The official narrative says that it is not known what type of tickets they had
The narrative doesn't seem to know much about anything.
If a truther had conducted an 'investigation' of the same standard, I'm sure you'd have a few things to say about it. _________________ It's a man's life in MOSSAD
The official narrative says that it is not known what type of tickets they had
The narrative doesn't seem to know much about anything.
If a truther had conducted an 'investigation' of the same standard, I'm sure you'd have a few things to say about it.
Well, troofer ZUCO says he knows more, he knows they bought return tickets. I am asking to know what evidence he has that the police overlooked, perhaps his investigation was of a higher standard, but he seems to have gone coy about it.
The official narrative says that it is not known what type of tickets they had
The narrative doesn't seem to know much about anything.
If a truther had conducted an 'investigation' of the same standard, I'm sure you'd have a few things to say about it.
Well, troofer ZUCO says he knows more, he knows they bought return tickets. I am asking to know what evidence he has that the police overlooked, perhaps his investigation was of a higher standard, but he seems to have gone coy about it.
Well, the police overlooked all kinds of things - such as the train the bombers actually caught. I know the dibble are lazy, but you'd think they'd make the effort for something like this, particularly when they've got their voluminous secret stash of cctv to go on.
The return tickets issue is hardly key - Are you satisfied the narrative is a reasonable, comprehensive and appropriate document regarding the events? _________________ It's a man's life in MOSSAD
Joined: 22 Feb 2007 Posts: 179 Location: Manchester
Posted: Sat Mar 10, 2007 6:39 pm Post subject:
I'm failing to see what you don't understand. The second video I provided was from BBC and if you've watched it you will have heard Peter Power saying:
"We were actually running an exercise...simultaneous bombs going off at precisely the same stations which were bombed"
In which case I will say the bomb was under the train which explains metal twisting upwards. If you point to any evidence suggesting a downward blast, I will say -
"it's an explosion, * happens."
I assume you'll find that answer satisfactory. _________________ It's a man's life in MOSSAD
Joined: 13 Jun 2006 Posts: 374 Location: North East
Posted: Sat Mar 10, 2007 7:22 pm Post subject:
dh wrote:
The official report is a sack of nonsense of supposition And the debunkers and the thickos buy it
The only thing that surprised me about the "narrative" is it was not written in crayon. It is such an amateur fusion of supposition and non-committal Civil Service speak. Sir Humphrey would have been proud.
"In which case I will say the bomb was under the train which explains metal twisting upwards. If you point to any evidence suggesting a downward blast, I will say -
"it's an explosion, * happens."
I assume you'll find that answer satisfactory."
are you just attempting to be as retarded as possible or were you born that way?
that "piece of metal" is the floor, it has been sheared by being pushed from right to left. away from the epicentre of the blast.
while explosions are a little chaotic stuff like the source can be determined very easily.
Joined: 23 Dec 2005 Posts: 500 Location: South London
Posted: Sat Mar 10, 2007 9:28 pm Post subject:
johndoe wrote:
while explosions are a little chaotic stuff like the source can be determined very easily.
Sure.
Quote:
Those who attended the Edgware Road meeting believed that there was a possibility of a second error in the Official Account. They said that Mohammed Sidique Khan was by the second set of double doors in the tube carriage at the time of the attack, whereas the Official Account states that Khan was ''most likely near the standing area by the first set of double doors.''
My officials have made enquiries of the Metropolitan Police. The police have confirmed that the wording of the Official Account accurately reflects their initial conclusions following statements they took from witnesses and their early examination of the scene. This shows that the bomb probably exploded near to the first set of doors. But where exactly [underlined] the bomb exploded has yet to be established. The police are currently awaiting the final report from the Forensic Explosives Laboratory. This will be vital in determining the precise location of the bomb at the time of its detonation.
The wording in the Official Account therefore accurately reflects the police's understanding of the initial examination of the scene. The preface of the Official Account makes it clear that ''the evidence is not yet the full picture'' because it was known at the time of writing that more evidence might emerge from the ongoing police investigation. To date, none of the forensic evidence suggests that the Official Account is incorrect in stating where Khan was ''most likely'' to have been located prior to the explosion. Should the police revise their initial conclusions in the light of further information, an update will be issued.
"In which case I will say the bomb was under the train which explains metal twisting upwards. If you point to any evidence suggesting a downward blast, I will say -
"it's an explosion, * happens."
