Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 12:09 pm Post subject: 3 tube terror 'dry runs' before 7/7
THE TV SHOW
Tue 16 May 2004 - Panorama 'London Under Attack' - 3 London Underground Bombs and one on a lorry - featuring 'terror expert' Peter Power.
THE TERROR DRILL
Operation Atlantic Blue 4-8 April 2005 - bombs on buses and on underground - in conjunction with international summit
THE FEATURE FILM
V for Vendetta which includes a tube train packed with explosives was filmed by Warner brothers between March and June 2005 and due to be released on 5th November 2005.
WB were granted top security clearance to Westminster tunnels etc. with help from Tony Blair's son Ewen Blair. One of the chief fillmakers died mysteriously before the film was released.
wikipedia wrote:
To film the final scene at Westminster, the area from Trafalgar Square and Whitehall up to Parliament and Big Ben had to be closed for three nights from midnight until 5 a.m. This was the first time the security-sensitive area (home to 10 Downing Street and the Ministry of Defence) had ever been closed to accommodate filming. Prime Minister (at the time of filming) Tony Blair's son Euan Blair worked on the film's production and is said (according to an interview with Stephen Fry) to have helped the filmmakers obtain the unparalleled filming access. This drew criticism of Blair from MP David Davis due to the content of the film. However, the makers of the film denied Euan Blair's involvement in the deal, stating that access was acquired through nine months of negotiations with 14 different government departments and agencies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_for_Vendetta_%28film%29#Production
Wilkipedia wrote:
Adrian Biddle went on to work as a cinematographer on a further twenty-five feature films, including Thelma and Louise (1991), for which he received a nomination for the Oscar for Best Cinematography. In 1997 he was voted as the European Cinematographer of the Year for his work on The Butcher Boy. The last film that he worked on, prior to his death at the age of 53 from a myocardial infarction, was V for Vendetta (2006) which was dedicated to his memory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adrian_Biddle
Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 10:09 am Post subject: Re: 3 tube terror 'dry runs' before 7/7
TonyGosling wrote:
THE TV SHOW
Tue 16 May 2004 - Panorama 'London Under Attack' - 3 London Underground Bombs and one on a lorry - featuring 'terror expert' Peter Power.
How does a television documentary constitute a "dry run" of anything?
Quote:
THE TERROR DRILL
Operation Atlantic Blue 4-8 April 2005 - bombs on buses and on underground - in conjunction with international summit
THE FEATURE FILM
V for Vendetta which includes a tube train packed with explosives was filmed by Warner brothers between March and June 2005 and due to be released on 5th November 2005.[/b]
Based on a comic strip written in the 1980s. Is Alan Moore in on it now?
Quote:
WB were granted top security clearance to Westminster tunnels etc. with help from Tony Blair's son Ewen Blair.
One of the chief fillmakers died mysteriously before the film was released.
wikipedia wrote:
To film the final scene at Westminster, the area from Trafalgar Square and Whitehall up to Parliament and Big Ben had to be closed for three nights from midnight until 5 a.m. This was the first time the security-sensitive area (home to 10 Downing Street and the Ministry of Defence) had ever been closed to accommodate filming. Prime Minister (at the time of filming) Tony Blair's son Euan Blair worked on the film's production and is said (according to an interview with Stephen Fry) to have helped the filmmakers obtain the unparalleled filming access. This drew criticism of Blair from MP David Davis due to the content of the film. However, the makers of the film denied Euan Blair's involvement in the deal, stating that access was acquired through nine months of negotiations with 14 different government departments and agencies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_for_Vendetta_%28film%29#Production
No mention of "tunnels" there.
Quote:
Wilkipedia wrote:
Adrian Biddle went on to work as a cinematographer on a further twenty-five feature films, including Thelma and Louise (1991), for which he received a nomination for the Oscar for Best Cinematography. In 1997 he was voted as the European Cinematographer of the Year for his work on The Butcher Boy. The last film that he worked on, prior to his death at the age of 53 from a myocardial infarction, was V for Vendetta (2006) which was dedicated to his memory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adrian_Biddle
He had a heart attack. Where is any credible evidence that anyone - other than those trying to shoe-horn his unfortunate demise into some conspiracy theory or other - view it as "mysterious"?
Quote:
Scotland Yard's Anti-terror chiefs are believed by anonymous sources close to the Met. to be at the heart of a cover-up to fit Muslims up to get the UK population and political classes behind wider anti-Arab Middle Eastern wars and to persuade them to give up their civil liberties.
"Anonymous sources"? How convenient....
Last edited by Nick Cooper on Fri Aug 01, 2008 12:08 pm; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2008 11:42 pm Post subject: Re: 3 tube terror 'dry runs' before 7/7
point 1.
In the doc they ran through an attack on three tube stations
point 2
No, Alan Moore is not 'in on it' but it is a peculiar coincidence
point 3
Alan Biddle died at an early age and unexpectedly
point 4
Millions of people in the UK want an enquiry because they quite rightly don't trust the TV news and proven liar Sir Ian Blair to tell them the ins and outs of what happened that day. The official anonymous, as you are, narrative is full of holes. Why don't you talk to the public about this matter?
