US Indymedia Global Indymedia Publish About us
Printed from Boston IMC : http://boston.indymedia.org/
Boston.Indymedia
IVAW Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier
Testimonies
Brad Presente

Other Local News

Spare Change News
Open Media Boston
Somerville Voices
Cradle of Liberty
The Sword and Shield

Local Radio Shows

WMBR 88.1 FM
What's Left
WEDS at 8:00 pm
Local Edition
FRI (alt) at 5:30 pm

WMFO 91.5 FM
Socialist Alternative
SUN 11:00 am

WZBC 90.3 FM
Sounds of Dissent
SAT at 11:00 am
Truth and Justice Radio
SUN at 6:00 am

Create account Log in
Comment on this article | Email this article | Printer-friendly version
News :: Politics
London; Whay really happened!(from a UK source!)
13 Aug 2005
Truth?
Final Word: Her Majesty's Terrorist Network;Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005
12:19:07 Forwarded message

Her Majesty's Terrorist Network
;7/7 Bombings
Final Word: Her Majesty's Terrorist Network Only conspiracy
theorists would believe the government wasn't involved. The wealth of
evidence that has emerged in the month following the 7/7 London
bombings only leads us to one clear conclusion, that the attacks had
to have been orchestrated by or with help from the very highest
levels of British intelligence. The latest piece of evidence
to suggest that the official story is a fraud focuses again on the
contention that the bombs were placed under the trains and were not
detonated by suicide bombers wearing backpacks. The
first eyewitness to report this was Bruce Lait, a victim of
the Aldgate Station bombing. He told the Cambridge
Evening News, quote; 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. Now another credible source, Guardian
journalist Mark Honigsbaum, talked to eyewitnesses at the Edgware
Road bombing, who essentially described the same
thing. Eyewitnesses told Honigsbaum that the
covers on the floor of the train, suddenly flew up, raised
up. How could the floor of the train raise up from a
bomb supposedly in the backpack of an individual seated in the
carriage, above the floor? The victims then heard
almighty crash as a train traveling in the opposite direction
collided, clearly indicating that the train had derailed due to the
bomb being placed under the carriage.
For individuals to plant bombs
underneath trains and secure them in place without being caught, they
would need to secure access to the trains. In this scenario, London
Underground could have been told that a dummy device was to be placed
underneath the train as part of an exercise to test security and
alertness. When the real attacks happened some LU officials would
have been alarmed but their suspicions would have dampened when it
was revealed that the bombs were carried in , meaning that
the drill was just a strange 'coincidence'. The fact that the
bombs were actually planted underneath the trains could have easily
been buried in an avalanche of official announcements to the
contrary. On the other hand the backpack bombs could have
just been the diversionary blasts to enable patsies to be framed,
just like the planes flying into the towers acted as the diversionary
cover for the explosives planted inside the World Trade
Center. The fact that the ID's of all the so-called suicide
bombers were found in pristine condition right next to where the
bombs went off strongly suggests the planting of evidence to frame
patsies. The ID's would have had a very good chance of surviving if
the bomb was not in the backpack with them, but underneath the
train. The drill scenario would have provided culpability
cover if investigators started asking questions about objects
underneath the carriage. As we have exhaustively
documented, such a drill did take place on the morning of
7/7. A consultancy agency with government and police
connections was running an exercise for an unnamed company that
revolved around the London Underground being bombed at the exact same
times and locations as happened in real life on the morning of July
7th. On a BBC Radio 5 interview that aired on
the evening of the 7th, the host interviewed Peter Power, Managing
Director of Visor Consultants, which bills itself as a 'crisis
management' advice company, better known to you and I as a PR
firm. Peter Power was a former Scotland Yard official,
working at one time with the Anti Terrorist
Branch. Power told the host that at the exact same time that
the London bombings were taking place, his company was running a
1,000 person strong exercise which drilled the London Underground
being bombed at the exact same locations, at the exact same times, as
happened in real life. How can anyone credibly claim
that this was sheer coincidence when pieced together with the rest of
the evidence? Our original article on this matter is the top
link on Google when you type in 'London bombing' - above BBC, CNN and
ABC News, proof of how much attention this article
received. Our suspicions were aroused just hours after the
bombing when it was reported by Associated Press that Israeli Finance
