I am sorry STARAKER but you are misrepresenting the photos.
There should be loads of people around the bus, pulling people from the wreckage as is shown in the sun's photo for example, and people who are injured upstairs would recieve treatment in situe
peaple who are walking wounded or pulled from the wreck would be just outside the wreck recieving treatment. Actually it looks like a ghost town scene in some of the photos
but people think about it, if you were walking past and that happened surely you would run towards the scene and render assistence.
Some pictures do show people helping, or running to help, but these are few and far between for the very reason that while the British media does not have an aversion to showing gruesome images shot abroad, they are far more cautious when it's something shot at home. Take last week's shooting of the two armed robbers - pictures of their dead bodies lying in the street are conspicuously absent for precisely the same reason. Basically, you seem to be complaining about the lack of the sort of pictures that we would not normally expect to see, anyway.
Quote:
As Guzmans very useful analysis shows there are clearly questions the bus driver needs to answer
It looks like the area was cleared before the explosion and that is undisputable.
No. When viewed as a whole, all the available pictures show that the area was crowded before the explosion, most people were subsequently cleared by the emergency services, and once all the injured had been dealt with, everyone cleared the immediate scene, pending the arrival of the forensic teams.
Quote:
As i have stated the demolition firm is unconnected, how many hundreds of building white vans do we see every day? So it is a red herring. More important is if the area was cleared and if the bus was stopped, whether parked or just stopped, it means people knew there was about to be a n explosion which means it is all an inside job not an act of terror.
No known witness has said anything that remotely corresponds with your theory.
Quote:
The bus driver claims he stopped the bus, to ask two traffic wardens for directions. I have already stated my view that drivers dont normally swap route and diversions are always planned. but lets for the moment say that he stopped and asked directions then where are the traffic wardens.
Presumably living their lives, trying not to think too much about what happened. You seem to expect everyone even remotely connected to the event to be giving full and frequent interviews saying what they saw. If you look at other similar traumatic incidents, whether it be bombs, shootings, accidents, natural disasters, or whatever, you will see that this is rarely the case, so why should this be any different?
Quote:
The picture from the high level is apparantly an office worker who took the picture so it must be reliable.
Remember everyone has a camera phone and many carry digital cameras on their keyrings.
No they don't. Stop making such ridiculously inflated claims. In any case, previously you complained that everyone should be rushing to help, then that some should be standing around screaming, and now you think they should all be taking pictures, as well. Inadvertently, you have confirmed what I have been saying all along, namely that different people react in different ways. Saying, "They're not reacting like I would," is worthless, because you probably don't really know how you'd react, either. You might think you do, but you can't know it's true until it actually happens.
Quote:
It is NOT also possible that the deserted pictures are AFTER the crowded pictures. because the area would stay crowded for days afterwards but would only be deserted at the beginning of events. You see people in white forensic clothing would be picking up bits of evidence with tweezers and the human remains (i apologise) so it cannot happen that you have a crowded scene and everyone leaves and then comes back.
Wrong again. At any major incident, the uninjured and walking wounded would be removed as quickly as possible, leaving the emergency services to deal with the seriously injured in situ. After all this has been done, the immediate site will be cleared to avoid evidence being further disturbed or contaminated, pending the arrival of the forensic teams. The latter make take several hours to do so, even if there are no other incidents to be dealt with, as of course there were on 7/7. A friend who works in fingerprinting says that there would usually be eight forensic experts at most at any incident, but not all would be working at the same time, in order to avoid confusion. To compare again to the bungled robbery last week, the pictures below shows the similar "lull" between the scene being secured - with everything left in place, whether the cash box, paramedic packs, or even a police rifle - and the forensic teams arriving, although in this case the area is much more localised compared to how much of an explosion site would be cordoned off, due to the liklihood of evidence being scattered:
Quote:
The London bus bombing was not Hasib Hussein, it was not an act of terro it was an inside job from start to finish.
