20 questions Re: London bombing psy-op alleagations. Sat Jul 16, 2005 04:48 http://www.team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?9.441 20 questions Re: London bombing psy-op alleagations. 1) Men who were part of a secret Al Qaeda organisation, that had the ability to evaded western intelligence agencies for years, would NOT have carried documents with them, whereby they could have been identified, if captured, or after they killed themselves when the bombs exploded. Such documents would enable the police to link them to their families and provide an opportunity for the British police to start be able to break into the 'secret Al Qaeda' organisation. 2) The men would not have split amongst themselves, documents belonging to one man, so that again, the web of the organisation can be connected, identified, tracked and hunted down. 3) The men would not have been so foolish as to allow themselves to be seen together, especially outside Kings Cross Station. A station so obviously known to have many spy cameras in and around it.. 4) There is no reason why these men would travel, together, to London, as again, this allows them to be linked together. 5) There is no reason why they would have driven from Leeds to Luton and then taken the train to London. Where did they disembark on arriving in London? Why would outside the arrival station for a group meeting infront of Kings Cross and all its obvious CCTV cameras? 6) The fact the bus's 4 security cameras were not operating is very suspicious. When was maintenance conducted on these cameras. What does the maintenance report say? 7) A bomber wishing to cause harm would done so BEFORE the Olympic committee decided on the wining city, to ensure London did not win the Olympic bid. 8) A bomber who wanted to strike against the UK would have tried to make sure that his actions would lead to only a minimal increase in powers being granted to anti-terror organisations. 9) To prove his cause worthy, a bomber would have tried to strike at a targetfar more directly involved in oppression of Muslims. 10) Why would a bomber detonate bombs in London at the time of the extended G8 in Gleneagles? If they thought that the security in Scotland was too tight then they would of course have realised that the security in London would be almost as tight. Certainly it would have ranked second to Gleneagles. Bombing at the same time as the G8, would only help the psychotic liar Tony bLiar a golden opportunity to get the worlds most powerful leaders to offer support to Mr bLiar. After all, can you imagine a world leader refusing to stand behind bLiar as he made his trickery-fakery condemnation? A series of bombs in other less well CCTV'd cities, and against military or governmental targets would have made far more sense. 11) Benjamin Netanyahu was given a warning before any bombs exploded to stay in his hotel room. Mr Netanyahu was planning to attend a conference in the Great Eastern hotel above the Liverpool Street subway station. However this version of events has spawned multiple variations, with some sources saying he was on the way, some reports saying he received the warning AFTER the bombs has exploded. Whenever Mr Netanyahu received the warning, who were ordinary civilians not warned? Not to warn them raises the charge of manslaughter. Who issued the warnings of attacks? Evidence of their warnings should be given along with the timings of their warnings to quash these incredibly serious allegations. Conference participants are said to have been evacuated from the hotel. Where is documentation about the timeline of this evacuation event? 12) New Scotland yard and Israeli authorities contradicted each other about Mr. Netanyahu warning. 13) Peter Power (a former Scotland Yard official), Managing Director of Public Relations firm Visor Consultants, which bills itself as a 'crisis management' advice company, was working at one time with the Anti Terrorist Branch. Mr Power said that a large company was, at 9:30am 7/72005, staging a drill at the EXACT SAME TIME and EXACT SAME LOCATION, where the railway station bombings occurred. The drill involved 'simultaneous bombings'. On 9/11/2001, the CIA conducted drills involving hijacked planes flying into the WTC in New York and on the Pentagon at 8:30am that morning. Mr. Power may have noting to do with the bombings, but his information and correlation to 9- 11 is deeply disturbing. What is the significance of drills? It is said that the 'drills' are to provide a cover for the REAL government backed terror operation. If the operatives were caught, they would simply say they are part of the drill. Power himself refuses to release the identity of the private company in London that these drills were being conducted for. Why does this private company wish to remain anonymous? Power states the company has over 1,000 employees. 14) UK official sources stated that "high explosives", "probably of military grade" were used in the London bombings. and not 'typical' of home made devices. 15) The look of calm on many of the people close to the scene of the bombings was unusually calm. If these people were genuine, then it indicates that the 'bombings' were very low key. There is also the possibility that a number of them interviewed after the bombings were actually people participating in the drill, and were possibly not actual real victims. 