Nick Cooper wrote:
TonyGosling wrote:
THE TV SHOW
Tue 16 May 2004 - Panorama 'London Under Attack' - 3 London Underground Bombs and one on a lorry - featuring 'terror expert' Peter Power.
How does a television documentary constitute a "dry run" of anything?
Quote:
THE TERROR DRILL
Operation Atlantic Blue 4-8 April 2005 - bombs on buses and on underground - in conjunction with international summit
THE FEATURE FILM
V for Vendetta which includes a tube train packed with explosives was filmed by Warner brothers between March and June 2005 and due to be released on 5th November 2005.[/b]
Based on a comic strip written in the 1980s. Is Alan Moore in on it now?
Quote:
WB were granted top security clearance to Westminster tunnels etc. with help from Tony Blair's son Ewen Blair.
One of the chief fillmakers died mysteriously before the film was released.
wikipedia wrote:
To film the final scene at Westminster, the area from Trafalgar Square and Whitehall up to Parliament and Big Ben had to be closed for three nights from midnight until 5 a.m. This was the first time the security-sensitive area (home to 10 Downing Street and the Ministry of Defence) had ever been closed to accommodate filming. Prime Minister (at the time of filming) Tony Blair's son Euan Blair worked on the film's production and is said (according to an interview with Stephen Fry) to have helped the filmmakers obtain the unparalleled filming access. This drew criticism of Blair from MP David Davis due to the content of the film. However, the makers of the film denied Euan Blair's involvement in the deal, stating that access was acquired through nine months of negotiations with 14 different government departments and agencies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_for_Vendetta_%28film%29#Production
No mention of "tunnels" there.
Quote:
Wilkipedia wrote:
Adrian Biddle went on to work as a cinematographer on a further twenty-five feature films, including Thelma and Louise (1991), for which he received a nomination for the Oscar for Best Cinematography. In 1997 he was voted as the European Cinematographer of the Year for his work on The Butcher Boy. The last film that he worked on, prior to his death at the age of 53 from a myocardial infarction, was V for Vendetta (2006) which was dedicated to his memory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adrian_Biddle
He had a heart attack. Where is any credible evidence that anyone - other than those trying to shoe-horn his unfortunate demise into some conspiracy theory or other - view it as "mysterious"?
Quote:
Scotland Yard's Anti-terror chiefs are believed by anonymous sources close to the Met. to be at the heart of a cover-up to fit Muslims up to get the UK population and political classes behind wider anti-Arab Middle Eastern wars and to persuade them to give up their civil liberties.
Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2008 12:45 pm Post subject: Re: 3 tube terror 'dry runs' before 7/7
TonyGosling wrote:
point 1.
In the doc they ran through an attack on three tube stations
But how does a TV documentary running through a scenario constitute the same sort of "dry run" that Atlantic Blue clearly was? More to the point, it was part of a clear trend of BBC documentaries/drama-documentaries around that time about perceived terrorist threats, i.e.:
Smallpox 2002 (Feb 2002) Release of smallpox by terrorist
Crisis Command: Hijack (Feb 2004) Aircraft highjacking and Underground train/mainline station bombings
Dirty War (Sep 2004) Radiological bomb outside Liverpool St Tube station
So out of just these four programmes, the 7 July bombings bore a very superficial resemblance to one of them? If there is any sort of "connection," surely it's more likely than it being nothing more than someone having seen the programme and thinking, "that's a good idea"?
Quote:
point 2
No, Alan Moore is not 'in on it' but it is a peculiar coincidence
The explosive-laden Tube train was in the original comic strip in the 1980s, it's not like it was one of the new elements added to the film's narrative. The film was in development hell for years, so unless you're suggesting that Warner Brothers is in on it, and that production was deliberately held up so that it took place when it did, then no, it isn't anything more than a coincidence.
Quote:
point 3
Alan Biddle died at an early age and unexpectedly
Which does not automatically make it "mysterious".
Quote:
point 4
Millions of people in the UK want an enquiry because they quite rightly don't trust the TV news and proven liar Sir Ian Blair to tell them the ins and outs of what happened that day. The official anonymous, as you are, narrative is full of holes. Why don't you talk to the public about this matter?
That's not really relevant to you making wildly tenuous "connections", is it?
Oh, and how exactly am I "anonymous," as you put it?
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2008 10:34 pm Post subject: An announcement by Sir Ian Blair is not justice
An announcement by Sir Ian Blair is not justice
I'm so so glad you're convinced all these fact are mere coincidence. That's a bit of a coincidence in itself isn't it.
Some people just can't let debunkers of that murderous masonic Met maniac Sir Ian Blair's lies lie.
