Jump to content

RobFr

Banned
  • Content Count

    219
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Neutral

About RobFr

  • Rank
    Registered User
  1. Simple and irrefutable facts don't exist without evidence. It is the evidence that makes the facts irrefutable.
  2. from http://www.rense.com/general67/camb.htm, Bruce Lait is quoted as saying... Reflecting on the ordeal, he said: ."Out of that whole carriage, I think Crystal and I were the only ones who were not seriously injured, and I think we were nearest the bomb "It makes me thank Him up there. I'm not overly religious but I'm not a disbeliever. I pray now and again. Something like this has just made me think, 'thank you Lord'." And more importantly Bruce Lait told us he didn't see any backpack/rucksack, Muslim or Muslim with/carrying a backpack/rucksack bomb on the carriage or near the blast location. So what data exactly was the diagram you provided concocted from? Was there an SO15 agent on the carriage at the time of the explosion? Bruce Lait, an actual witness who was on the carriage and received injuries from the blast says he didn't see any Muslims carrying backpack/rucksack, or any backpack/rucksack at the place where the explosion occurred, which left a hole in the floor of the carriage with metal pushed UPWARD. So what evidence is there that Tanweer was standing in the spot marked on the diagram you provided? NONE. What evidence is there that Tanweer was even on that carriage at all? Again the answer is: NONE. Isn't it the least bit odd that his face was cut up by shattered window glass that should have been blown OUTWARD if the blast had really occurred from inside the carriage as we have been told? So again you are trying to run your little smokescreen to cover up the truth and making up stories about what Bruce Lait actually said whilst accusing others of doing what you are ACTUALLY doing. You have ZERO credibility.
  3. No evidence. Just your opinion. Business as usual. Nobody believes you.
  4. The quotes from Bruce Lait are from the 25 July 2005 edition of the Cambridge Evening News:- http://prisonplanet.com/Pages/Jul05/250705under.html
  5. Sorry, you are completely untrustworthy. Here is what Bridget actually said from the link that you provided:- As the timings on the CCTV shown today hadn't been pixellated , 28/6 08.10.07 Enter Luton 08.14.26 Go through barriers 08.15.07 Enter platform 7/7 07.21.54 Enter Luton 07.22.29 Ticket hall 07.22.43 Go through barriers 07.23.27 On platform 07.24.47 Train arrives 07.24.56 Board 07.25.36 Train leaves Presumably you can move in less than half the time when carrying bomb-laden rucksacks! Did you get that please? She doesn't believe that nonsense either.
  6. Let's see what Bruce Lait really said:- from http://aangirfan.blogspot.com/2008/05/bruce-lait-i-dont-remember-anybody.html "The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train." "I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag." "We were nearest the bomb." The metal was pushed upwards because THE BOMB WAS UNDERNEATH THE TRAIN. Lait didn't remember seeing anyone, or a bag that could be holding a bomb, near the point of detonation because there was no bomber sitting there, there was no bag. THE BOMB WAS UNDERNEATH THE TRAIN. Dance partners Bruce Lait and Crystal Main were nearest the bomb.....again, no Islamic radical, no Mideastern terrorist sitting in that carriage. THE BOMB WAS UNDERNEATH THE TRAIN. So we are actually back on topic, where we see that Bruce Lait and Cystal Main were nearest to the bomb and they didn't see anyone Muslims, any backpacks or even a bag that could be holding a bomb. Nothing except a big hole in the floor where the metal had pushed UPWARDS. And there is no mention of him reading a newspaper in this article. So you were in error regarding your assumption that those nearest to the bombs wouldn't have survived just as you were in error about the ice from ASDA, the explosive material, the "bomb factory" in Leeds, etc, etc, etc. More spoon-fed government nonsense. "Open wide". You have zero credibility just like the official government conspiracy theory that you espouse has zero credibility.