Contrast the photos taken by office workers which show the area deserted with the official news photos which show the area covered with people.
Media outlets favour picture with "more going on" in them. Wow! What a revelation!
Quote:
Can so many people STAND upstairs on the bus after it has been exploded? Can it support their weight?
Your grasp of structural engineering is obviously as weak as your knowledge of the effect of explosives. A smaller device would have just blown out the back windows and killed one or two people, if any; a larger one would have totally destroyed the bus and killed and/or sereiously injured everyone. What happened was somewhere inbetween.
Quote:
The sun's photo that shows an elderly asian man being pulled from downstairs by two onlookers. Who is the man? Regina friel does not mention any asian man nor does daniel nor does richard jones.
Both of them were on the bottom deck, Jones apparently getting off before the explosion. You seem to be reading something into them not seeing someone you wouldn't have expected them to see in the first place. Did you get on a bus this morning? Do you know who was on the top deck when you got off? Did you bother looking round to see who else got off before or after you?
Quote:
This was a drill that went real time and people involved must be official secrets act signators.
Such exercises would not involve live explosives, dead civilians, and body parts scattered in a public place, and it would not happen amongst members of the general public who were not even aware a "drill" was taking place. Even when public fire alarms are tested, they are immediately preceded by an announcement that a test is about to take place, and followed by one to the effect that the test is over.
The reason there were more ppl upstairs was because the driver stopped on the corner, 70-80 metres away from the only bus stop in Tav Sq.
Ppl on the lower deck immediatly noticed this. The bomber came down and sat by the door, then more ppl on the upper deck followed him or looked out of the window and saw other passengers decamping.
Hi Daniel,
Could you give a description of the bomber and did he exit the bus before the explosion?
Staraker, you are losing credibilty fast mate, why on earth are you posting photos of a bank robbery?
I suggest you remove them because they have jack to do with 7/7.
You did well to visit Tavistock square and i applaud your desire to investigate the truth.
Please follow this up by trying to contact Richard Jones and the other known 'witnesses'
I like many would love to hear their current recolections. _________________
Nobody has every come up with a version of this footage that is clear enough to demonstrate that the man in the background is Richard Jones. You are seeing what you want to see. All anyone else can actually see is that it is a man with white hair.
Quote:
Staraker, you are losing credibilty fast mate, why on earth are you posting photos of a bank robbery?
I suggest you remove them because they have jack to do with 7/7.
On the contrary, it is you that is losing credibility by demonstrating your abject ignorance of how crime scenes are treated after a major incident. The robbery photos are an example of how things actually work, which is exactly what the pictures of Tavistock Square - when put in the correct order - show. You seem to want to treat Tavistock Square in isolation, and appear to believe that the normal procedures for dealing with such an incident - or indeed any crime - should not have been followed, when in fact everything suggests that they were.
Quote:
You did well to visit Tavistock square and i applaud your desire to investigate the truth.
Please follow this up by trying to contact Richard Jones and the other known 'witnesses'
I like many would love to hear their current recolections.
Why don't you do it? What exactly are you doing besides sitting in front of a computer and whinging? People should do what they're in a best position to do. Since I don't drive, I'm not in a position to go flitting around doing interviews, and I think that those should be done face-to-face and preferably on camera, since if they're by correspondence or 'phone, others will not unnaturally doubt their authenticity for one reason or another.
Nobody has every come up with a version of this footage that is clear enough to demonstrate that the man in the background is Richard Jones. You are seeing what you want to see. All anyone else can actually see is that it is a man with white hair.