All the more reason for a genuaine enquiry which doesn't discard a shred of given statements in the final report. For history and the bereaved families' sake.
point 1
Thanks for all the other filmic references but none, no not one, detracts from the amazing appearance of Peter Power in a 'real' version of his three 'fake' tube bombs in the BBC show from a few months before.
point 2
Again yes the timing of the filming of V for Vendetta just before the bomb attack is a bizarre coincidence
point 3 & 4
All these coincidences could ad up to a pattern methinks - and more and more reasons why justice should be done and the entire bomb attack properly investigated by officials, public and journalists. Which to date it has never been,
Many journalists believe they will be targetted by theirmanagers if they bang on about this - it's too big for us - is the sort of answer they get from their editors. Only freelancers dare venture into this area.
Scotland Yard who as I have explained elsewhere is riddled with corruption can simply not put their crooked chief constable up to tell the world what happened and expect the vicims' families to forget it and go home that is not even close to justice.
Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 8:02 am Post subject: Re: An announcement by Sir Ian Blair is not justice
TonyGosling wrote:
An announcement by Sir Ian Blair is not justice
I'm so so glad you're convinced all these fact are mere coincidence. That's a bit of a coincidence in itself isn't it.
Some people just can't let debunkers of that murderous masonic Met maniac Sir Ian Blair's lies lie.
All the more reason for a genuaine enquiry which doesn't discard a shred of given statements in the final report. For history and the bereaved families' sake.
point 1
Thanks for all the other filmic references but none, no not one, detracts from the amazing appearance of Peter Power in a 'real' version of his three 'fake' tube bombs in the BBC show from a few months before.
May 2004 to July 2005 is hardly "a few months," and complaining about Peter Power appearing as a media pundit on security matters is about as unsusprising as Bob Stewart being called upon to comment on military operations, or Alan Titchmarsh on gardening, for that matter. "Expert" is involved in a programme about their field of "expertise". Wow! That's a coincidence!
Quote:
point 2
Again yes the timing of the filming of V for Vendetta just before the bomb attack is a bizarre coincidence
Yes, a coincidence that cannot sensibly "mean" anything other than what it is. You've also failed to explain how the stop-start-stop-start and methodical filming of tightly-scripted fiction constitutes a "dry run". Maybe next you'd like to suggest that actors pretending to perform open heart surgery in Holby City constitutes preparation for doing it for real...?
Quote:
point 3 & 4
All these coincidences could ad up to a pattern methinks - and more and more reasons why justice should be done and the entire bomb attack properly investigated by officials, public and journalists. Which to date it has never been,
So you are suggesting that these events were deliberately arranged in preparation with advanced knowledge of 7 July? In which case that would mean the BBC and Warner Brothers are complicit, right?
Quote:
Many journalists believe they will be targetted by theirmanagers if they bang on about this - it's too big for us - is the sort of answer they get from their editors. Only freelancers dare venture into this area.
So they're "scared off," but you and others aren't? That seems a bit remiss of the Dark Forces, doesn't it?
Quote:
Scotland Yard who as I have explained elsewhere is riddled with corruption can simply not put their crooked chief constable up to tell the world what happened and expect the vicims' families to forget it and go home that is not even close to justice.
If you want justice too for those 50 plus bereaved friends families then please feel free to discuss how we get it here.
"Justice" won't be served by ludicrous conspiracy theories.
I note that you have failed to comment on my request to explain your reference to me as "anonymous". Would you care to do so?
Can't this be moved to Critic's Corner so those of us sickened by the likes of Nick Cooper can more easily avoid his nonsense?
7/7 Ripple Effect
Link _________________ "The conflict between corporations and activists is that of narcolepsy versus remembrance. The corporations have money, power and influence. Our sole influence is public outrage. Extract from "Cloud Atlas (page 125) by David Mitchell.
Joined: 10 Dec 2005 Posts: 2017 Location: Croydon, Surrey
Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 12:53 pm Post subject: Re: An announcement by Sir Ian Blair is not justice
Nick Cooper wrote:
Discussion is fine, as long as it's rational and logical. Stringing together random coincidences proves and acheives nothing.
Discussion of anomalies and suspicious coincidences and outright misinformation is always depicted as 'fanciful imaginings' by those who insist that the official narrative is the truth.
For what it's worth, I and many like me believe that the official narrative is an appalling and wicked bunch of lies put together by the same criminals who work so hard to make us accept the official narrative of 9/11.
Joined: 10 Dec 2005 Posts: 2017 Location: Croydon, Surrey
Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 1:23 pm Post subject:
Here is a part of The Protocols of Zion.....from Protocol no. 12
ONLY LIES PRINTED
15. Methods of organization like these, imperceptible to the public eye but absolutely sure, are the best calculated to succeed in bringing the attention and the confidence of the public to the side of our government. Thanks to such methods we shall be in a position as from time to time may be required, to excite or to tranquillize the public mind on political questions, to persuade or to confuse, printing now truth, now lies, facts or their contradictions, according as they may be well or ill received, always very cautiously feeling our ground before stepping upon it .... WE SHALL HAVE A SURE TRIUMPH OVER OUR OPPONENTS SINCE THEY WILL NOT HAVE AT THEIR DISPOSITION ORGANS OF THE PRESS IN WHICH THEY CAN GIVE FULL AND FINAL EXPRESSION TO THEIR VIEWS owing to the aforesaid methods of dealing with the press. We shall not even need to refute them except very superficially.