I assume you'll find that answer satisfactory."
are you just attempting to be as retarded as possible or were you born that way?
that "piece of metal" is the floor, it has been sheared by being pushed from right to left. away from the epicentre of the blast.
while explosions are a little chaotic stuff like the source can be determined very easily.
I take it your recourse to insults indicates you don't have a real answer.
Yes, I'd agree it has probably been sheared by being pushed right to left away from the epicentre of the blast.
Though remarkably it appears to blown upwards against the force of a downwards blast. Forgive me if I regard that as unusual.
One image (and I don't know exactly when this picture was taken) is perhaps insufficient. As I asked before; you previously referred to photos of the blasts so if you could point me in the direction of others it might be useful all round. _________________ It's a man's life in MOSSAD
Please tell me why we have not seen the tube cairrages?
I mean surely reporters have gone into them and filmed the debris and taken photos etc so we can make up our own minds whether the metal was twisted up or down.
The point is the public has been shown nothing. And have been fed a pack of lies and misdirections.
Whether the four bought return tickets is a good point. How do the police know this? Why would suicide bombers pay a car park pay and display?
Why would nombers leave a boot full of nore sophisticated bombs in a micra in the car park? Surely they would have used them on the day after all when else were they going to use them?
Why would a bomber go to boots to buy a 9 volt battery? Surely he would already have his bomb ready to explode after all the mission was so meticulasly planned.
Why was the bomber buying the battery in boots at the same time as the station was being evacuated and the shop assistant would have lost her job had she not collected his £3.99.
It is all lies thats why. 7/7 was an inside job. Full stop.
"Though remarkably it appears to blown upwards against the force of a downwards blast"
try something for me. hold a piece of paper by the ends, now very quickly bring your hands together. what happens to the paper?
"Please tell me why we have not seen the tube cairrages?"
we have, in fact we were just discussing one of the blast holes in one of the carriages.
stelios here's a question....... you claim the government did this, and you also claim they were behind 9-11. so these people know what they are doing by now.
so why would they make those kinds of mistakes? if tru we would be talking about people who have alot of experience in this. what makes you think that they would have been so stupid to leave clues that you managed to find?
"Though remarkably it appears to blown upwards against the force of a downwards blast"
try something for me. hold a piece of paper by the ends, now very quickly bring your hands together. what happens to the paper?
"Please tell me why we have not seen the tube cairrages?"
we have, in fact we were just discussing one of the blast holes in one of the carriages.
stelios here's a question....... you claim the government did this, and you also claim they were behind 9-11. so these people know what they are doing by now.
so why would they make those kinds of mistakes? if tru we would be talking about people who have alot of experience in this. what makes you think that they would have been so stupid to leave clues that you managed to find?
So you illustrate what you think happened during an explosion by giving an example involving compression? Sorry if I'm being a bit slow, but I kind of thought they were direct opposites.
I think what Stelios means is the apparent dearth of images. I ask for the third time; you say you have seen photos (plural), if you could point us in the direction of the other images you have seen it may aid the discussion. I posted one image here - the only one I know of; you had previously said -
johndoe wrote:
then how come photos of the blast show the floor bent down and not up?
Exactly which images were you referring to?
It always slightly mystifies me when discussing so-called 'conspiracy theories' that people often argue that the intelligence services are far from perfect and are known to mess things up, hence could not pull off big operations like 911 or 7/7 without making errors. Yet on the other hand it is argued that they would not make such obvious mistakes when anomalies appear.
However, whether or not they 'would' make mistakes is neither here nor there -anomalies are anomalies and you would think HM Government would be as keen as anyone to clear them up.
Funny really - when the police investigate a crime and find the criminals have left clues, they don't assume the suspects wouldn't have made such errors and eliminate them from their enquiries. _________________ It's a man's life in MOSSAD
Not coy at all, I used news reports. Did they just invent the story?
None of the references you quoted gave any evidence that they had return tickets, or any other type of ticket, the police apparently have no evidence, so it seems to be merely an urban myth that people have picked up and passed with no supporting evidence. _________________ ".......some partial collapse [of WTC7] would not have been suspicious......." - chek
The return tickets issue is hardly key - Are you satisfied the narrative is a reasonable, comprehensive and appropriate document regarding the events?
No, I think there should be an official enquiry to examine fully the entire circumstances. We have such enquiries over far less serious matters, so why not this?
"So you illustrate what you think happened during an explosion by giving an example involving compression? Sorry if I'm being a bit slow, but I kind of thought they were direct opposites. "
explosions cause compressions.