Whinging apart, this is Richard Jones in the video
Richards Jones wrote:
the bomber was around 6ft tall, in his mid-twenties, clean-shaven and smartly dressed. The man was wearing hipster-style fawn checked trousers, with exposed designer underwear, and a matching jersey-style top. The pants looked very expensive, they were white with a red band on top... He was standing with his back to me downstairs at the driver's side, which is exactly where the explosion was... The noise was unbelievable. I served an apprenticeship in an explosives factory in Ayrshire so I knew what it was
These two friends were scheduled to meet in the Great Eastern Hotel. But Nethanayu was sent a warning as is widely reported. Guiliani at two crime scenes 911 and 7/7 coincidence? _________________
Nobody has every come up with a version of this footage that is clear enough to demonstrate that the man in the background is Richard Jones. You are seeing what you want to see. All anyone else can actually see is that it is a man with white hair.
Peter Power and Richard Jones receiving their awards from this year's Business Continuity Awards.
Business Continuity Consultant of the Year
Lifetime Achievement
_________________ 'The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie -- deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought'. JFK
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 Posts: 632 Location: London UK
Posted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 12:41 pm Post subject:
stelios wrote:
the reason for the second photo is because that is richard jones IT consultant
Have you a source for the second image? _________________ 'The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie -- deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought'. JFK
Nobody has every come up with a version of this footage that is clear enough to demonstrate that the man in the background is Richard Jones. You are seeing what you want to see. All anyone else can actually see is that it is a man with white hair.
I really want to know what happened that fate full day. However, understandably most of the focus is on the bus...
What I would like to see are detailed pictures of the inside of the Tube Trains, as I am intrigued as to the location of the train bombs, were they under the floor or ontop of the floor ?
Some witnesses are reported in David Shaylers video documentary to have seen the floor wreckage twisted upward, as would be the case if the bombs had been planted underneath the trains.
Also I am amazed that no video of the bombers traveling on the underground have been released.
I am also aware that the authorities would like to missdirect . _________________ Paranormal Investigator
Ghost Scene Investigations
the reason for the second photo is because that is richard jones IT consultant
Have you a source for the second image?
Following the image back to its root, it's on the website of the Intelligent Multimedia Systems and Services Research Centre of the University of Reading. This is the directory page on which this Richard Jones appears:
As you say, it's hardly an uncommon name. It's notable that if you go to the "second" Richard Jones's site, his full CV has his earliest noted job being "1985 to 1988: Public Building Surveyor, Hertsmere Borough Council" and membership of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors from 1985, as well. Richard Jones the witness was said to be 61 in 2005, making him around 41 in 1985. I'll leave it to someone who is more up on chartered surveying to say if that sounds feasible, but I suspect that it's not the same person, as anyone who was that old then must have some previous employment history, and you'd expect them to disclose it, even if they later took a sudden change in career path.
The two images COULD be the same person. because only the hair colour is different and the second picture was a university photo.
http://www.rdjconsultants.com/index.php
is where the second Richard Jones works.
I admit it could be a different person but the fact iss there is no Richard Jones IT consultant in Bracknall, Berks because we did the exercise of phoing every R Jones in the phone book who was in Berks/Bucks area.
This second Richard Jones is curious because he has government contracts for IT. But he grew up in Walthamstow and is nothing to do with any explosives factory in Ayrshire.
The eyes and eyebrows and complexion look the same but remember one thing if Richard Jones exists and is an IT consultant he must be able to be reached. As should all the other so called witnesses. The strange case of the witness who was not a qualified doctor and committed suicide is one obvious dead end. Richard Jones cannot have been on the bus as he is walking past Russel Square station in the video. But also he has in fact NOT correctly identified Hussein.
Richard Jones wrote:
the bomber was around 6ft tall, in his mid-twenties, clean-shaven and smartly dressed. The man was wearing hipster-style fawn checked trousers, with exposed designer underwear, and a matching jersey-style top. The pants looked very expensive, they were white with a red band on top... He was standing with his back to me downstairs at the driver's side, which is exactly where the explosion was... The noise was unbelievable. I served an apprenticeship in an explosives factory in Ayrshire so I knew what it was
So is Richard Jones simply a John Smeaton character and also a Mark Whitby. Smeaton was the have a go hero from Cambridge who happened to be in Glasgow airport 'working' and heard the burning doctors shout Allah. Mark Whitby was the guy who was quoted as saying Jean Charles de Menezes was wearing a padded jacket and running away from police.