Freedom to lie, distort, provoke, support mass murderers and attempt to undermine the aim of this site. This is not a debating society (although Critic's Corner has been established for that - God knows why!) but a place where people who have become aware of the lies peddled by your kind can assist each other in spreading the truth. It is totally contrary to the aims of this place to allow your kind any platform, and bleating about freedom of speech doesn't wash. You already have the mainstream media pushing your lies and avoiding the truth. Just about every newspaper, TV station and radio station spreads your lies. Just why do you need to come here as well? I think I know, but you are fighting a losing battle as your version is so full of holes and blatant inventions you are going to be exposed, as more and more people become aware of what creeps you are. _________________ "The conflict between corporations and activists is that of narcolepsy versus remembrance. The corporations have money, power and influence. Our sole influence is public outrage. Extract from "Cloud Atlas (page 125) by David Mitchell.
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 6:56 pm Post subject:
To be fair to Nick he has made some good points - but entirely missed mine which is that there may be a pattern here of different 'precursor' events before the London Bombings happened.
It is not impossible that terror exercises and TV shows may even give real terrorists bad and evil ideas which they then carry out.
Equally exercises can be used as 'cover' for real attacks by traitorous moles within the authorities.
remember this vid though to put all this in perspective
Here is a part of The Protocols of Zion.....from Protocol no. 12
ONLY LIES PRINTED
15. Methods of organization like these, imperceptible to the public eye but absolutely sure, are the best calculated to succeed in bringing the attention and the confidence of the public to the side of our government. Thanks to such methods we shall be in a position as from time to time may be required, to excite or to tranquillize the public mind on political questions, to persuade or to confuse, printing now truth, now lies, facts or their contradictions, according as they may be well or ill received, always very cautiously feeling our ground before stepping upon it .... WE SHALL HAVE A SURE TRIUMPH OVER OUR OPPONENTS SINCE THEY WILL NOT HAVE AT THEIR DISPOSITION ORGANS OF THE PRESS IN WHICH THEY CAN GIVE FULL AND FINAL EXPRESSION TO THEIR VIEWS owing to the aforesaid methods of dealing with the press. We shall not even need to refute them except very superficially.
So the connectioin between a forgery by the Tsarist secret police and the events of July 7 is...?
Freedom to lie, distort, provoke, support mass murderers and attempt to undermine the aim of this site. This is not a debating society (although Critic's Corner has been established for that - God knows why!) but a place where people who have become aware of the lies peddled by your kind can assist each other in spreading the truth. It is totally contrary to the aims of this place to allow your kind any platform, and bleating about freedom of speech doesn't wash. You already have the mainstream media pushing your lies and avoiding the truth. Just about every newspaper, TV station and radio station spreads your lies. Just why do you need to come here as well? I think I know, but you are fighting a losing battle as your version is so full of holes and blatant inventions you are going to be exposed, as more and more people become aware of what creeps you are.
I'll happily accept "provoke" in the context of pointing out obvious illogical or counter-factual thinking, and if you think that constitutes "undermin(ing) the aim of this site," then that says more about the site that anythign I have ever said. As for "lies," "distort(ing)" or "support(ing) mass murderers" then perhaps you would be good enough to give specific examples. As for you references to "your kind," "your lies," "your version," and "what creeps you are"? Perhaps you would like to explain exactly who you think I am. Come on - cards on the table. After all, you seem so keen on full disclosures, so go ahead, say what you really think. Unlike most people here, I'm using my real name, not hiding behind a screen-name like you and so many others.
The bottom line is that if your sentiments are echoed by the more than a few people here, then clearly this forum is nothing like you describe. If all you are going to do is sit around weaving more and more ludicrous "theories," cherry-picking every scrap of "evidence" - no matter how trivial or tenuous - then you achieve what, exactly? It strikes me that the this is what is the real house of cards. Nobody - or very few people - here are prepared to question or debate in any great detail, because they're terrified that if they dispute what they silently disbelieve someone else to be claiming or suggesting, then others might start attacking what they believe.
To be fair to Nick he has made some good points - but entirely missed mine which is that there may be a pattern here of different 'precursor' events before the London Bombings happened.
No, I get your point, I just don't accept it.
Quote:
It is not impossible that terror exercises and TV shows may even give real terrorists bad and evil ideas which they then carry out.
As I said...
Quote:
Equally exercises can be used as 'cover' for real attacks by traitorous moles within the authorities.
Which implies a phenomenal degree of control over the BBC and Warner Brothers, then. As stated earlier, the BBC programme was just one of a number of similarly-themed productions that appeared at the time, which is hardly surprising in the wake of 9/11. You can't isolate it and imply that it was something extraordinarily unexpected, when actually it was part of a clear trend of speculation.
