| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Ed
Minor Poster
Joined: 29 May 2006
Posts: 12
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Henry Wilson
Minor Poster
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 15
|
 Posted: Sat Nov 08, 2008 5:24 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
The BBC have reproduced the cctv picture as supplied by the Met Police in good faith that it is legit. Therefore your critism of the BBC is not a valid one.
It has be claimed by many people that the cctv picture of the alleged bombers is faked but noone to my knowledge has actually provided a competant study of the image to prove the case. And as the cctv video containing this picture has been released a few months ago and is of a better quality, the case for fakery is not well established. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
scubadiver
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 1850
Location: Currently Andover
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 08, 2008 6:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't consider the photo of the alleged bombers to be faked.
_________________
Currently working on a new website |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TonyGosling
Editor
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 18335
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
paul wright
Moderator
Joined: 26 Sep 2005
Posts: 2650
Location: Sunny Bradford, Northern Lights
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 08, 2008 11:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Uh? Come on! It's long been established that this still is totally corrupt in every aspect
Other than having a singular Hasib in frame like the only other two cctv images that day
Scubadiver believes this is real? ffs
_________________
http://www.exopolitics-leeds.co.uk/introduction |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Henry Wilson
Minor Poster
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 15
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 08, 2008 11:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Paul,
It has never been established that the picture is fake. Over and over I have seen people claim it to be fake but none have yet made a competant case for it. And so you are doing just the same in claiming fakery without providing evidence. As you believe it to be fake please state your reasons why. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
paul wright
Moderator
Joined: 26 Sep 2005
Posts: 2650
Location: Sunny Bradford, Northern Lights
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Henry Wilson wrote: | Paul,
It has never been established that the picture is fake. Over and over I have seen people claim it to be fake but none have yet made a competant case for it. And so you are doing just the same in claiming fakery without providing evidence. As you believe it to be fake please state your reasons why. |
Oh - the wrong time frame, when measured against everything else in the story, the poles in front of arm,and bleeding into faces, the wrong reflection, the seeming incorrectness of wet and dry areas, the cropping out of another available image, the smudging of three facial images, the clarity of a dry-run cctv compared to this
This is an utter and complete obvious nonsense and I cannot believe it's a matter of contention
Total and utter nonsense evidence of the official story - at least that is evident?
_________________
http://www.exopolitics-leeds.co.uk/introduction |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
scubadiver
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 1850
Location: Currently Andover
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 6:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Henry Wilson wrote: | Paul,
As you believe it to be fake please state your reasons why. |
ditto!
_________________
Currently working on a new website |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
numeral
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Dec 2005
Posts: 500
Location: South London
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 3:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Don't forget Tanweer's trousers. As the Home Office narrative pointed out:
| Quote: | The Micra stops at Woodall Services on the M1 to fill up with petrol. Tanweer goes in to pay. He is wearing a white T-shirt, dark jacket, white tracksuit bottoms and a baseball cap.
.....
Tanweer is now wearing dark tracksuit bottoms. There is no explanation for this change at present. |
_________________
Follow the numbers |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Henry Wilson
Minor Poster
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 15
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 4:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| paul wright wrote: | Oh - the wrong time frame, when measured against everything else in the story, the poles in front of arm,and bleeding into faces, the wrong reflection, the seeming incorrectness of wet and dry areas, the cropping out of another available image, the smudging of three facial images, the clarity of a dry-run cctv compared to this
This is an utter and complete obvious nonsense and I cannot believe it's a matter of contention
Total and utter nonsense evidence of the official story - at least that is evident? |
Paul,
A case for fakery has to consider the distortions which arise from the composite video signal, analogue video tape and the jpeg compression. The distortions in this picture are severe and unless understood a competant examination of the picture cannot be undertaken.
The faces show no sign of deliberate smudging but are subject to the low resolution of the cctv system and to the loss of detail caused by the jpeg compression.
There is a great loss of detail in the reflection due to the jpeg compression. The resultant distortions within each macro block forms an incoherant image which cannot be judged.
The clarity of the so called 'dummy run' cctv is no better but the colour content is better due to the brighter light.
The railing is not in front of the arm. This is part of the wall behind and not the arm.
The railing bleeding into the face is an illusion. The cheek bone is at the level of the railing and appears to be joining the railing. However the railing is on an incline to the left and so if this was the railing passing through the face then the brightness of the pixels above the line of the cheek bone would be brighter.