As we know that Richard Jones could not have been on the bus and we know that his description of Hussein is not the same as the Official story and as Richard Jones has so far proved untraceable for further comment we would have to conclude that Hussein was not on the bus. _________________
Nobody has every come up with a version of this footage that is clear enough to demonstrate that the man in the background is Richard Jones. You are seeing what you want to see. All anyone else can actually see is that it is a man with white hair.
I really want to know what happened that fate full day. However, understandably most of the focus is on the bus
The reason the bus is easier to debunk is because it should have eyewitnesses, passers by, office workers, traffic wardens, motorists etc.
We know that there is no cctv released of any of the bombs and of any of the alleged bombers. Which leads me to believe that none of the bombers were either in London or at the bomb sites. It would be so easy for the met to release cctv of eg Hasib Hussein getting on the bus and sitting down. But they claim some of the cctv was not working when we know that all the cctv was fine on the 26/6 and 21/7 for the dummy run and the bags of flour bombers.
There is a list of named witnesses and yet none of them is contactable or traceable. There are reports that the area was cordoned off in advance of the explosion and that a secondary suspect device was also exploded. The bus driver - who fled the scene - claims to be a veteren bus driver switched routes that day and was asking a traffic warden "what was the name of this road and what way should i go"
Why would they divert a bus away from the main Euston Road unaffected by bombs and into the blocked road Wobern Place where the Russel Square bomb has gone off?
Why were all passers by mobile phones confiscated and none of the images released?
One thing is clear the more you look into 7/7 the more you realise it is a complete shambles and has so many holes in the official version of events. _________________
Richard Jones cannot have been on the bus as he is walking past Russel Square station in the video.
It is not known at what time the video clip showing Richard Jones was recorded. The woman being interviewed is one of several people who exited Russell Square station and walked down towards Brunswick Square (where this and other interviews were filmed) at approximately 10:50am. It is very possible for this interview clip to have been filmed at that time (i.e. shortly after 10:50am). This would have given Richard Jones ample time to walk from where he got off bus.
Nobody has every come up with a version of this footage that is clear enough to demonstrate that the man in the background is Richard Jones. You are seeing what you want to see. All anyone else can actually see is that it is a man with white hair.
Thanks Muncher, I downloaded it and it played for me. It certainly looks like the same Richard Jones, pink shirt and all, the problem is we can't put a time on this interview with the victim of the RS/KX incident. Although there are shots of people being evacuated from the same area before being interviewed and timed at 10.51:
Richard Jones certainly made himself available for interviews that day and was responsible for the 'suicide-bomber on the bus' meme.
edit: Sorry Muncher didn't catch your post before I added this. _________________ 'The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie -- deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought'. JFK
The two images COULD be the same person. because only the hair colour is different and the second picture was a university photo.
It's not a "university photo" in the sense of being an old one when he was at uni, it's on the faculty's "staff" directory - he's one of the research associates.
Quote:
http://www.rdjconsultants.com/index.php
is where the second Richard Jones works.
I admit it could be a different person but the fact iss there is no Richard Jones IT consultant in Bracknall, Berks because we did the exercise of phoing every R Jones in the phone book who was in Berks/Bucks area.
Has it been cross-checked with the electoral register? He could be ex-directory.
Quote:
This second Richard Jones is curious because he has government contracts for IT. But he grew up in Walthamstow and is nothing to do with any explosives factory in Ayrshire.
The eyes and eyebrows and complexion look the same but remember one thing if Richard Jones exists and is an IT consultant he must be able to be reached.
Looking at the work of the "second" Richard Jones, "IT consultant" is a very dumbed-down description, if it's the same person.