"Funny really - when the police investigate a crime and find the criminals have left clues, they don't assume the suspects wouldn't have made such errors and eliminate them from their enquiries. "
that's because criminals aren;t that organised, don''t have that lelve of backing or expertise.
Joined: 22 Feb 2007 Posts: 179 Location: Manchester
Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2007 11:04 am Post subject:
Bushwacker wrote:
ZUCO wrote:
Not coy at all, I used news reports. Did they just invent the story?
None of the references you quoted gave any evidence that they had return tickets, or any other type of ticket, the police apparently have no evidence, so it seems to be merely an urban myth that people have picked up and passed with no supporting evidence.
I gave you a link with where I got the information from
Quote:
They boarded the 7.48am to London carrying return tickets.
@ Johndoe why do you continue to string this out...drills drills drills...I must have asked you to explain them about 6 times now and you've still failed to do so. You cannot realistically expect to be taken seriously if you pick and choose which areas you want to debate. _________________
"Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither" --Benjamin Franklin--
"So you illustrate what you think happened during an explosion by giving an example involving compression? Sorry if I'm being a bit slow, but I kind of thought they were direct opposites. "
explosions cause compressions.
"Funny really - when the police investigate a crime and find the criminals have left clues, they don't assume the suspects wouldn't have made such errors and eliminate them from their enquiries. "
that's because criminals aren;t that organised, don''t have that lelve of backing or expertise.
Yes, it was a poor choice of word - I assumed you'd get what I meant. To be more clear, you are modelling an explosion on something being mechanically crushed. Shall we then say that explosions don't mimic mechanical crushing?
Some criminals have phenomenal levels of backing, expertise and resources. Consider the mafia, the triads, the yardies etc.
Some individual 'career' criminals are as professional and accompished as their counterparts in legitimate industries.
In principle, assuming that someone 'wouldn't' have a made a particular mistake is neither definative nor sufficient.
fourth time -
Though still not as many times as Zuco's been asking for his answer!
Dogsmilk wrote:
I think what Stelios means is the apparent dearth of images. I ask for the third time; you say you have seen photos (plural), if you could point us in the direction of the other images you have seen it may aid the discussion. I posted one image here - the only one I know of; you had previously said -
johndoe wrote:
then how come photos of the blast show the floor bent down and not up?
Exactly which images were you referring to?
I'm thinking you'd never actually seen any images until I posted one here. Is that correct? _________________ It's a man's life in MOSSAD
"To be more clear, you are modelling an explosion on something being mechanically crushed."
nothing wrong with that. the physical mechanism represents the shock wave.
"In principle, assuming that someone 'wouldn't' have a made a particular mistake is neither definative nor sufficient. "
to call leaving bombs in a car an accident is odd........ it's clealry not a mistake. their construction and placement would not be accidental. so why would they do it?
Joined: 22 Feb 2007 Posts: 179 Location: Manchester
Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2007 12:54 pm Post subject:
I've not been a member of this forum for very long but already I can see that Johndoe is completely incapable of answering perfectly reasonable questions presented to him. In his last post he mentions nothing about the the two posts immediately preceding it by Dogsmilk and myself in which we each ask him a question (not for the first time). It's time you answered us Johndoe. Explain how the drills could possibly be coincidental when the odds of it happening are astronomical and provide the images you refer to that show the insides of the tube carriages. _________________
"Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither" --Benjamin Franklin--
"To be more clear, you are modelling an explosion on something being mechanically crushed."
nothing wrong with that. the physical mechanism represents the shock wave.
"In principle, assuming that someone 'wouldn't' have a made a particular mistake is neither definative nor sufficient. "
to call leaving bombs in a car an accident is odd........ it's clearly not a mistake. their construction and placement would not be accidental. so why would they do it?
I see. So two forces moving towards one another and crushing something in between models a shockwave emanating from a blast. If you want to actually answer the question, perhaps a less cryptic approach would be helpful. As I said before, I've no expertise on bomb damage - you, however, seem very confident on the subject yet I'm failing to understand exactly what you mean and we seem to be going round in circles - I'll put it to the others here; is it just me?
I personally wouldn't classify the bombs left in the car as a likely 'accident'.
Either the 'terrorists' left them there for some reason known to themselves (however absent minded one may be, forgetting you had bombs in your car is unlikely.)
Otherwise, if we postulate a 'conspiracy', then it would make sense to have examples of the bombs allegedly used you could use to 'demonstrate' their home made origins, deflecting from the original reports of military grade explosives. Military grade explosives would be significant as this raises the question of where they came from.