  7. What Biddle claimed was that Khan was “sitting with a rucksack over his shoulders and a main bag in his lap over his chest”, which directly contradicted public statements made by both Andy Hayman and Sir Ian Blair of the Metropolitan Police who both claimed that the bombs were on the floor of the carriages when they detonated. Feel free to dig up whatever links you wish. Here is what Danny Biddle actually claimed, which is quoted from the same J7 article:- http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/7-7-edgware-road-paddington.html#dannybiddle One of the major concerns with Danny Biddle's recollections about whether or not he saw Mohammad Sidique Khan on his train is that, after being unconscious for 5 weeks, and having received significant injuries to his head in the incident, the association between Khan and what happened on the train was planted by television news stories. Danny Biddle describes this moment after waking in hospital as follows: I was on the ward and woke up at 4am. I don't sleep well because of flashbacks and nightmares. I put the TV on and BBC news were playing the video Al Jazeera had shown of Khan. I didn't have the sound on and kept thinking, "I'm sure I know him from somewhere." 'Then the words flashed up: "Edgware Road bomber". It just clicked in my mind that we'd looked at each other on the train. I just punched out at the TV I couldn't believe it. Source: Danny Biddle, Daily Mail 25th June 2006 So after months of being exposed to news stories about the 7/7/2005 London bombings, "it just clicked" in Biddle's mind that he had seen Khan somewhere before...on TV perhaps? There were almost 800 people that were injured that day. You may be able to convince yourself that none of those people were close enough and that's why none of them saw any backpacks/rucksacks, or any Muslims or any Muslims with backpacks/rucksacks, but you're not going to convince anyone with any common sense of that rubbish. Bruce Lait ring a bell? According to you, based on nothing but your assurance that it is "quite easily do-able", even when the time is cut in half. Sorry, but I'll have to go with documented evidence, where someone actually put a stopwatch to it, rather than believing your unfounded and undocumented claims. Again, zero evidence supporting the government's conspiracy theory or your defense of it. "As already demonstrated"? You mean as you have tried to claim to run away from the fact that it is absolutely ridiculous for anyone to believe that all but one of the CCTV security cameras on 7/7/2005 weren't working in the London underground, on the No. 30 bus, or inside Luton station. It was 9/11 that was used as a springboard by the British government to claim all of those cameras were needed FOR SECURITY REASONS. So anyone who claims they aren't security cameras or that they aren't there to help identify "the bad guys" isn't only being dishonest with themselves and others, but they are proving just how far the government spoon is stuck in their mouth as they are swallowing the expense of all of those cameras that don't even perform the function they were purchased to do. What a colossal waste of resources for the cameras and for all of the people that are monitoring and maintaining all of that equipment. Wonder where all of those people were on 7/7/2005? Or have you "already demonstrated" that it is reasonable to assume they were all out for their morning breaks at the same time that morning? You're running away from the total lack of CCTV evidence just like you have been running away from the fact that there is only one chance in 3,715,592,613,265,750,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000 that the drill and attack could have coincided in a 10-year period. Which means in plain English that the official government conspiracy theory doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of being true. Kinda like that ridiculous nonsense you bought hook, line and sinker about the trip to ASDA and the 4 alleged suicide bombers needing to ice down their backpack bombs...which all went out the window when the government changed its story about the explosive material being TATP to black pepper peroxide (which wouldn't need to be iced down). Please see your post #892 as a reminder. http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/show...&postcount=892 You not only bought that ridiculous story you defended it proving you will defend any government story no matter how untenable it becomes and in the face of overwhelming evidence contradicting it. You therefore have zero credibility. So go ahead and follow your standard operating procedure, run from the facts and start pointing fingers at everyone else. Nobody's buying it anymore.
  8. And we know Danny Biddle is not a reliable witness. The nature of his injuries should explain why his quoted accounts conflict with each other and with the accounts of other people:- http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/7-7-edgware-road-paddington.html#dannybiddle Danny Biddle Danny Biddle is the only survivor and eye-witness to claim that he actually saw Mohammed Sidique Khan implying that he saw Khan detonate a bomb. In fact, what he claims to have seen is someone he believes to be Khan reaching into something that Biddle describes as a 'main bag'. In the only image ever released purporting to show the four men accused of perpetrating the attacks, taken from outside Luton station 30 miles from the scenes of the crimes, there is no evidence of Khan or any of the men carrying anything that could be 'described' as a "main bag" in addition to their rucksacks. If Khan was carrying a 'main bag' then that raises further questions about where en route from Luton to London he obtained such an item. Unfortunately Mr Biddle, who survived with appalling injuries, has made a number of varying claims about his alleged sighting of Khan and it is difficult to know if any of his accounts are a true recollection of what happened. Further, the severity of the injuries he received and the severe trauma that he experienced are factors that are generally recognised and widely accepted to have a direct impact on a person's ability to accurately remember, recall and recount details of a incident. So we're back to zero credible witnesses. No reliable witnesses saw any backpacks, any Muslims or any Muslims carrying backpacks on any of the tube trains or on the No. 30 bus. Not even Danny Biddle who described Khan as "a youngish-looking Asian guy sitting on the empty seat next to me." No witnesses, no CCTV security camera footage of any of the 4 alleged suicide bombers getting on any of the tube trains or the No. 30 bus, unbelievable train times, sequences of truly unbelievable "coincidences" all explained away by the frightened and brainwashed who believe any lie their government feeds them. No evidence to support the official government conspiracy theory. Only innuendos and a trial by media of 4 young Muslims who are INNOCENT.
