railway) had been closed down. It predicts that there should be some CCTV footage of the four in London, as well as at Luton station, albeit arriving somewhat late, and this is could be a difficulty, because the police have not in two years been able to produce this. The main difficulty lies in the notion that British police could shoot dead three people, at a busy location, with hardly any media coverage.
The Testimony of ‘Gareth:’ (7)
'I was working in the main Canary Wharf building on the morning of J7. I was contracted to a mailroom and worked in the same office as the facilities people. These are the people that have the responsibility for the health and safety for the bank’s employees and every office throughout London has a team of these people.
'In these offices is an electronic wall panel linked directly to the government, through which they can send information incase of an emergency. On the morning of 7/7, every facilities office received a message that their had been a power surge in the London underground. This was put out, but nothing was said about any explosions. Only Sky news and the other news broadcasters reported them. '
'As time passed the facilities people asked me and a colleague to go and prepare food and water at an evacuation site the bank were paying for as well as set up a phone line and internet connection. That was at a church in Mile End, which was over a mile away. We took a small 5-man passenger lift down to the shopping precinct under the tower. We soon found out that a section of the shops had been marked off-limits by security. The main HSBC entrance is underground where the shops that had been blocked off were. As well as being blocked off by many security personnel, they had also cut the lights so no-one could see what was happening in the area they were guarding. I thought this was strange, because there were no reports of explosions at Canary Wharf on the news.
'By this time there were a lot of people at the train station, but could only get there by following certain routes because the CW security where blocking off areas to the public, so they were being led. Anyway, me and my colleague made our way to the street and soon noticed there wasn't any cars on the roads, only emergency vehicles. This was also odd.
'After we left the Isle of Dogs we noticed the police had set road-blocks denying anyone access, but never said why. At this point on our journey my colleague somehow received a phone call from a friend working in the city saying that someone had been shot and killed by a sniper at CW. A lot of people tried to call relatives, but the phones had been jammed. After hearing about the explosions and then bus explosion our office caught wind of snipers having shot some people at ground level outside the building next to us. We heard that the HSBC staff were being told to stay away from their windows
1. http://jforjustice.co.uk/77/ 7/7 Ripple Effect
2. Timesonline 18.12.05, Rachel North ‘The July 7th Questions that Still Haunt victims.’
3. www.mayor-of-London.co.uk/blog/2006/06/mobile_phones_networks_access_o verload_control_london_july_7th_2005.html
4. A ‘power-surge’ was the official story for much of that morning. But, a power surge ought merely to have blown the fuses, which would (a) have stopped the trains and (b) brought on the emergency lighting. Here is an electrician’s view: ‘During the first hour following the blasts, the 'official version' attributed the cause of the explosion to 'an electrical power surge'. Hmm....as a qualified and experienced electrician, I cannot quite figure how a 'power surge' can lead to an explosion. Electricity does not explode, and unless the laws of the physics have once again changed … we have a serious flaw to contend with.’ http://planetquo.com/7-7-The-London-Terror-Attack-Death-Of-A-Nation
5. Feb 2005, Ahmed p116.
6. ref: South London.co.uk 'Hidden holdall bomb' causes carnage by Ben Ashford.
7. http://westyorkshiretruth.aceboard.com/225988-9331-5906-1-ripple-effec t.htm This video was sent to Muad’Dib and helped to inform the theme of his video. One would like to hear when 'Gareth' first wrote this down.
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
6.86 KB |
| Viewed: |
2515 Time(s) |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
