I have only one reason for starting this blog. It is to ascertain the facts behind the events in London on and since the 7th July 2005.
I have made many attempts to ascertain a few simple facts (and therefore truths) about the events on that morning.
Simply, what times did the trains leave Kings Cross that morning? You might think this was too obvious a question and that the answer would be easily available. But, no! It would appear to be totally absent from any newspaper or website, including that of the Metropolitan Police.
I will share with you all the replies that I have received and hope to receive from my enquiries.
Please aid me in this important quest for the truth. If you have any information or have made your own inquiries add them to this blog and hopefully together we can get to the true facts behind these events.
I have made many attempts to ascertain a few simple facts (and therefore truths) about the events on that morning.
Simply, what times did the trains leave Kings Cross that morning? You might think this was too obvious a question and that the answer would be easily available. But, no! It would appear to be totally absent from any newspaper or website, including that of the Metropolitan Police.
I will share with you all the replies that I have received and hope to receive from my enquiries.
Please aid me in this important quest for the truth. If you have any information or have made your own inquiries add them to this blog and hopefully together we can get to the true facts behind these events.
18 comments:
Seeing as you appear to like the concept and definition game, let's start a little closer to home with perhaps, Attrition, defined as:
1. A rubbing away or wearing down by friction.
2. A gradual diminution in number or strength because of constant stress.
3. A gradual, natural reduction in membership or personnel, as through retirement, resignation, or death.
4. Repentance for sin motivated by fear of punishment rather than by love of God.
In response:
1. Persevere.
2. Immediately apparent.
3. Equally as obvious.
4. Your nom de plume.
The timetables are great, everyone has those and thanks for pointing out the obvious. You don't happen to work for the Metropolitan Police Service do you? They said precisely the same thing.
Hi Attrition
Thank you for taking the trouble to comment on my posting.
Due to the heartsickening events in New Orleans I have not posted further correspondence yet, but will get around to it. Interestingly the times that the trains left Kings Cross that morning is absent from all of them.
Yes, there is a video supposedly of Mr Khan's confession on Al Jazeera but I do not take that to be substantive proof of what we are being told happened on the morning of 7th July. I prefer to look at the facts and make up my own mind. Like the vast majority of people, we can neither confirm nor disprove that the video or the one CCTV image we have been shown so far, is actually of Mohammad Sidique Khan. As I prefer to make up my own mind about what really happened on that morning rather than being told what to think, I will base the facts on the FACTS.
The lack of facts surrounding these events is (suspciously?) absent. I am only asking Why? It must be obvious to all that a genuine investigation would include this information if only to ask eye witnesses to come forward.
I find it hard to believe that I or any other member of the public should check a Transport for London timetable for that Thursday morning and from that work backwards to Kings Cross, trying to sumise at what time a train in a tunnel between Liverpool St and Aldgate would have left Kings Cross that morning. This information is obviously known, so why isn't it avaiable? It is as simple as that.
The mystery is not why I or anyone else concerned should be asking these questions, the mystery is the total absence of the answer.
I hope that this answers your question, and if you are aware of the answer from any official source please let me know.
Thanks.
Hi Attrition
Thanks for taking so much time and trouble on this issue.
I would refer you to my latest posting on my reply from London Underground, and draw your attention to the information on the TFL and Government for London websites that was available soon after these events. That is, until the story changed.
As far as the video of Mr Khan, well, I recently watched a TV advert that I swear showed Gene Kelly dancing to Singing in the Rain. Have you seen it? Just amazing what technology can do with images these days.
Hi Attrition
Thanks once again for commenting and showing your concern for the truth.
You state "Rather than acknowledging known facts", if you read my posting on the reply from the London Underground you will see that I acknowledge the fact that on TFL's website on the 7/7 they stated the trains were going towards Kings Cross. The times of the explosions were also stated on many sites including Government for London (from information given them by the Metropolitan Police) to be different from that which we are later told. Did I make this up or are these known facts? That the story changed is also a known fact. That I have been unable to find out at what times these trains left Kings Cross is also a known fact.
BTW, it is also a known fact that when Channel 4 news played the video tape of Mr Khan to two of his friends they said "It isn't him it doesn't even sound like him" (Channel 4 News 2/9).
I am looking at ALL the evidence that I can find and then making up my own mind. That I am suspicious of what we are told ia also a fact, and one that continues to be compounded by the lack of facts.
History alone should teach us not to believe everything or even anything that is an official story, especially a story that lacks so many verifiable facts.
I am not aware of ever turning down a chance to address the facts, in fact I would have thought it fairly obvious that that is exactly what I am doing. If only I could find out the times that these trains left Kings Cross, I could address that as well.
Hi Attrition
Back again but then that's the nature of the name.
As far as official stories not being trusted have you heard the one about WMD in Iraq? The one that has led to the slaughter of how many innocent Iraqis? On that basis alone I think we have a duty to ask questions and not take at face value what we are told.
I find it rather interesting that attrition opines that Bridget should accept as proof the video, which as yet has STILL not been verified as authentic by the `authorities' (whomever they might be) despite what the media are saying, that Mohammad Sidique Khan was one of four Muslims who bombed London. Attrition says
"Of course you can't. You had never laid eyes on the man. Why would you or the rest of the world think you could identify someone from a photo who you had never seen before ?"