As for V for Vendetta, a major film from a major studio, costing tens of millions of dollars to make, adapted from a twenty year old comic strip by a leading (if not the leadining) writer in the field, only one small part of which you seem to think "fits" the purpose you're suggesting. But even then, it wasn't actually shown until after 7/7, and while the filming did get some publicity, few people will have been aware or it as a whole - let alone the specific aspect which seems to interest you - until after 7/7. So what does that achieve, if it was "planned"? It also seems ironic, to say the least, to send a "message" via a film that advocates civil insurrection. Of course, I'm slightly surprised that you haven't highlighted the fact that part of the narrative - which wasn't part of the original comic strip - rests on exposing a past supposed "terrorist" attack as having been the work of those in power. Wow! I wonder what that bit "means"?! Apart from just being a piece of fiction, of course.
I would also contend that the idea that making TV or film fiction is an excpetionally poor way to "practice" for anything. Have you ever actually seen a TV programme being recorded or a film being shot, Tony? People stand around; equipment is checked; actors run the run their lines one last time; eventually everthing is ready to go. But maybe someone fluffs their lines, or something happens in the background that shouldn't, or a special effect does work, or works too well, or something else goes wrong. Even if all seems to have gone smoothly, checks afterwards prove otherwise. Hair in the gate, glitch in the recording, someone's timing was wrong, etc., etc., so they start again. It takes hours of work to produce what can be just a few seconds of screen time.
Last edited by Nick Cooper on Fri Aug 01, 2008 7:59 am; edited 1 time in total
Nobody - or very few people - here are prepared to question or debate in any great detail
Any more! Many of us are sickened by your kind and see no point in "debating" with you, which is why Critic's Corner exists and why this thread should be there. I make a point of having nothing more to do with your kind and avoid Critic's Corner like the plague it is. Thanks for the invite to waste time listening to your vile lies but no thanks. I can read any of that nonsense in any mainstream newspaper. Suicide bombers on the tube for God's sake! All they had to do was leave their bombs to do their job and flee to do the same another day, but we are supposed to believe they pointlessly and deliberately killed themselves while they were at it. What cack!! If anybody reading this thread has yet to view 7/7 Ripple Effect I urge you to do so.
Link _________________ "The conflict between corporations and activists is that of narcolepsy versus remembrance. The corporations have money, power and influence. Our sole influence is public outrage. Extract from "Cloud Atlas (page 125) by David Mitchell.
Nobody - or very few people - here are prepared to question or debate in any great detail
Any more! Many of us are sickened by your kind and see no point in "debating" with you, which is why Critic's Corner exists and why this thread should be there. I make a point of having nothing more to do with your kind and avoid Critic's Corner like the plague it is.
"Your kind!" "Your kind!" You're like a stuck record. Or a child clamping their hands over their ears and screaming "Not listening! Not listening!"
As for your desire to ghettoise me in Critic's Corner, thnen that just says it all, really. So many of you whinge about not being heard in the mainstream media, but the reality is that you are just as keen - if not more so - to marginalise those who disagree with you.
Quote:
Thanks for the invite to waste time listening to your vile lies but no thanks.
Still waiting for you to identify those "lies"....
Quote:
I can read any of that nonsense in any mainstream newspaper. Suicide bombers on the tube for God's sake! All they had to do was leave their bombs to do their job and flee to do the same another day, but we are supposed to believe they pointlessly and deliberately killed themselves while they were at it. What cack!!
Oh, absolutely, because there have never ever been any suicide bombers before, have there? That's also ironic given the tendency of those hereabouts to cherry-pick from the past for whatever or whoever they think are responsible may have done previously. "They did that once, so this must be the same thing again..."
Joined: 10 Dec 2005 Posts: 2017 Location: Croydon, Surrey
Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2008 8:12 am Post subject:
Nick Cooper wrote:
kbo234 wrote:
Here is a part of The Protocols of Zion.....from Protocol no. 12
ONLY LIES PRINTED
15. Methods of organization like these, imperceptible to the public eye but absolutely sure, are the best calculated to succeed in bringing the attention and the confidence of the public to the side of our government. Thanks to such methods we shall be in a position as from time to time may be required, to excite or to tranquillize the public mind on political questions, to persuade or to confuse, printing now truth, now lies, facts or their contradictions, according as they may be well or ill received, always very cautiously feeling our ground before stepping upon it .... WE SHALL HAVE A SURE TRIUMPH OVER OUR OPPONENTS SINCE THEY WILL NOT HAVE AT THEIR DISPOSITION ORGANS OF THE PRESS IN WHICH THEY CAN GIVE FULL AND FINAL EXPRESSION TO THEIR VIEWS owing to the aforesaid methods of dealing with the press. We shall not even need to refute them except very superficially.
So the connectioin between a forgery by the Tsarist secret police and the events of July 7 is...?
The point is that major anomalies and extremely suspicious coincidences are never allowed into the public domain....never mind being debated in the public domain. The government deemed that there will be no public Inquiry. ......so no one need refute the claims on sites like this (except superficially) ....
......unless, of course, some aspect of evidence does seep into the public consciousness.
Then, as with 9/11 and, more lately, Building 7......there is no genuine investigation but no stone is left unturned in the business of one-sidedly trying to discredit any evidence that contradicts the official narrative.