  9. Number of CCTV Cameras in London http://www.numberof.net/number-of-cctv-cameras-in-london/ How many CCTV cameras are there in London? Around 2 million. There are about 2 million closed-circuit television cameras, or CCTVs, in London. This is according to a January 5, 2010 news report published in the Telegraph U.K. The report further estimates that there are about 4 million CCTVs in the entire U.K. It is also estimated that 200 million pounds have been spent so far on CCTVs. So to correct a previous statement, several million covers Great Britain, of which about 2 million are reportedly in London at the time of this report last year. And yet somehow, when it really counted, there were ZERO CCTV images of the 4 alleged suicide bombers getting on the tube trains or the No. 30 bus that they supposedly blew up. Where is the evidence in support of the government's official cover-story? --NO CCTV footage of any of the 4 alleged suicide bombers purchasing tickets at Luton station --NO CCTV footage of any of the 4 alleged suicide bombers boarding the train at Luton station --NO witnesses claiming to have seen the 4 alleged suicide bombers on the 7:24am train at Luton BEFORE the government changed its official conspiracy theory from the 4 having caught the non-existent 7:40am train to them catching the 7:24am train --NO CCTV footage of any of the 4 alleged suicide bombers boarding any of the tube trains they supposedly blew up --NO CCTV footage of any of the 4 alleged suicide bombers boarding the No. 30 bus they supposedly blew up --NO reliable witnesses that place any of the 4 alleged suicide bombers on any of the tube trains they supposedly blew up --NO reliable witnesses that place any of the 4 alleged suicide bombers on the No. 30 bus they supposedly blew up So we are to believe that these 4 alleged suicide bombers just happened to choose "precisely" the same scenario that Peter Power and his firm Visor Consultants chose for their mock terrorists drill on the same day, at the same time and at the same tube train locations? Remember the odds of the drill and attack coinciding is One chance in 3,715,592,613,265,750,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. And these odds don't take into account compounding from the other terror drills, including "Operation Hanover" that were conducted just prior:- From the inquest:- http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/10022011am.htm The Inquest hears about the Met’s terror drill called, ‘Hanover’ (July 1-2, 2005) Q. We know from the documents which have been disclosed to us in these proceedings, and indeed which are in the public domain, that on 1 and 2 July 2005, Metropolitan Police officers from your Anti-terrorist Branch conducted a table-top training exercise which had at its core an attack on the London Underground. A. (Assistant Commissioner Christopher Allison) ..in the presentations I’ve given about 7/7, that extensive training programme which I think stood us in extremely good stead on 7 July. All the people responding knew each other, trusted each other. There were plans in place that we’d exercised and we knew whether they were going to work or not. Q. Thank you for that. The exercise itself, as I understand it, envisaged simultaneous bomb attacks on trains, Waterloo, Embankment and St James’s Underground stations. Again, so there’s absolute clarity about this, this was nothing more than a coincidence, there was no intelligence to suggest that attacks of that nature were about to take place? A. That’s entirely correct, sir. (Feb 1, am, 53 – 54) So the Inquest heard about three simultaneous underground bomb attacks that were rehearsed in a police terror drill less than one week before the three simultaneous underground bomb attacks ACTUALLY took place, on 7/7/2005. No wonder they had De Boer set up the triage clinics the day before (6th of July 2005) the 7/7/2005 London bombings actually took place. Add to this the amazing story that the 4 alleged suicide bombers somehow made it from outside Luton station to the platform in 93 seconds on 7/7/2005:- http://terroronthetube.co.uk/inquest-articles/77-inquest-government-offers-new-still-unbelievable-version-of-the-train-times-timeline/ 07.21.54 Enter Luton, 07.22.43 Go through barriers, 07.23.27 On platform. ...when it took them 5 minutes to do the same during the dry run on 28/6/2005... 08.10.07 Enter Luton station (and buy tickets), 08.14.26 Go through barriers, 08.15.07 Enter platform Not to mention the difficulty with them appearing in the only working camera at Thameslink King Cross at 8:26am. But despite these astronomical odds and in the face of a complete lack of any concrete evidence people desperately cling to the official government conspiracy theory which doesn't have a prayer of being true.