Unless you know the time as set in the cctv system it is impossible to use the timestamp as an indication of the actual time the cctv image was recorded. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
numeral
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Dec 2005
Posts: 500
Location: South London
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 5:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Concerning jpeg compression an uncompressed image must exist. However:
| Quote: | Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2006120002592
I write in connection with your request for information which was received by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS). I note you seek access to the following information:
* Request that the uncompressed image be released. All files possessed by the Metropolitan Police Service, in whatever format, from which the released image was derived, be released. .
DECISION
Having located and considered the relevant information, I am afraid that I am not required by statute to release the information requested. This letter serves as a Refusal Notice under Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act).
REASONS FOR DECISION
Section 17 of the Act provides:
(1) A public authority which, in relation to any request for information, is to any extent relying on a claim that any provision in part II relating to the duty to confirm or deny is relevant to the request or on a claim that information is exempt information must, within the time for complying with section 1(1), give the applicant a notice which-
(a) states the fact,
(B) specifies the exemption in question, and
© states (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the
exemption applies.
Harm
In considering whether or not this information should be disclosed, I have considered the potential HARM that could be caused by disclosure:
The following areas of Harm are judged relevant:
Proper judicial process (long established legal processes exist through which access to relevant material is achieved - CPIA, civil discovery, etc.). FOIA access should not usurp those processes.
The above exemptions are Class-based absolute exemptions. Where information falls within these categories it is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.
Section 30: Investigations And Proceedings Conducted By Public Authorities
The above exemptions are Qualified exemptions, some class-based, others requiring a prejudice test.
PUBLIC INTEREST TEST
Considerations Favouring Disclosure
o Public awareness
In the context of this enquiry, this factor may assist in explaining the events of that day. That might assist the public to understand more clearly and accurately what actually occured, and might assist to abate inaccurate speculation.
Considerations Favouring Non-Disclosure
The following criteria will be applied by the Police Service in favour of non-disclosure:
o Investigations
Information relating to an investigation will rarely be disclosed under FOIA and only where there is a strong public interest consideration favouring disclosure. It is the Association of Chief Police Officer's approach that information relating to an investigation will rarely be disclosed under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act. Whilst such information may be released in order to serve a 'core policing purpose' - i.e. to prevent or detect crime or to protect life or property - it will only be disclosed following a Freedom of Information request if there is are strong public interest considerations favouring disclosure. In the context of this case, relevant information is already released.
o Existing procedures
It would not be in the public interest for Freedom of Information to be used to obtain information which is already available under existing procedures. In the context of this case, this particularly would especially relate to the established legal routes through which information is properly accessed. In the context of this case, the information requested forms part of the evidence required for future Coroner's Court consideration, and should charges be brought following the police investigation could form part of that evidential case.
Balancing test / Decision
After weighing up the competing interests I have determined that further CCTV footage should not be released. It would not materially advance public knowledge, and be unlikely to effect some pre-conceptions regarding the events of that morning. I judge that the public interest balance has been properly assessed at this stage in this data release. |
_________________
Follow the numbers |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stefan
Banned
Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 1219
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 6:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Henry Wilson wrote: |
The faces show no sign of deliberate smudging but are subject to the low resolution of the cctv system and to the loss of detail caused by the jpeg compression. |
Very debatable. I use photoshop sometimes and the face on the far right look very much like it's been deliberately smudged or blurred.
| Quote: | | The railing is not in front of the arm. This is part of the wall behind and not the arm. |
Sorry but you're completely incorrect there. Look at the photo properly.
The wall stops pretty much where it meets his shoulder in the image.
Look properly at the gray space behind, it's low resolution but you can still see there is space between the edge of that building and the fencing. For that dark area the be the edge of the wall, and not part of the mans coat, the wall would be right against the railing.
_________________
Peace and Truth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Henry Wilson
Minor Poster
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 15
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 7:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| numeral wrote: | | Concerning jpeg compression an uncompressed image must exist. |
After the image was captured from the video tape it could have been saved as a jpeg and may never have been saved in an uncompressed form.
The cctv footage released a few months ago shows different video capture characteristics which may indicate that the original video capture was not kept and the video was recaptured for the trial.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TonyGosling
Editor
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 18335
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Henry Wilson
Minor Poster
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 15
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Stefan wrote: | | Henry Wilson wrote: |
The faces show no sign of deliberate smudging but are subject to the low resolution of the cctv system and to the loss of detail caused by the jpeg compression. |
Very debatable. I use photoshop sometimes and the face on the far right look very much like it's been deliberately smudged or blurred. |
The face is no different in quality to the rest of the picture so how can it be determined that it has been smudged? And as the low resolution of the cctv system cannot reproduce the detail of a face at that distance what purpose is there in smudging?
| Stefan wrote: | | Quote: | | The railing is not in front of the arm. This is part of the wall behind and not the arm. |
Sorry but you're completely incorrect there. Look at the photo properly.