By the way, Makow (above) is a Jewish writer who does not believe that 'The Protocols' were a Tsarist forgery. I agree with him.......but whether forgery or not these 'Protocols' describe almost precisely how the world works today. The 'anti-semitic' meme, again, is the biggest obstacle preventing people seriously considering the contents of these protocols and their relevance to our current difficulties.
Joined: 10 Dec 2005 Posts: 2017 Location: Croydon, Surrey
Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2008 8:25 am Post subject:
Nick Cooper wrote:
"Your kind!" "Your kind!" You're like a stuck record. Or a child clamping their hands over their ears and screaming "Not listening! Not listening!"
We've heard everything you have to say...over a period of months.
We know you do not debate honestly, you are just here to post broad-brush denials against every iota of evidence that contradicts official narratives. Critic's corner is where you should be and that gives you more 'airtime' than you deserve.
Nick Cooper wrote:
As for your desire to ghettoise me in Critic's Corner, then that just says it all, really. So many of you whinge about not being heard in the mainstream media, but the reality is that you are just as keen - if not more so - to marginalise those who disagree with you.
The purpose of this site is to expose the lies printed in the mainstream media. It is no surprise to us that they do not like this and send their liars here to disrupt and otherwise interfere with this purpose. The reason you are 'ghettoised is because we've seen your style, it is familiar, and we think (many here would say 'know') that your engagement in 'argument' with us is not honest.
Here is a part of The Protocols of Zion.....from Protocol no. 12
ONLY LIES PRINTED
15. Methods of organization like these, imperceptible to the public eye but absolutely sure, are the best calculated to succeed in bringing the attention and the confidence of the public to the side of our government. Thanks to such methods we shall be in a position as from time to time may be required, to excite or to tranquillize the public mind on political questions, to persuade or to confuse, printing now truth, now lies, facts or their contradictions, according as they may be well or ill received, always very cautiously feeling our ground before stepping upon it .... WE SHALL HAVE A SURE TRIUMPH OVER OUR OPPONENTS SINCE THEY WILL NOT HAVE AT THEIR DISPOSITION ORGANS OF THE PRESS IN WHICH THEY CAN GIVE FULL AND FINAL EXPRESSION TO THEIR VIEWS owing to the aforesaid methods of dealing with the press. We shall not even need to refute them except very superficially.
So the connectioin between a forgery by the Tsarist secret police and the events of July 7 is...?
The point is that major anomalies and extremely suspicious coincidences are never allowed into the public domain....never mind being debated in the public domain. The government deemed that there will be no public Inquiry. ......so no one need refute the claims on sites like this (except superficially) ....
......unless, of course, some aspect of evidence does seep into the public consciousness.
That presupposes that the "major anomalies and extremely suspicious coincidences" actually mean anything. Life is made up with things that may seem to be "wrong" and coincidences, but that does mean that they are part of anything other than poor recording or reporting, or purchance. Particularly in a chaotic situation, information is easily garbled or unintentionally corrrupted, and we see this with a lot of aspects of 7/7. Yet even when corrections or clarifications appear, some choose not to believe them, prefering instead to represent the original version as the "truth," or that the amendment as part of a "cover-up," e.g. the persistence of the "carraige 346" myth. But the reality is that people do get things wrong, and misinformation (as opposed to disinformation) can persist for a very long time. I'll illustrate this with a nice neutral example, which I'm sure some people will love, because it involves a bomb and the Piccadilly line...
On 13 October 1940, a bomb from a German aircraft demolished two three-storey houses adjacent to Bounds Green station. The shockwave caused the collapse of the northern end of the westbound tunnel, killing a number of the people sheltering there from the air raid. The damage was so extensive that it took five days to get the last body out, and almost two months for the line to reopen. If you read any of the stadard reference works on the history of the Underground, all will tell you that the fatalities were sixteen Belgian refugees and three British citizen. Some accounts are prosaic, almost romaticised, emphasising the tragedy of people who had fled the Nazi invasion of their country, only to die in a north London suburb, while the three Britons were welcomed into the "Belgian enclave" at that end of the platform, as they were newcomers who had only just moved into the area, having been bombed out of two homes previously.
Except it's almost entirely wrong. The Commonwealth War Grave Commision's register of civilian dead shows that in actual fact sixteen people were killed immediately, and a seventeenth in hospital the next day, but only three of them were Belgian. On top of that, recorded addresses show that the most likely candidates for the "English newcomers" are actually a family of four of at least partial Italian descent. I first uncovered this 2003 and documented it on my website*, which - if I may say so - is a fairly popular resource on the Underground during WW2. Anyone Googling the subject would be hard-pressed to miss it, and yet despite that, new books on the Undeground have appeared which repeat the old "16 Belgians + 3 Britons" story, one being specifically on the history of the Piccadilly line.
Now, this is clearly an important detail of a historical event in which - regardless of their nationality - a large number of people died. But do I think this constitutes a deliberate attempt to suppress the truth, perhaps as part of some diabolical scheme to generate and then sustain sympathy for the Belgian people? Of course not. Do I think this is a good example that other people supposedly researching and writing about a particular subject have not been as thorough as they would have their publishers and readers believe? Certainly. The unfortunate reality is that effectively every subsequent account of this particular event can be traced back to a single book published by London Transport in 1947, no doubt in good faith, but based heavily on their own records of events during the War, which common sense tells us cannot be treated as wholely accurate for a whole host of innocuous reasons.