Quote:
As should all the other so called witnesses. The strange case of the witness who was not a qualified doctor and committed suicide is one obvious dead end.
The piece posted by Prole suggests she died of natural causes.
Quote:
Richard Jones cannot have been on the bus as he is walking past Russel Square station in the video.
I remain unconvinced on that until I see a better quality image.
Quote:
But also he has in fact NOT correctly identified Hussein.
Richard Jones wrote:
the bomber was around 6ft tall, in his mid-twenties, clean-shaven and smartly dressed. The man was wearing hipster-style fawn checked trousers, with exposed designer underwear, and a matching jersey-style top. The pants looked very expensive, they were white with a red band on top... He was standing with his back to me downstairs at the driver's side, which is exactly where the explosion was... The noise was unbelievable. I served an apprenticeship in an explosives factory in Ayrshire so I knew what it was
So is Richard Jones simply a John Smeaton character and also a Mark Whitby. Smeaton was the have a go hero from Cambridge who happened to be in Glasgow airport 'working' and heard the burning doctors shout Allah. Mark Whitby was the guy who was quoted as saying Jean Charles de Menezes was wearing a padded jacket and running away from police.
As we know that Richard Jones could not have been on the bus and we know that his description of Hussein is not the same as the Official story and as Richard Jones has so far proved untraceable for further comment we would have to conclude that Hussein was not on the bus.
Well, to be honest, while typing this I just did a quick Google on the Aryshire angle, and it seems the Jones on the bus originally came from Ardrossan. Googling that with the name brought up this:
This shows a Dick Jones, educated at Ardrossan Academy, "owner at Compliance Technology Limited," and based in Reading, which is obviously near Bracknall. His full profile has him being at the Academy between 1949 and 1960, which is feasible for someone who would be around 63 now (aged 5-16). There is an explosives factory at Ardeer, Stevenson, which is next to Ardrossan:
Dont forget practically all the IRA bombers who were convicted turned out to have been innocent and many served half their lives in jail.
Absolute rubbish. For every one of the twenty or so inncoent people fitted up by the police, there were many more IRA members who either pleaded guilty, or did not fight their convictions once found guilty. Many of them freely admit what they did and stand by it, but it is the nature of things that miscarriages of justice will get proportionally far more media coverage.
This is the bit I like.
In the 1970's the British security services were exposed in a scandal under the Heath government of being involved in organising robberies, causing bombs and general mayhem in Ireland.
The 2 brothers were known as the Littlejohn brothers and it became known as the Littlejohn Affair. An ex-Sunday Times investigative journalist called Alex Mitchell exposed the affair, the connections with the higher echelons of the Tory party, MI5 and the British Army. It all exists in the public domain.
Under pressure from the press the Dublin police came to London to arrest these two dodgy characters and took one of them back to Dublin. He initially said my backers are MI5 and because Special Branch were also involved they didn't want to claim responsibility. When Littlejohn started to spill the beans the powers that be alongside the Dublin elite covered up the affair.
Britain has a 300 year history of dodgy deals. It used to run 1/4 of the known world.
If you are to assume it cant organise the blowing up of a bus with the owners of companies who were given them on a plate in the sell-offs of the 1970's then you sound like one of those fools in the media who now complain about the effects of demutualisation of the building societies. Behind most large fortunes are crimes against people who try to mind their own business. The links between Stagecoach, Verint Systems, the USA and MI5 are out in the open.
If you assume the locking up of the Irish had anything to do with ...Irish terrorism and not the British occupation and the locking up of muslims has anything to do with muslim terrorism, then you are running a line. The government one. Go sell it to those who are buying. To old to believe in fairy tales. Disney and Mickey Mouse no longer get me interested.