  10. Yes they are. The mechanism is a closed circuit television camera (CCTV). The purpose of the camera is SECURITY (thus the debate about security vs. privacy). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed-circuit_television "Surveillance of the public using CCTV is particularly common in the U.K., where there are reportedly more cameras per person than in any other country in the world.[3] There and elsewhere, its increasing use has triggered a debate about security versus privacy." ...later in the same article... "Many proponents of CCTV cite the attacks of the 2005 London Underground bombings as one example of how effective surveillance led to swift progress in post-event investigations." Even though with all of these CCTV security cameras they didn't manage to catch any of the alleged suicide bombers entering the tube trains or the No. 30 bus that they supposedly blew up. This article is a bit dated (August of 2009) but it states there are over 4 MILLION CCTV security cameras in Great Britain:- http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1205607/Shock-figures-reveal-Britain-CCTV-camera-14-people--China.html
  11. Are they not called "security" cameras which are operated by "security" companies? Are there not several million CCTV cameras in London, the most surveyed city in the world (which couldn't manage even ONE CCTV photo of the 4 alleged suicide bombers entering the tube trains or the No. 30 bus they supposedly blew up)? Do you think they are free? If you've watched the "7/7 Ripple Effect", then you should know the connection just as you should know that the statistics shared about the likelihood of the drill and attack have been well-explained. The only difficulty you are really having with the statistics is they prove beyond any REASONABLE doubt that the 4 young Muslims wrongly blamed for the 7/7/2005 London bombings are INNOCENT.
  12. More on the unbelievable train times according to the latest revision of the government's official conspiracy theory:- from http://terroronthetube.co.uk/inquest-articles/77-inquest-government-offers-new-still-unbelievable-version-of-the-train-times-timeline/ ------------------------------- June 28th 2005 ‘Dry Run’ timings Three of the Four came to London ten days earlier on June 28th, and the Inquest was shown CCTV with timestamps of them entering Luton station (See ‘Bridget’, here). They took exactly five minutes from the lower-ground entrance door to go through the station, get their tickets and go onto the platform: 08.10.07 Enter Luton station (and buy tickets), 08.14.26 Go through barriers, 08.15.07 Enter platform July 7th New ‘Official Narrative’ timings Then the court showed similar CCTV sequence of July 7th with the Four carrying (alleged deadly-bomb) rucksacks. Now they only took one and a half minutes to complete exactly the same movements: 07.21.54 Enter Luton, 07.22.43 Go through barriers, 07.23.27 On platform. IT IS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY TO THE NEW OFFICIAL NARRATIVE, FOR THE FOUR TO HAVE BEEN ON THE BOMBED TUBE TRAINS, THAT THEY CAUGHT THIS EARLIER TRAIN THAT LEFT LUTON AT 7.25 . ------------------------------- More unbelievable nonsense.
  13. What are the odds of all but one of the cameras malfunctioning during a critical 20 minute window from 8:30-8:50am? Please see the following excerpt from the inquest:- http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/...cctv-fail.html ------------------------------------- The exchange below, between Mr Patterson QC, counsel for the bereaved, and Detective Inspector Ewan Kindness, provides further details. Details which only become apparent to keen listeners in attendance at the Inquests or eagle-eyed readers of the transcripts because, as usual, major show-stoppers in the official "narrative" of 7/7 are regularly and completely ignored by the press. MR PATTERSON: Officer, we then watched the footage -- and I don't think we need to play this, thank you -- of the men entering the railway station. In fact, we don't actually see them buying tickets, do we, in the footage? Were you able to find any footage or CCTV evidence that helps to explain how they got their tickets? A.[DI EWAN KINDNESS] I can't recall the tickets being purchased. Q. Then in terms of the journey south, I think you told us that there were no cameras on board the train, is that right? A. That's correct. Q. When they got to King's Cross, in terms of the available footage, although there were quite a few cameras at King's Cross station, is it right that the only cameras that were recording for the relevant time was a camera in the tunnel? A. There were 76 -- it was a temporary system. King's Cross underground had a temporary system in place. 