16) Israeli media reported that the explosives used in the bomb were probably the same as used in Tel Aviv, as used, supposedly, by two British Muslims on a suicide bomb misison there. It is said that one of the bombs failed to detonate and one of the men ran away. Later his body was found on a beach. The Israeli media showed the men's British passports and later, the passports were said to be fake. When has it become policy to notify Israeli intelligence and the media on issues and information concerning matters of British internal national security? 17) On 13/7/2005 British anti-terrorism agents detonated a series of 'controlled-explosions' in explosive devices left in thebombers car in Luton. Why would the bombers have left this material in the car? If this was an intended bomb, then if it was set off, there would a link from the London bombs to Luton train station, again enabling the police to trace events and therefore be in a strong position to destroy the "Secret Al Qaeda organisation in Europe" cell. If these unattended explosive devices were functional back-ups then why were they abandoned? If they were dud's why were they abandoned? The explosives inside them would have aided explosion in London, whether they were in working order or not. What exactly are 'controlled explosions' How do they render explosive material safe? Why the need for ten controlled explosions? How can these multiple controlled explosions be done in such a way a to preserve forensic evidence? Why not just transport the explosive material to a safe location and detonate it there? Why not get a robot to try and disarm the device in the care there and then? How can destruction of evidence be allowed to take place? Surely ALL untainted evidence must be collected when investigating criminal cases. It is said that the bomb disposal unit/ anti-terrorist investigators were targeting specific parts of the car in order to try to limit damage to forensic clues. The theory and methodology, execution and results of this must be explained. Why remove the car in 4:30am darkness? 18) When investigating crimes, One key question that should always be asked is... "Who benefits" The London bombs have achieved absolutely nothing for the sake of what is called "radical Islamists" or whatever label is used. Fear of Muslims has increased, Attacks on Muslims and their property is now more likely. An opportunity for the deionisation of something associated with Islam has resulted. The Image of Islam has been Peoples fear level has increased which has inevitably led to the public rallying behind the Government. New ID cards are more likely to come into force whereas previously, 80% of the population did not want ID cards. Europe is reported to approve tighter security measures to combat 'terrorism'. 19) The two Downing street memo's are a crushing blow to Tony bLiar sickening pretence that he has been truthful about the war in Iraq. These and his Jackie Milburn farce, his failure to uphold his nuevo manifesto pledges clearly show that he's a pathological liar. The man is dangerous, by his own admission as a consequence of his lies, he stated categorically that an attack on London would result. In other words, the citizens of London will pay a painful price for the lies of Tony bLiar. Nothing he says should be believed. Another eerie event was the Death of Dr David Kelly who, now it is known beyond any doubt, told the truth about the Governments documents were sexed up. Kelly ended up dead, and reports indicating foul play have never been answered successfully. Tony bLiar cherry picked Lord Hutton to investigate the Kelly affair and imposed restrictions on Huttons mandate to investigate the Death of Kelly. Of course bLiar knew (as the downing street memo proves) that Kelly was absolutely right. At that time the attorney General's legal advice and the Downing street memo were still being covered from the public. bLiar was in full knowledge of this. By calling for another limited enquiry, he tried to play an ace and have the whole affair buried and provide a doorstop to further claims about the whole Iraq/Kelly/WMD event. And unfortunately, he has been partially successful, in that the slow trickle of information showing bLiars murderous actions never manages to surmount the crest of public distaste, instead he has ridden over the gentle ups and downs of mild political storms and lived to tell the tale. The ex-BBC journalist Andrew Gilligan, made the assertion that the Government probably knew the 45 minute claim was incorrect, has been proven in its entirety without any residual doubt. 20) It is reported the bombers were ordinary 'law abiding folk' who likes to play cricket and basketball, had 8 month babies and guys who taught disabled schoolchildren. So that's the lifestyle of a suicide bomber. What was the reason they blew themselves up? Why not just leave the bomb on the bus or tube and then make a leisurely, unsuspicious getaway? Live to fight another day, leave no incriminating evidence. What was to gain by killing themselves. Nothing. What is to gain from the a section of the British Government having set the up as patsies and having them killed? Well, dead men cant incriminate anyone can they?
Pages to are hidden for
"LONDON BOMBINGS - 20 Questions"Please download to view full document