Joined: 28 Jul 2005 Posts: 274 Location: North West London
Posted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 7:52 pm Post subject:
DANIEL'S INTERVIEW WITH SUNDAY MIRROR JOURNALIST
In Daniel’s book, he relates how he gave a newspaper interview with Sunday Mirror journalist Michael Duffy, at 7.30 pm on the 13th July, 2005. This did really happen – as Duffy confirmed to Kenyon Gibson, (the London 9/11 Sceptics Press Officer) who has just phoned him up at my suggestion – they met in A McDonalds just as written. Duffy's memory was quite clear on the subject.
He felt that Daniel was basically a fantasist and was not impressed by the way he was asking for money in return for his story. The sum was not specified but it was definitely expected. Duffy categorically denied the core part of Daniel’s version, whereby he had produced a picture of the alleged young Muslim suicide bomber (Hasib Hussein) and asked Daniel if he remembered this character as having boarded the bus (p.95). In Daniel’s story, the journalist harps on about this matter, the implication being that Daniel agreeing to this story was the condition of his publishing the article.
Duffy had agreed to meet after working hours, in case the story was important, and (he explained to Gibson) he had nothing in principle against conspiracy theories. He was simply given nothing solid to write about, because in his view Daniel’s story had no corroboration from any source. This recording by Duffy seems to be the one testable feature of Daniel’s narrative. It shows a big alteration to what happened, in passing through Daniel’s memory.
That is, one must agree, the principal problem with Daniel’s entire narrative.
Earlier this year, I got an agreement form the London 9/11 group to have a meeting on the 7/7 issue, with the basic idea that Daniel’s book had just been published and hopefully we could get him to agree to come. He never replied to any invitation, but I later heard from another source (forgive me if I don’t cite this) that he would have required some payment to come along. Well I guess that isn’t how we do things. Mr Duffy’s experience reminded me of this.
…………………………
* In the event we had both Tony Gosling and Bridget Dunne on the same platform, at the meeting, and I hope we can agree that was better!
If you assume the locking up of the Irish had anything to do with ...Irish terrorism and not the British occupation and the locking up of muslims has anything to do with muslim terrorism, then you are running a line. The government one. Go sell it to those who are buying. To old to believe in fairy tales. Disney and Mickey Mouse no longer get me interested.
Perhaps you should try actually reading my post in the context of it being a reply to a very specific comment made by stelios, rather than using it as an excuse to go off on a wild speculative tangent.
If you assume the locking up of the Irish had anything to do with ...Irish terrorism and not the British occupation and the locking up of muslims has anything to do with muslim terrorism, then you are running a line. The government one. Go sell it to those who are buying. To old to believe in fairy tales. Disney and Mickey Mouse no longer get me interested.
Perhaps you should try actually reading my post in the context of it being a reply to a very specific comment made by stelios, rather than using it as an excuse to go off on a wild speculative tangent.
Stelios spoke about collusion between the British security services and the IRA. You replied most of the IRA terrorism was real, just like today muslim terrorism is.
Change the tune you are getting boring. Its as old as British occupations the world over. Blame the victims, not the culprits.
You have spent over two weeks to justify the bus arrived as they said it did, that all passengers that alleged to be on it were and that 13 died on the bus.
I still aint seen any other evidence which is corroborated with more than one independent source. When you find some instead of looking at non-working CCTV cameras and their angles.
Like forensic autopsy reports that were published by the medical profession withing two months of the event.
CCTV camera releases with dates of Hackney bus garage.
Payroll info of the bus driver and at least ten bus drivers from his depot who can state which routes he did prior to the event.
CCTV cameras of the hospital he visited in Acton, an interview of the hospital secretaries and the nurses and doctors that saw him.
A transcript of what his father said on foreign tv about his son being held by the police word for word.
You can sidetrack most issues as much as you want but you cant change the facts.
If you assume the locking up of the Irish had anything to do with ...Irish terrorism and not the British occupation and the locking up of muslims has anything to do with muslim terrorism, then you are running a line. The government one. Go sell it to those who are buying. To old to believe in fairy tales. Disney and Mickey Mouse no longer get me interested.