76 cameras moving in sequence from one second at a time. Fortunately for us, at the appropriate period, between 8.30 and 8.50, it sat for 20 minutes on that one camera and that allowed us, at that period, they came through and we got the first sighting. Q. Is there any footage of the mainline station as opposed to the Thameslink station? A. When you say "mainline", do you mean mainline King's Cross? Q. Yes. A. At some distance away? Q. Yes, is there any footage, CCTV footage -- you referred earlier today to many, many hours of footage that would be relevant to the emergency response. A. I mean, King's Cross mainline footage was that which Hasib Hussain has been identified on, so that's some of it. Of course, it's quite a large estate, but there is definitely King's Cross mainline footage. Q. So if anyone wants to look at footage of the platform or of the escalator, there is footage that has survived of all of those different areas of the mainline station? A. I would -- I mean, we'd have to check the schedule, sir, but from my understanding, that would have been seized and certainly was viewed, so it would be accessible, yes. Q. Was it possible to find CCTV footage showing the area of the station where the witness, Joseph Martoccia, A. Could you just provide me a little bit of information about what he sighted, sir, just to refresh my memory? Q. He was a witness who described seeing the group. He described four to six Asian males with rucksacks, and hugging and euphoric I think – A. Certainly euphoric, but, no, there was nothing, we looked for that, sir, and there was nothing at all. Q. That wasn't covered by cameras? A. No. Q. In terms of the platforms and the Circle Line heading west and the movements of Mohammed Sidique Khan, presumably you looked but that wasn't covered? A. That's correct. Q. And heading east and the movements of Shehzad Tanweer, presumably you looked – A. Yes, we did. Q. -- but there was no coverage of him boarding the train? A. At King's Cross? Q. At King's Cross. A. No. Source: Transcripts, 14 October 2010 Afternoon session, p57, Line 19 on From this we learn that "a temporary system" of 76 cameras was installed at King's Cross, but that it malfunctioned for 20 minutes between the crucial period of approximately 8.30am - 8.50am on the 7 July 2005. This "malfunction" left just one of 76 cameras actually recording CCTV footage. Fortunately for the investigating officers, the one camera which remained in operation happened to be the one which was trained on the tunnel between the King's Cross Thameslink station and King's Cross mainline station. This one CCTV camera captured the image shown above. ------------------------------------- What REAL evidence is there that the 4 actually got onto the tube trains and the No. 30 bus? Why isn't Verint Systems, an Israeli company who owns and operates the cameras in the underground, being made to explain all of these malfunctions? How many hundreds of millions of pounds have been spent on CCTV cameras that don't even work when it counts?
  14. Are we really to believe that a "CCTV-rich environment" somehow had this many failures in one day? http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/final-curtain-cctv-rich-to-cctv-fail.html ----------------------- Sunday, October 17, 2010 The Final Curtain - "CCTV rich" to "CCTV FAIL!" "In the next image, this is the last sighting of Lindsay, Khan and Tanweer. This was the first CCTV sighting that we had on the unit on this enquiry as they pass through towards the underground station." DI Kindness, to the 7/7 Inquests 13 October 2010 Q. [Hugo Keith QC] Can you recall on what day you first spotted a number of men walking through the King's Cross area, in particular through the Thameslink station carrying rucksacks? A. [Detective Inspector Ewan Kindness] It was on 11 July 2005, sir. Q. So on the Monday? A. It was, yes. Q. Can you recall what it was about the appearance of those men on the CCTV that alerted you to the fact that you might have identified the bombers? A. My officer, who was engaged in the actual CCTV recovery, was ex-military. He saw the four individuals walking through and they were walking two by two and he felt it was significant. They were carrying large rucksacks and he brought my attention to it. I concurred with him that it was a matter of priority for us. Source: Transcript, 13 October 2010 Morning session - page 6, lines 12-25 On Day 4 of the Inquests it became clear that the image above was the last piece of CCTV, according to the Metropolitan Police, that exists of the four accused together anywhere near King's Cross underground station and also the last of Khan, Tanweer or Lindsay. CCTV footage of Hasib Hussain outside King's Cross was shown to the Inquests and released to the press. However, no other footage exists, we are told, that shows the movements of Khan, Tanweer or Lindsay after the King's Cross Thameslink was captured. Why not? Especially when on 11 July 2005, Deputy Chief Constable of the British Transport Police, Andy Trotter, boldly announced, "The Underground network is a CCTV-rich environment". ----------------------- We are not just talking about the cameras at Thameslink King Cross. We are talking about cameras at Luton station (where are the images of the 4 making their way from outside the station to the platforms? If the camera outside of Luton station is Camera #14, then where are views from any of the other cameras? Why weren't the cameras working on the No. 30 bus? How are we to believe that Khan, Tanweer and Lindsay even got on a tube train if there are no images of them entering any of the tubes that blew up? How did the 4 make it from outside Luton station to the platforms carrying large heavy backpacks during rush hour in less than 3 minutes when it took them 5 minutes during the "dummy run" on 28/6/2005 and others have independently timed the walk at 3 minutes and 35 seconds without stopping to purchase tickets? Where is all of the evidence of the 4 alleged suicide bombers actually entering or inside of their target vehicles/carriages? Where is all of the evidence?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.