A better example of an 'accident' would be Khan's ID appearing at three blast sites. As I said before, I know not how or why this happened but am more struck by the lack of curiosity or comment on the matter on the part of the authorities.
Fifth time -
Quote:
Dogsmilk wrote:
I think what Stelios means is the apparent dearth of images. I ask for the third time; you say you have seen photos (plural), if you could point us in the direction of the other images you have seen it may aid the discussion. I posted one image here - the only one I know of; you had previously said -
johndoe wrote:
then how come photos of the blast show the floor bent down and not up?
Exactly which images were you referring to?
I'm thinking you'd never actually seen any images until I posted one here. Is that correct?
It appears discussion of the bomb damage will get us nowhere. It seems increasingly likely you cannot reference any other images and unlikely you had seen any until I posted one. You had made up your mind before the discussion even began. Hence, faced with a dogmatic prior belief based on...?, I'm wondering if this entire discussion is futile. _________________ It's a man's life in MOSSAD
Not coy at all, I used news reports. Did they just invent the story?
None of the references you quoted gave any evidence that they had return tickets, or any other type of ticket, the police apparently have no evidence, so it seems to be merely an urban myth that people have picked up and passed with no supporting evidence.
I gave you a link with where I got the information from
Quote:
They boarded the 7.48am to London carrying return tickets.
But like Dogsmilk said "The return tickets issue is hardly key"
Do you really not understand the difference between someone mentioning return tickets in an article and providing evidence? The author of the article offers no evidence that they had return tickets, so there is still no publicly available evidence. _________________ ".......some partial collapse [of WTC7] would not have been suspicious......." - chek
Joined: 22 Feb 2007 Posts: 179 Location: Manchester
Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2007 10:47 pm Post subject:
Bushwacker wrote:
ZUCO wrote:
Bushwacker wrote:
ZUCO wrote:
Not coy at all, I used news reports. Did they just invent the story?
None of the references you quoted gave any evidence that they had return tickets, or any other type of ticket, the police apparently have no evidence, so it seems to be merely an urban myth that people have picked up and passed with no supporting evidence.
I gave you a link with where I got the information from
Quote:
They boarded the 7.48am to London carrying return tickets.
But like Dogsmilk said "The return tickets issue is hardly key"
Do you really not understand the difference between someone mentioning return tickets in an article and providing evidence? The author of the article offers no evidence that they had return tickets, so there is still no publicly available evidence.
So by the same standard you accept that there's hardly any evidence (if any) supporting the official narrative and that it's all speculation and presumption? _________________
"Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither" --Benjamin Franklin--
"I've no expertise on bomb damage - you, however, seem very confident on the subject"
crater damage actually.
"Either the 'terrorists' left them there for some reason known to themselves (however absent minded one may be, forgetting you had bombs in your car is unlikely.)"
have you ever considered the chance they didn't forget? two explanations i have from the top of my head.
they were left as a message "look how eays this is/it could be a lot worse next time"
or even more frightening maybe they weren't meant to be found. what if someone else knew the location of those bombs and had access to them?
" It seems increasingly likely you cannot reference any other images and unlikely you had seen any until I posted one."
sorry about that, it's what happens when you don't stick to one subject. but i don't see why you would want them from me..... the bbc has some very nice pictures of the bomb damage.
if you're still struggling to find images of the carriages by tomorrow and i don't get sidetracked again then i guess i could do the 5 minutes work it would take for you. it does seem a little idle of you though.
Not coy at all, I used news reports. Did they just invent the story?
None of the references you quoted gave any evidence that they had return tickets, or any other type of ticket, the police apparently have no evidence, so it seems to be merely an urban myth that people have picked up and passed with no supporting evidence.
I gave you a link with where I got the information from
Quote:
They boarded the 7.48am to London carrying return tickets.
But like Dogsmilk said "The return tickets issue is hardly key"
Do you really not understand the difference between someone mentioning return tickets in an article and providing evidence? The author of the article offers no evidence that they had return tickets, so there is still no publicly available evidence.
So by the same standard you accept that there's hardly any evidence (if any) supporting the official narrative and that it's all speculation and presumption?
No, there is actual evidence that the four men went to London carrying bags which exploded.
Your evidence for return tickets is on a par with a newspaper article which simply mentioned four suicide bombers. _________________ ".......some partial collapse [of WTC7] would not have been suspicious......." - chek
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
