London Terrorist Attacks

I was just wondering why i never see any threads on the london subway bombings on this site. i'm not from england but wouldn't it be like 9/11 but less people died? i was just wondering what some peoples opinions were on this subject

Well, trying to focus on 9/11 right now, but there is enough strange stuff about the London bombings as well to have made a number of conspiracy web sites pop up around the web.

The London bombings looks to have been a inside job, just like 9/11.

Here is a clip with Alex Jones and a London Bus Bomb witness:



Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5.



[edit on 3-11-2007 by Copernicus]

There are threads, including the news story I broke on the morning of the attacks when they were still blaming it on an "electrical surge", here.

Try using the search function, the threads are out there....

And who is sitting their collective tails in that God forsaken waste hole with us? Hmmmmmm???? Only solution. Get off oil for good. We are certainly not bringing democracy to Darfur where genocide is occuring. Funny indeed. Oh wait, they don't have any oil. Right. Never mind.

that audio is pretty crazy. i only listened to part one. so let me get this straght, the three trains blew up at the same time, this man was waiting for the train and they made him get on a bus, then the bus explodes a little way down the street? please let me know if i got this wrong, i didn't really pay attention to this at the time because i was about 12 or 13.

Originally posted by stumason
they were still blaming it on an "electrical surge"

This I found strange, I remember the morning of the attacks that first reports clearly stated there had been a power surge. Now this along with the fact that some eyewitness said the hole in the train caused by the bomb looked like the bomb was under the train. Could a power surge cause the bombs to go off? Then you need to look at the Brazilian man, Jean Charles de Menezes, who was murdered in could blood by the police days after the bombings, he was an electrician and as far as I know nobody knew who he worked for. Is it possible that jean charles de menezes caused the power surge in the beginning and was shot to keep him quiet? Just something that entered my head.

The London bombings were a carefully staged and professionally executed psyop to galvanize support for the Iraq war. The motive for the bombings can be clearly seen simply by looking at what happened on July 6. The day before the bombings, it was announced that the UK would pull out of Iraq over the next 18 months (www.dawn.com...). Of course, after the bombings, everyone wanted to stay in the Iraq war. This was no coincidence. You see, it worked like this. Make all the people who want a pullout happy by announcing one the day before your scheduled terror psyop is to run. But, of course, you want this war. They don't, but they are happy with you for deciding to start pulling out. The next day, your psyop runs. Everyone suddenly wants the Iraq war that you wanted in the first place, so then you go back to wanting the Iraq war, and you make the people happy, and you've also achieved your warmongering agenda. It was a complete G8 operation (They went on TV only hours before the blasts), using British intell and leading a false trail of conspiracy breadcrumbs for truthseekers leading to Mossad (They warned the Mossad, then a bunch of people jumped on that and said "THE MOSSAD KNEW", when in reality, Scotland Yard gave them the intelligence warnings, most likely so the fact that they had them would be seized upon, and Israel would be framed as a perp in the attacks.).

How they carried it out is very complex. One of the theories floating around alternative websites is that a terror drill being run by anti-terror spook Peter Power used the four bombers as unwitting drill actors. This is backed up by the 'return tickets' and lack of suicide bomber MO, as well as the fact that one eyewitness said the bus bomber was fiddling with his rucksack.

In reality, this theory is wrong, and there were no bombers. Other than the ones on the bus, there are no eyewitnesses who saw bombers (And the witness who saw a bus bomber reported someone who was carrying a small bag and a description of someone different than the official bomber.). The CCTV footage was exposed as a fake. It is covered in anomalies. Railing bars are going through arms, faces are blurred, clown shoes, half legs, disconnected rails. It is a fake image. The confession videos do not mention the London bombings. The online Al Qaeda confession was proven a fake, and it was released from a server in Houston, Texas. The webhost of the site that posted it is run by Everyone's Internet, which is connected to the Bush family.