By the way, Makow (above) is a Jewish writer who does not believe that 'The Protocols' were a Tsarist forgery. I agree with him.......but whether forgery or not these 'Protocols' describe almost precisely how the world works today. The 'anti-semitic' meme, again, is the biggest obstacle preventing people seriously considering the contents of these protocols and their relevance to our current difficulties.
An interesting theory. I do have a tendency, though, to be suspiscious of people who are keen to highlight the level of their qualifications, even when they do not relate to the subject they apparently wish to add legitimacy to their writing about, in this case someone with a English Literature doctorate writing about history/politics....
Last edited by Nick Cooper on Fri Aug 01, 2008 12:08 pm; edited 2 times in total
"Your kind!" "Your kind!" You're like a stuck record. Or a child clamping their hands over their ears and screaming "Not listening! Not listening!"
We've heard everything you have to say...over a period of months.
Actually, this is the first thread I've posted to since 3 January. Sorry to disappoint you, but I have had more important things to do, although I have lurked occasionally to see what the latest topics of "discussion" were. I was mildly amused by Paul Wright's pompous categorising of me as amongst "what factions oppose us" in March, and Tony's subsequent suggestion that I'm the barrister who just happens to share my name, but I guess once you've been accused of working for MI5 (within days of my first posting here), any other erroneous speculation pales a bit. The only reason I've stuck my head above the parapet now is that Tony's first post in this thread struck me as too ludicrous to go unchallenged, and after almost two weeks it was clear that nobody else was going to.
Quote:
We know you do not debate honestly, you are just here to post broad-brush denials against every iota of evidence that contradicts official narratives. Critic's corner is where you should be and that gives you more 'airtime' than you deserve.
Which is really nothing more than a "broad-brush denial" on your part. I have debated specific points and details time and time again. If something appears to be nonsense, then I will say so; if someone says something that I know to be factually inaccurate, then I will correct them. If people can't handle that, then it suggests that they are not really interested in the truth at all.
Quote:
Nick Cooper wrote:
As for your desire to ghettoise me in Critic's Corner, then that just says it all, really. So many of you whinge about not being heard in the mainstream media, but the reality is that you are just as keen - if not more so - to marginalise those who disagree with you.
The purpose of this site is to expose the lies printed in the mainstream media. It is no surprise to us that they do not like this and send their liars here to disrupt and otherwise interfere with this purpose. The reason you are 'ghettoised is because we've seen your style, it is familiar, and we think (many here would say 'know') that your engagement in 'argument' with us is not honest.
Nobody has "sent" me anywhere. The reality is that I'm just an ordinary member of the public, who is neither paid nor ordered to say what I have here. To be honest, after wading through so much here, there is very little that I would consider would constitute "lies printed in the mainstream media" that can't be explained by numerous innocuous reasons, although that does include poor or plainly incompetent standards of research and reporting. People make mistakes, and even when they are corrected, sometimes the early incorrect versions prevail, but that doesn't make them part of some all encompassing plan. It strikes me that much of the "case" here depends on a mass of quite frankly irrelevant detail - never mind the quality, feel the width!
If there is anything more sinister to 7/7 than - as I believe - a monumental ball-dropping by the secret services and a resultant opportunism by a paranoid and control-seeking government, it's not going to be exposed by a small number of people obsessing over finding meaning in trivial details that were never true in the first place.
As an aside, I see that I have now been dubbed a "9/11 Truth critic" which is pretty remarkable as I do think think I have said much, if anything, about 9/11. It's funny that some people decry being called "conspiracy theorists" as it is a label which inherently questions and marginalises their views, but isn't this exactly the same thing? "Oh, this person is a 'Critic' - I don't need to talk to them."
Joined: 10 Dec 2005 Posts: 2017 Location: Croydon, Surrey
Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2008 1:17 pm Post subject:
Tony,
Can you please do something to limit this person to 'Critic's Corner'? Last time he was here he stuck around for ages with his particular style of disingenuous blather. We can do without all that again.
Tony,
Can you please do something to limit this person to 'Critic's Corner'? Last time he was here he stuck around for ages with his particular style of disingenuous blather. We can do without all that again.
Yes, you can all do without your nonsense being challenged.
I wouldn't worry though - I have a wedding to organise, books to write, things to do, and a life to lead, so I'm not likely to be here much longer, and have no desire to get any deeper than this one thread. Quite frankly, it's rather disappointing that things here are as boringly predictably as they were six months ago....
Joined: 10 Dec 2005 Posts: 2017 Location: Croydon, Surrey
Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2008 1:59 pm Post subject:
Nick Cooper wrote:
kbo234 wrote:
Tony,
Can you please do something to limit this person to 'Critic's Corner'? Last time he was here he stuck around for ages with his particular style of disingenuous blather. We can do without all that again.