Perhaps you should try actually reading my post in the context of it being a reply to a very specific comment made by stelios, rather than using it as an excuse to go off on a wild speculative tangent.
Stelios spoke about collusion between the British security services and the IRA. You replied most of the IRA terrorism was real, just like today muslim terrorism is.
No, Stelios said, "practically all the IRA bombers who were convicted turned out to have been innocent." I pointed out that this was not true, as there were many convicted of such offences who either pleaded guilty, or did not contest their sentences, and that many freely admitted what they did then and now. I did not make a qualitative statement about what you term "IRA terrorism" as a whole, and I made no reference to what you term "muslim terrorism".
If all you can do is put false words into other people's mouths, it demonstrates the moral and intellectual bankruptcy of your position.
(snip further ad hominem projection)
Quote:
You have spent over two weeks to justify the bus arrived as they said it did, that all passengers that alleged to be on it were and that 13 died on the bus.
No, I have spent two weeks demonstrating that the available evidence from multiple sources does not support certain wilder theories, and pointing out where people are basing those theories on factual misconceptions and/or ignorance.
Quote:
I still aint seen any other evidence which is corroborated with more than one independent source. When you find some instead of looking at non-working CCTV cameras and their angles.
LOL! I'm sure you'd be singing a different tune if I'd found something that you wanted to hear.
(snip more rambling)
Quote:
You can sidetrack most issues as much as you want but you cant change the facts.
Dear, oh dear, you guys crack me up. You've been pissing about for two years, weaving ever more convoluted and improbable theories, yet none of you even managed to identifiy the "real" Richard Jones, when it took me five minutes to do so. You've rushed to embrace evidence that fits in with your preconceived ideas, without subjecting it to even the most basic of corroboratory tests, while at the same time you're demanding that every piece of evidence you dispute is ripped apart.
It's no wonder nobody takes you seriously.
Last edited by Nick Cooper on Sun Sep 30, 2007 9:52 am; edited 1 time in total
A majority of muslims in Britain dont take the government seriously when it alleges muslims did 7/7.
Just like a majority of New Yorkers no longer take Bush seriously.
When transferred in the wider world, ie away from silly internet chat rooms and on the rooftops of Gaza and Baghdad as well as Afghanistan the numbers who believe US made lies regarding the 'war on terror' probably drops to single figures.
Being in a minority may indeed make you feel proud, but your whole premise is that a half baked story which has been presented by the embedded neo-con media is a real event.
Children believe in Disneys cartoons but that does not make them real. They are fiction. And your alibis for this fiction aren't ad hominem attacks by myself but an attempt to reduce our sense of reality to the level of a child.
When events have so many glaring contradictions and a non-character like yourself pops a long, walks along a route and looks at CCTV cameras and talks about angles of them, it shows that you are in the arena of the absurd.
No CCTV camera spotted any alleged bomber anywhere near tube stations, buses, or on London streets on that day.
Why is that? They weren't there. Pure and simple. If nothing has been produced for two whole years the event is fake. Pure and simple.
Theres a bigger chance of the resurrection of Christ than for 7/7 to be evened out with police releases of 'evidence' they hold in their 'war on terror'.
So keep on writing nonsense as I didn't go to the circus often enough when I was young...
You clearly have absolutely no idea of what I think about virtually all of the various issues you have brought up. If all you're going to do is spin out what you think I think, based on nothing more than your own prejudice, you'll be waiting a long time for another response from me.
Lets not get into personal attacks between ourselves.
There are huge holes in the official conspracy story and until we join up all the dots or unless they release all the welter of evidence they have suppressed nobody will know what actually did happen.
but the fact remains, the four muslims did not do this. They could not have been at the crime scenes if they got to Luton staion at 7.22.
Nobody except Danny Biddle and Richard Jones claims to have seen any of them.