There is no credible evidence of bombers. So, here's an alternative, better supported explanation of what happened. The bombs were underneath the train carriages. They were set and planted during maintenance. Injuries seemed to indicate that this was the case. Emily Benton, for example, had serious injuries to her feet. Christophe Chaboud, head of the French Anti-Terrorism Co-ordination Unit saw injuries like Benton's and others and stated that the wounds of the victims indicated bombs set on the ground or under the seats. The key eyewitness to bombs under the train is Bruce Lait. He and his partner were the only survivors to the blast on his carriage, and they were closest to the bomb. He said he didn't remember anyone where the bomb was, or any bag. He said the metal was pushed up as if the bomb was under the train:

"The policeman said 'mind that hole, that's where the bomb was'. The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train. They seem to think the bomb was left in a bag, but I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag," he said.

Now, proof that it was military grade:

In an interview with Le Monde, Chaboud announced to the world that he knew "the nature of the explosives" used in the London bombings. It "appears to be military, which is very worrisome,"

It also now stands that the official train ride of the london bombers was impossible.

PSYOP.

Originally posted by coryblood
that audio is pretty crazy. i only listened to part one. so let me get this straght, the three trains blew up at the same time, this man was waiting for the train and they made him get on a bus, then the bus explodes a little way down the street? please let me know if i got this wrong, i didn't really pay attention to this at the time because i was about 12 or 13.

Yeah that's the exact way I understood it too.

Do those who believe in this being a psy-op then think that the second attack a fortnight later was intended to fail? If so, for what purpose?

It's like why are there no threads about the Madrid bombings? I have yet to see anyone say that wasn't terrorists and explain who and why it was done. That certainly wasn't about getting support for the war as a new Government was voted in and they pulled the troops out.

reply to post by coryblood


Apparently we only have conspiracies here in the United States. Remember, no one here trusts our government, so everything is a conspiracy. Unfortuantely for me, I am one a just a few people here in the states, and on here, that does not buy the whole conspiracy thing.

i haven't heard of the madrid bombings, maybe i have i just forgot. please inform me

Originally posted by coryblood
i haven't heard of the madrid bombings, maybe i have i just forgot. please inform me

Oh my... Are you sure?

It was 11th March 2004 and 191 people died, with 2050 injured!

Linky

reply to post by stumason


well at the time i was in 4th grade i think so the news wasn't really on my mind. i'm checking the link now.

i just checked it and i could be a government thing too, i'm not going to rule out that it was Al Quida though.

[edit on 5-11-2007 by coryblood]

How old is 4th grade? I'll let you off though!

hey i was like 8 ok! now i watch the news like every day, if this were to happen now i'd be all over it.

Originally posted by Muppetus Galacticus
Do those who believe in this being a psy-op then think that the second attack a fortnight later was intended to fail? If so, for what purpose?

It's like why are there no threads about the Madrid bombings? I have yet to see anyone say that wasn't terrorists and explain who and why it was done. That certainly wasn't about getting support for the war as a new Government was voted in and they pulled the troops out.

It was a psyop. A scare tactics psyop. (The 7/21 bombing)

There is some very revealing facts about the 7/21 attack. Before the break, 7/21 was the last day in parliament. The 7/7 psyop was making way for big changes in the anti-terror systems. It was making way for a crackdown. With the bloody bombings of July 7, nothing could act better as the perfect way to make people really feel like they need the crackdown other than a 'second failed attempt', which would pound the idea in everyone's heads that the wave of terror was not over.

Initial reports stated that Arabs were running from the scene, however, they were heard shouting "what is wrong with these people?". This would indeed indicate that the Arab in question was not a bomber, but was a fleeing innocent. I have seen no hard proof against the accused perpetrators.

Much of the initial reports were very revealing indeed, and indicated the 7/21 bombing was another psyop.

BBC NEWS: The bomber looked surprised after his bomb went off.

Sky News: Several stations were closed at 11AM due to 'something being in the air'.

ITN News: Instead of being taken into a police station, one of the suspected bombers was taken into the government building Whitehall.

Sky News: Tony Blair was in an underground bunker for a crisis meeting on the day of 7/21. He was scheduled to later meet the MI5, MI6, and secret service.