Yes, you can all do without your nonsense being challenged.
I wouldn't worry though - I have a wedding to organise, books to write, things to do, and a life to lead, so I'm not likely to be here much longer, and have no desire to get any deeper than this one thread. Quite frankly, it's rather disappointing that things here are as boringly predictably as they were six months ago....
You are just too boring and predictable yourself and you do not challenge substantial points. You pick out fairly loose comments about anomalies that look like connections but cannot be proven to be...then you drone on ad infinitum exploiting side-issues in an obvious way.
What do you make of the fact that Peter Power went onto the radio on 7/7 and said that "the hairs were standing up on his neck" because the exercise his company were involved with had 3 bombs going off in precisely the stations that were attacked....so they had to switch from 'exercise' to 'real time'.
What do you make of that? I'm sure you'll have something very interesting to say about it?
Oh, absolutely, because there have never ever been any suicide bombers before,
Not when they have alternatives. No suicide bomber at Madrid or Bali. No suicides on 9/11 in spite of the drivel we are fed. No suicide bombers except in situations where there is no other alternative to get the fiendish work done such as in Israel where security is so tight that there is no other way. Suicide bombing is a last resort not a first choice as you would have people believe happened on 7/7. Typical cack and the reason why you should be booted off here. _________________ "The conflict between corporations and activists is that of narcolepsy versus remembrance. The corporations have money, power and influence. Our sole influence is public outrage. Extract from "Cloud Atlas (page 125) by David Mitchell.
Tony,
Can you please do something to limit this person to 'Critic's Corner'? Last time he was here he stuck around for ages with his particular style of disingenuous blather. We can do without all that again.
Yes, you can all do without your nonsense being challenged.
I wouldn't worry though - I have a wedding to organise, books to write, things to do, and a life to lead, so I'm not likely to be here much longer, and have no desire to get any deeper than this one thread. Quite frankly, it's rather disappointing that things here are as boringly predictably as they were six months ago....
You are just too boring and predictable yourself and you do not challenge substantial points. You pick out fairly loose comments about anomalies that look like connections but cannot be proven to be...then you drone on ad infinitum exploiting side-issues in an obvious way.
What do you make of the fact that Peter Power went onto the radio on 7/7 and said that "the hairs were standing up on his neck" because the exercise his company were involved with had 3 bombs going off in precisely the stations that were attacked....so they had to switch from 'exercise' to 'real time'.
What do you make of that? I'm sure you'll have something very interesting to say about it?
Well, there are lot of problems with building anything out of it, not least because Power did not say it was three bombs in his first interview on 7/7 (from which he's obviously thinking on his feet and a little hesitant/confused), while in his second interview that evening he categorically stated, "simultaneous attacks on an underground and mainline station." Now that's either two stations - i.e. he meant "an underground and a mainline station" - or a single combined underground/mainline station.
The major problem is one of perception. Power's perception of the actual bombing is through the prism of his exercise, while for most people, their perception of Power's exercise is through the prism of the actual bombings. People are quick to assume when Power said in his first interview, "an exercise... based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning," he meant that the all of the stations "where" explosions took place appears in his exercise, as opposed to all of the station in his exercise being amongst those "where" explosions took place. The two might seem to be the same, but they're not. And we shouldn't forget that at the time of that first interview there was still a lot of confusions over exactly which stations the explosions had occurred at.
If, for the the sake of argument, we assume that Power's exercise had bombs going off at King's Cross and Aldgate, what he said in his first interview is poor English, but still true, since precisely the stations in the exercise had appeared at that time to have been the location of some of the attacks.
Even the fact that Power's company was running thieir exercise on the day isn't particularly significant, and we should be clear about what they actually do:
People should ask themselves some basic question, such as - from the above costs - just how many how many clients would they need to have, and just how many hours of training they would be running to make the business financially viable? I would assume that someone has called up the financial records of the company in the past, which should give an idea of the level of turnover, which would aid an estimate of the client base, etc. It's all going to add up to a lot of training sessions in any one year.
Last edited by Nick Cooper on Fri Aug 01, 2008 4:22 pm; edited 1 time in total
Oh, absolutely, because there have never ever been any suicide bombers before,
Not when they have alternatives. No suicide bomber at Madrid or Bali.
Except when some of the Madrid bombers were cornered by the police, of course.
Quote:
No suicides on 9/11 in spite of the drivel we are fed. No suicide bombers except in situations where there is no other alternative to get the fiendish work done such as in Israel where security is so tight that there is no other way.
Apart from rocket attacks, of course. And Sri Lanka. The Tamils have got as part are aerial bombing, yet still use suicide bombing, as well.
Quote:
Suicide bombing is a last resort not a first choice as you would have people believe happened on 7/7.
How do you know it was a first choice? How do you know that those involved had the level of technical expertise that the Madrid or Bali bombers had, and thus would not have had to set off their bombs manually? How do you know that they didn't think that they were certain to get caught, but were prepared to die rather than that happening. Suicide bombing is as much a political statement as a physical act.
Quote:
Typical cack and the reason why you should be booted off here.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