The wall stops pretty much where it meets his shoulder in the image.
Look properly at the gray space behind, it's low resolution but you can still see there is space between the edge of that building and the fencing. For that dark area the be the edge of the wall, and not part of the mans coat, the wall would be right against the railing. |
I don't understand what you are describing. Here's an image with the railings and wall unobscured.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Henry Wilson
Minor Poster
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 15
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TonyGosling wrote: | | I lean toward fakery having had several amomalies pointed out to me by professional photographers. |
This is not a photograph, it's a cctv image. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Henry Wilson
Minor Poster
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 15
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TonyGosling wrote: | Does anyone have the petrol station Tanweer image?
|
This one?
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
numeral
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Dec 2005
Posts: 500
Location: South London
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 3:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Exibit KAR/15 NIssan MIcra DE05 RJX at Woodall Services.
04:51:27
MIcra pulls up at the pump. Tanweer gases up. Person visible in front passenger seat.
Jumps in the timestamp:
[04:51:31...41
04:51:45...57
04:52:29...33
04:52:34...38
04:52:41...53:06]
04:53:20
passenger door opens partially.
04:53:21
fade to black for a second or so. (September Clues style)
04:53:51
video resumes with the timestamp jumping 30 seconds. passenger door still open.
04:53:51 [53]
Tanweer moves out of shot
(seems to be another jump here, 7 seconds) [04:53:54...54:01]
04:54:01
Tanweer seen near wide open passenger door.
04:54:04
Tanweer out of shot. passenger door closes.
_________________
Follow the numbers |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Disco_Destroyer
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 05 Sep 2006
Posts: 6342
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 1:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Henry Wilson wrote: | | TonyGosling wrote: | | I lean toward fakery having had several amomalies pointed out to me by professional photographers. |
This is not a photograph, it's a cctv image. |
Do you have access to the CCTV footage?
If so post it?
_________________
'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'
“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”
www.myspace.com/disco_destroyer |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stefan
Banned
Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 1219
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 1:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Henry, so you mean to say it is the edge of the lamp post we are seeing not the edge of the wall which as I said, and you can see in that second image, clearly has it's base around shoulder height of the figure?
Regardless of your error, it's still a good catch, fair play.
I disagree with your verdict on the smudged, blurred faces - the one on the far right at the very least looks very suspect to me.
_________________
Peace and Truth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Disco_Destroyer
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 05 Sep 2006
Posts: 6342
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 1:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with Stef in as much as thee is reasonable detail to the interior of the phonebox in the background 
_________________
'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'
“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”
www.myspace.com/disco_destroyer |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Henry Wilson
Minor Poster
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 15
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 5:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Stefan wrote: | Henry, so you mean to say it is the edge of the lamp post we are seeing not the edge of the wall which as I said, and you can see in that second image, clearly has it's base around shoulder height of the figure?
|
I see no lamp post. Are we looking at the same thing? The wall I am refering to is the one directly behind the railings with the reflective surface.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dewstru
Suspended
Joined: 14 Sep 2008
Posts: 61
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 6:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Did that second image, with the pixelated faced member of the public, only turn up a few months back? 3 years AFTER the event? what's the government spin for that anomoly? Where's the whole film? why was it not released on day one?
BUT...We're not disputing there were four patsies are we? just that they couldn't have gotten on those tube carriages because of the Luton train cancellation and subsequent train delay and that no CCTV camera on the underground caught one single image of the alleged tube bombers and the CCTV at Tavistock square also failed to function .You'd have to have 'coinciloonacy' pretty bad to buy all that! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stefan
Banned
Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 1219
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Henry Wilson wrote: | | Stefan wrote: | Henry, so you mean to say it is the edge of the lamp post we are seeing not the edge of the wall which as I said, and you can see in that second image, clearly has it's base around shoulder height of the figure?
|
I see no lamp post. Are we looking at the same thing? The wall I am refering to is the one directly behind the railings with the reflective surface.
|
Oh I get you now, it is hard to make stuff out at that resolution.
_________________
Peace and Truth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
numeral
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Dec 2005
Posts: 500
Location: South London
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TonyGosling
Editor
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 18335
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
numeral
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Dec 2005
Posts: 500
Location: South London
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
