7/7 'was a plot by the Govt'

7/7 'was a plot by the Govt'

www.thesun.co.uk

Tony Farrell, 51, handed in an annual "threat assessment" report after falling for a conspiracy theory he stumbled across on the internet.

Police chiefs were stunned to be told by their adviser on where to concentrate resources that the Government was the "enemy within".

He also claimed the risk from Islamic extremists was zero and tackling crime and protecting vulnerable people was "irrelevant". Mr Farrell, a £35,000-a-year civilian worker for South Yorkshire Police, was sacked after he refused to get his mental state checked by a doctor.

He is suing for unfair dismissal and demanding £140,000 damages.

(visit the link for the full news article)

I never believed the official story behind the 7/7 bombings in London for one moment. The idea that terrorists would go to all that trouble making bombs just to blow up what is effectively a hole in the ground seems crazy to me. As far as i know al qaeda has always gone for large above ground targets that are very visible. Its almost like they were deliberately trying to not damage any of the historical buildings and monuments in London City center while still giving the illusion of a terrorist attack.

IMO this has allways had all the halmarks of classical false flag attack.

And so another whistle blower loses his job and his credibility while another offical report blaming the government gets burried. I applaude Tony Farrell for trying to fight back against the decision even though we all know the chances of him winning his case are less than slim.

Hers some more info on the story from Alex Jones.




www.thesun.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

It's also much easier to hide and contain things when they're already 'contained'.

Admitedly, the patsy wasn't supposed to be on the Tavistock Sq bus, though with hindsight this did add more credibility to the OS.......


MR

I won't be surprised if he dies due to "unknown" causes in the coming days.

I wish V (from V for Vendetta) was real...

If he can push for a jury trail it would be interesting to see what the public make of the evidence he produces for his defence. It will be tough though, the courts already blind to the issues.

How is he a "whistle blower"?

He doesn't have any more knowledge of the conspiracy than anyone who can read articles on the internet. Why do those who think it was an inside job always seem to exaggerate their claims?

reply to post by TrickoftheShade


He was a chief intelligence analyst for future terrorist threats working for the police.

Originally posted by PhoenixOD
reply to post by TrickoftheShade

 

He was a chief intelligence analyst for future terrorist threats working for the police.

Rubbish. He earned 35k a year and he worked for Yorkshire police. I don't know if you're from the USA, but that makes him a provincial middle-grade analyst. It's a bit like being the guy who advises the Colorado authorities on terror threats. Hardly unimportant, but if he was really a "chief analyst" he'd be in London, working for the national government.

But even with that in mind, he doesn't even pretend to be a whistleblower. He says he found this stuff on the net, not in the course of his professional life. To be a whistleblower you have to be party to the conspiracy. This is fairly simple stuff.

"This stuff on the internet"?

You mean, like the photograph of the black Jaguar car immediately behind the number 30 bus when it was blown up
infowars.net...

which is similar to the black Jaguar that was parked in Luton Station car park (not in a parking space but as though it was waiting for someone) and which left just as Tanweer's Nissan Micra came into the car park:

This car was parked in the same place at the same time as when the four "bombers" arrived at Luton Station on June 28 to rehearse their journey to London AND when they arrived on July 7 to travel to London to detonate their bombs.

Now, what is the chance of THAT being a coincidence?

reply to post by TrickoftheShade


You don't have to be part off the actual attack to be part of the conspiracy. He says in the video that it was his job to do a threat analysis report that essentially expected him to agree with the official version of events. If this is a conspiracy and he had agreed with the official version of events against his own findings then he would have been part of that conspiracy. False flag ops work by compartmentalization, not everyone who is part of the attack and subsequent coverup knows the whole story.

reply to post by PhoenixOD


Sorry, that's ridiculous. To be a whistleblower you have to have inside knowledge. He freely admits that he got his information from Prison Planet and elsewhere on the web. Nothing he experienced within his organisation led him to believe that 7/7 was a government plot, just some stuff off the web.

He's no more a "whistleblower" than you are.

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
reply to post by PhoenixOD

 

Sorry, that's ridiculous. To be a whistleblower you have to have inside knowledge. He freely admits that he got his information from Prison Planet and elsewhere on the web. Nothing he experienced within his organisation led him to believe that 7/7 was a government plot, just some stuff off the web.

He's no more a "whistleblower" than you are.

You miss the point. Tony Farrell never claimed that he was a 7/7 whistle-blower. What he wanted to make public was that he was being wrongly fired for disagreeing with the official view about what happened on 7/7.

Originally posted by micpsi

You miss the point. Tony Farrell never claimed that he was a 7/7 whistle-blower. What he wanted to make public was that he was being wrongly fired for disagreeing with the official view about what happened on 7/7.