=======

I think that, based on the fact that it happened 14 days after the first psyop and was similar, the fact that there is no hard evidence against arab perpetrators, the fact that Tony Blair was in a bunker for a crisis meeting that day..later scheduled to meet with MI5 and MI6 and the secret service, the signs of foreknowledge, the surprised bomber, and the fact that they once again had the motive all point to the case of a psychological operation.

=========

PSYOPS MADRID: Terrorists were 'informants'

news.bbc.co.uk...

The bombers were in contact with the police before running their attack. It happened 911 days after 9/11, in a ritualistic 'coincidence'. Another psyop. The motive was to create another push for global surveillance, which it did do.

reply to post by LordCarpainter


i agree with the last paragraph, they are just trying to gain control over the general population

something i've always been curious about was the terror drills going on at the exact same time and place as the real bombs.. suspiciously similar to the 911 attacks..

newsmine.org... d-as-london-attacks.txt

and somthing i never got is why did the police call the israeli embassy and warn of impending attacks, but fail to warn the people actually in danger? this whole thing stinks.

can any of my friends across the pond (i say friends despite how some of your citizens treated my dad and his american friends recently )
shed any light on what happened with the ID cards proposed right before the attacks?

Originally posted by turbokid
something i've always been curious about was the terror drills going on at the exact same time and place as the real bombs.. suspiciously similar to the 911 attacks..

newsmine.org... d-as-london-attacks.txt

and somthing i never got is why did the police call the israeli embassy and warn of impending attacks, but fail to warn the people actually in danger? this whole thing stinks.

can any of my friends across the pond (i say friends despite how some of your citizens treated my dad and his american friends recently

)
shed any light on what happened with the ID cards proposed right before the attacks?

Cause Netanyahu's safety means more to them than the British public's, I guess. :/ After Scotland Yard sent intelligence warnings to the Israeli Embassy, these warnings were forwarded to Netanyahu, who was in the same hotel as Giuliani, suspiciously.

The real question is why they reported that it was a power surge that caused the explosions for hours when they themselves knew of possible bombings that day. That is a smoking gun. A contradiction of facts which proves a major cover-up, irrefutably. So, what are they covering up? One need look no further than the bombing drills, Aswat-MI6 connection, military explosives, lack of eyewitnesses to bombers, witnesses to bombs under the trains, currency drop a week before, 7:40 train ride discrepancy, strangely empty stations, the Power-Sheirer-Giuliani-Murdoch-Lowy connection, lack of evidence against patsies, assassination of Jean Charles de menezes, the fake CCTV image, the malfunction of the bus surveillance cameras, and the mysterious redirection of the number 30 bus.

It was a carefully stage-set covert operation, using drills as the cover for simultaneous explosions of military-grade bombs exploding under the trains. The cover-up then started, and that's always when the discrepancies start pouring out.

PATSIES

There is no credible evidence indicating the involvement of the alleged bombers.

Second, there is no motive. On July 6, it was announced that the United Kingdom would be pulling out of Iraq over the course of 18 months. What better way to blow what they would have wanted than to launch a major terror op the next day? The ones who would benefit from that are extremist right-wing war-mongerers in the covert government.

Third, for whatever reason, if they did want to attack, why would they use suicide tactics. There were no suicide tactics in other bombings and attacks? Why waste men on the operation when explosives could have been set off remotely?

---------

That's the logic of why they were patsies. Here's the hard evidence. Now, we have the documented proof that the alleged bombers did not fit the MO of suicide bombers. The CCTV image showing them is an obvious fake, with many anomalies. The passport that was supposedly proving that the bombers went to Pakistan belonged to the wrong Hasib Hussain. The man seen on the bus with a small bag did not fit the description of Hasib Hussain.

It reminds me of the Port Arthur massacre, where the patsy was the mentally handicapped Martin Bryant, when the true perpetrator was a professional special ops gunman who was hitting headshots all over the place. The surviving eyewitness descriptions showed that he did not look like Martin Bryant. No hard evidence was put forward linking Bryant to the massacre of 35 Australians, yet he still stands as the accused killer to this day.