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had received a warning from the Israeli
Embassy not to leave his hotel for a speech he was to give that
morning. The location of the speech was right next to the site of one
of the bombings. Despite debunking attempts
from much of the establishment press, Associated Press never
retracted the story and later Mossad admitted that it was
true. The so-called claim of responsibility for the attack
was made by a group that is known to not physically exist and which
at best is one guy sitting at a computer posting messages on a
forum. And yet the establishment media still report Al-Qaeda
responsibility for the attack as if it were the gospel
truth. Exactly what evidence have we seen to even agree with
the contention that four men with rucksack bombs carried out this
attack? Four grainy CCTV pictures of dark skinned men with rucksacks?
Should we not question this evidence especially when verified
witnesses on two of the three trains that were bombed said that the
bombs were underneath the train and that they saw no men with
rucksacks even in the area? Questions about the attacks are
never ending. Why was it reported that the explosives used
were military in origin but then the story changed to say they were
homemade? Can explosive experts not tell the difference or was the
story changed for a reason? Why would a man with an 8-month
old baby, another who was only interested in sports, and another who
taught disabled children, want to kill themselves, other innocent
people and cause so much carnage in the process? Even
the establishment media started speculating that the bombers
were duped into killing themselves by someone
else. Why did the cameras on the targeted bus malfunction
that day? Why was the bus diverted from its usual route? We
personally visited the site of the bus bombing at Tavistock Place and
verified that no number 30 bus travels down that
road. What are we to make of claims by
Stagecoach bus employees who say that a different group of
contractors inspected the CCTV cameras in the days before the
bombings and that they took two entire days to carry out tasks which
normally take just hours to complete. What is the reason
behind Alan Greenspan's decision to flush nearly $40 billion in
liquidity into financial markets two days before the attack? Was this
an attempt to preemptively head off a run on the markets? If
Greenspan had information about a terror attack then why didn't the
people on the trains and buses get the same warning? Who were
the individuals that profited from short-selling the British Pound in
the ten days before the attack? The pound fell 6% for no particular
reason. Fortunes were made after the pound dropped even further in
the aftermath of the attacks. This directly mirrors short selling of
United and American Airline stocks in the days before 9/11. These
suspicious transactions led directly to the CIA. Why was an
innocent man, Jean Charles de Menezes, shot in the head eight times
at Stockwell tube station? Why did the police change their story,
from saying Menezes was wearing a heavy jacket to admitting it was a
lightweight denim jacket? Why did the media initially report that
Menezes was shot in the stomach but then change the story when it was
pointed out that it would be stupid to shoot suspected
suicide bombers in the very place that the bomb would
be. Was Menezes shot because he knew
something about the drills? Menezes was an electrician by trade. Did
he have damaging knowledge of why the bombings were reported as an
electrical surge for over an hour? Why did Tony Blair
immediately reject a public inquiry into how and why the bombings
took place? In Britain, there is a public inquiry for every event, no
matter how insignificant, and yet after Britain's biggest tragedy
since the blitz, Blair shuts the door. What is he frightened
of? The final nail in the coffin regarding inside involvement
emerged when it was admitted that the so-called mastermind of both
the 7/7 and 7/21 attacks, Haroon Rashid Aswat, is a British
Intelligence Asset. Terror expert John Loftus
told Fox News, Back in 1999 he came to America. The
Justice Department wanted to indict him in Seattle because him and
his buddy were trying to set up a terrorist training school in
Oregon... we've just learned that the headquarters of the US Justice
Department ordered the Seattle prosecutors not to touch Aswat... ,
apparently Aswat was working for British
intelligence. The mastermind of the London bombings was
under the direction and protection of MI6. How much more obvious does
it need to be that criminal elements of the intelligence agencies
were involved in this attack? Related: London Bombings


I'd rather have a full
bottle in front of me, than a full frontal lobotomy!

Bush is;inarticulate clown with corporate masters that hold his leash

This work is in the public domain
Add a quick comment
Title
Your name Your email

Comment

Text Format
Anti-spam Enter the following number into the box:
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.