I haven't missed the point. It's there in big letters above - Tony Farrell is claimed to be a whistleblower by those with vested interests in there being a conspiracy. He is no such thing. And according to you even he doesn't think he's a "whistleblower", so why the hurry to pretend that he is?

reply to post by TrickoftheShade


micpsi is right you are missing the point :

A whistleblower (whistle-blower or whistle blower) is a person who tells the public or someone in authority about alleged dishonest or illegal activities (misconduct) occurring in a government department, a public or private organization, or a company. The alleged misconduct may be classified in many ways; for example, a violation of a law, rule, regulation and/or a direct threat to public interest, such as fraud, health/safety violations, and corruption. Whistleblowers may make their allegations internally (for example, to other people within the accused organization) or externally (to regulators, law enforcement agencies, to the media or to groups concerned with the issues).

Most whistleblowers are internal whistleblowers, who report misconduct on a fellow employee or superior within their company.

Source

Tony Farrell is blowing the whistle on alleged misconduct over a dismissal on a matter regarding the 7/7 attacks. Alex Jones may have taken licence with the exact wording in the title of his video but either way Tony Farrell is still a whistle blower.

I applaude Mr Farrell for standing up for his convictions by bringing this to the publics atension.

He's not really doing what your definition suggests. He hasn't directly seen any wrongdoing in his organisation. All he's done is go on the net and get duped - he just happens to work for the police.

But it doesn't really matter. I feel for the guy, he's clearly a bit troubled. And the vested interests like Richplanet and Jones who profit from this ought to be ashamed.

reply to post by TrickoftheShade

He's not really doing what your definition suggests. He hasn't directly seen any wrongdoing in his organisation. All he's done is go on the net and get duped

Of course you are entitled to your opinion thats what ATS is all about but Mr Farrell obviously thinks he's right and there has been some wrong doing or he wouldnt be wasting his money trying to take his former employer's to court. Mr Farrell seems like a honest man with a concious but like i said in the OP the chances of him winning are less than slim even if he is in the right.

I agree though alex jones intensions are money orientated and he does over sensationalise but at the same time he does help to bring some important info to the publics atension from time to time. Personaly i cant stand the guy.

Four terrorists supposedly got on a late train in Luton yet only one seems to have got off in London! That with the rumours that two middle east looking men with back packs were shot near the Gurkin in the City of London-shootings which weren't remarkably weren't reported by the media, and I think the conspiracy is there for all to see. The BBC tried to a demolition job on a viral internet documentary concerning the 7/7 bombings yet all they managed to do was show their bias. They've done something similar with the 9/11 conspiracies.

reply to

11867595" target="_blank" class="postlink">post by LemmyKautionu

That with the rumours that two middle east looking men with back packs were shot near the Gurkin in the City of London-shootings which weren't remarkably weren't reported by the media, and I think the conspiracy is there for all to see.

I had not heard of that before today. Ive had a quick look around on google and theres really not much info on it at all.

"The New Zealander, who did not want to be named, said the killing of the two men wearing bombs happened at 10.30am on Thursday (London time). Following the shooting, the 8000 workers in the 44-storey tower were told to stay away from windows and remain in the building for at least six hours, the New Zealand man said."

NZ Herald

At a press conference on July 7th, the police were asked to elaborate on the reports, but they simply said there had been no such incident, with no apparent explanation for why there should have been a "flurry" of police activity at Canary Wharf.

QUESTION: Can you tell me -- the rumors that a police sniper shot dead a suicide bomber at Canary Wharf (ph). Do you know anything about that?

PADDICK: We have no reports of any police sniper shooting at anybody today.

CNN Transcript

Originally posted by PhoenixOD
I never believed the official story behind the 7/7 bombings in London for one moment. The idea that terrorists would go to all that trouble making bombs just to blow up what is effectively a hole in the ground seems crazy to me.

Your "hole in the ground"...

Number of miles/km travelled by each Tube train each year: 76,800 miles/123,600km
Total number of passengers carried each year: 1,065 million
Number of individual passengers carried on the Tube each year: 28 million

Key Facts - Transport for London

Bus usage is growing at its fastest rate since 1946
Bus ridership grew more than 38 per cent between 1999/00 and 2004/05
Buses in London now carry the highest number of passengers since 1968
In the year to March 2005, there were 1.79 billion passenger trips on the network
Bus mileage in London is higher than at any time since 1957, with 450 million km covered in 2004/5

London Buses - Transport for London

Your "hole in the ground" is one of the busiest transport hubs on the face of the planet.

Its beyond me how anyone can think its not a perfect target for a terrorist to strike at.

Maybe you should review your thinking?

reply to post by neformore


Hi neformore, i agree that blowing up the underground was effective target i just think its suspicious that no lasting damage was done to any of the irreplaceable historical buildings or monuments in the center of London. Especially when al qaeda usually goes for larger and more visible targets. The damage done in the underground was terrible but like Marlborough Red said it was also very 'contained' . London is VERY crowded and you could go almost anywhere and cause more loss of life through explosions than the 50 odd people who tragically died on that day.

Also the center of London has more CCTV camera's than anywhere on the planet above ground while there was only a few in the underground. That has changed a bit now. I was in London last week on the underground close to where the bombs went off and there are a lot more cameras on those sections now.

So i agree that the tube was an effective place for an attack but IMO it was also the ideal place for a difficult to prove false flag attack.