There is no cctv from the thousands of cameras and hard drives that shows any of them anywhere in London that day.
But listen 2 years ago when this happened i immediately said it was all lies. Because i travel on the tubes i relised that nothing added up.
Not many people agreed with me.
But this year when Gordon Brown decided to have his own false flag with the doctors buring themselves - many previously sceptical people were telling me that 7/7 was an inside job.
You see the British public after having had wolf cried once too often have realised everything that this Labour government has done or said has been a lie. Today the percentage of previously apathetic people who are now 100% truthers is increasing exponentially.
Even Staraker who is a sceptic still does admit that there are holes in the official story and that an inquiry is needed. _________________
In Daniel’s book, he relates how he gave a newspaper interview with Sunday Mirror journalist Michael Duffy, at 7.30 pm on the 13th July, 2005. This did really happen – as Duffy confirmed to Kenyon Gibson, (the London 9/11 Sceptics Press Officer) who has just phoned him up at my suggestion – they met in A McDonalds just as written.
Duffy's memory was quite clear on the subject.
He felt that Daniel was basically a fantasist and was not impressed by the way he was asking for money in return for his story. The sum was not specified but it was definitely expected. Duffy categorically denied the core part of Daniel’s version, whereby he had produced a picture of the alleged young Muslim suicide bomber (Hasib Hussein) and asked Daniel if he remembered this character as having boarded the bus (p.95). In Daniel’s story, the journalist harps on about this matter, the implication being that Daniel agreeing to this story was the condition of his publishing the article.
Duffy had agreed to meet after working hours, in case the story was important, and (he explained to Gibson) he had nothing in principle against conspiracy theories. He was simply given nothing solid to write about, because in his view Daniel’s story had no corroboration from any source. This recording by Duffy seems to be the one testable feature of Daniel’s narrative. It shows a big alteration to what happened, in passing through Daniel’s memory.
That is, one must agree, the principal problem with Daniel’s entire narrative.
Earlier this year, I got an agreement form the London 9/11 group to have a meeting on the 7/7 issue, with the basic idea that Daniel’s book had just been published and hopefully we could get him to agree to come. He never replied to any invitation, but I later heard from another source (forgive me if I don’t cite this) that he would have required some payment to come along. Well I guess that isn’t how we do things. Mr Duffy’s experience reminded me of this.
Hmmm, so you believe a hack who does anything for a story, above a guy who puts his life on the line? Interesting.
As soon as Duffy showed me Hussains picture, I knew he didn't wanna publish anything I said anyway. Damn right I never gave him the good bits!
…………………………
* In the event we had both Tony Gosling and Bridget Dunne on the same platform, at the meeting, and I hope we can agree that was better!
BTW- It was Brudget Dunne that put it about that I'm in it for the money because she wanted me to tell her everything just like Duffy did.
But a website and a book is a more democratic way of releasing evidence.
Hmmm "Recording" eh? This suggests you and Gibson had more access to Duffy than mere members of the public. Duffy obviously had been having a word with the investigators.
Even Staraker who is a sceptic still does admit that there are holes in the official story and that an inquiry is needed.
Well, let's say that my opinion is that there too much supposition and not enough hard evidence in a number of place in the official narrative, but there are more than enough places to "slot in" more discrete ways of doing things than some people imagine.
I also think people are not asking the right questions when it comes to things like the external CCTV footage of the bus. There are wild assumptions made that, for example, the explosion "must have been caught on CCTV," because, "there are cameras everywhere," but it seems that before I did it, nobody bothered to check exactly where they are in relation to where the bus ended up. Now, if anyone wants to put in the FOI requests, they can state exactly which camera they want footage from, i.e. the non-moving ones in Upper Woburn Place (although I suspect they will only show the bus passing), or the moving one half way along Woburn Place. Even if they don't capture the explosion itself, they should be useful in recording the reaction of passersby.
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