In response to Bridget's comment that we cannot confirm that is is indeed him on the video.
By the same token, what, then, makes anyone think that we CAN?
It is NOT a fact that his family have confirmed it is his him. His family have released no other statement than their initial one. His friends have said that it appears to be him but looks significantly different than he did before the event.
Attrition says,
"Well Khan confessed to planning to blow up these trains and was photographed on his way to the bombings, just before the bombings occurred."
This is inaccurate. Khan made no `confession'. At no time, during the video did Khan mention London or indeed any specific intention he had to cause any damage to it. People have chosen to interpret his words thus, but if you listen to what is said during the video, and read the transcript, there is no statement of intent regarding London, trains, buses or anything else it has been attributed to. Secondly, the only photo released of the men on that day is of them apparently entering Luton station. How does this prove they were in London that day? It has simply been assumed.
Within the context of us being told these are the perpetrators, the public have taken it to be proof, but it actually means very little.
I personally find it hard to take very seriously a video released by an organisation that doesn't even exist, (something Tony Blair himself said very recently) which was recruited and funded by the CIA under the Reagan administration in the 1980s - a fact that was stated by Robin Cook and numerous political commentators.
I find this case woefully lacking in proof, and I cannot see how vilifying or ridiculing people who are understandably wishing to question quite clear anomalies and inconsistencies makes much sense at all.
The struggle between attrition and bridget is fascinating; my sense is that attrition should try to be more respectful.
Attrition should know that the Luton photos have ben called into serious question; that the train times down from Luton are likewise in question (either they got the 7.25 arriving 8.23 or they got the 8.42 arriving too late? at 8.39 - but no way could they have got the 7.40 Thameslink (which didn't run) or the 7.48 as we have been told.
Attrition should also know that there are two credible reports (one in the Cambridgeshire Evening news
http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/region_wide/2005/07/11/83e33146-09af-4421-b2f4-1779a86926f9.lpf
and one on Guardian On line http://nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?p=248#248
that the explosion on the two Circle line trains took place underfloor.
Other reasons people are suspicious concern Visor Consultants parallel 'Terror Exercise' with London Underground and (?Verint Systems) management that very morning focussed on those stations (what are the odds?) and also the speed with which the four men were identified when only one other victim had been identified.
None of this is conclusive, but abuse and the withholding of evidence won't help anyone. Surely you would agree that it is in everyone's interest for conspiracy theories to be scotched (if false) or confirmed (if true)?
Bridget,
If the information you seek is not on TfL website, then you have grounds for appealing to the Freedom of Information Ombudsperson, as they have invoked a reason which rests on a false premise.
So far as London Transport is concerned the man does say that they do of course have the information (which he didn't need to tell you), why not keep going with him, by phone perhaps? information is of course Guardian online and one and that Bridget
@anonymous
Quote: "I find it rather interesting that attrition opines that Bridget should accept as proof the video ... that Mohammad Sidique Khan was one of four Muslims who bombed London."
Why you find that interesting is anyone's guess.
I mentioned it only to point out the extremely unfortunate timing of its release for someone just starting a London bombings conspiracy blog.
Quote: In response to Bridget's comment that we cannot confirm that is is indeed him on the video.
By the same token, what, then, makes anyone think that we CAN?
That is what I said. You don't count.
It is NOT a fact that his family have confirmed it is his him. His family have released no other statement than their initial one. His friends have said that it appears to be him but looks significantly different than he did before the event.
Yeah. They also clarified this by saying that they thought Khan probably recorded months if not a year prior. In the news report I just read that was stated (as you would expect) in the very next paragraph.
This is inaccurate. Khan made no `confession'. At no time, during the video did Khan mention London or indeed any specific intention he had to cause any damage to it. People have chosen to interpret his words thus,but if you listen to what is said during the video, and read the transcript, there is no statement of intent regarding London, trains, buses or anything else it has been attributed to.
You are of course referring to this transcript...
Khan Video Transcript
... and indicating you are not someone worthy of further response.
I guess we will never know why Khan thought the media would be giving him attention in the near future when he made his martyr-styled video , for some reason produced by al Qaeda and delivered to al Jazeera, in which referred to himself as a soldier and talked about spilling his own blood in response to the UKs policies against Muslim populations.
You think it might have been a Big Brother audition tape ?
Another big mystery.
@Keith
Quote: Attrition should know that the Luton photos have ben called into serious question
Not by anyone serious thought. I known that actual digital photographers have stated that it is not possible to make any determination about details in the photos given the low resolution of the stock.
A serious question about the photos would be do those nimrods over at prisonplanet actually think that the BBC etc got a website-sized photo to put on their website-sized website or whether if they wanted to do an actual analysis of the thing they should maybe make an effort to source it themselves.
that the train times down from Luton are likewise in question (either they got the 7.25 arriving 8.23 or they got the 8.42 arriving too late? at 8.39 - but no way could they have got the 7.40 Thameslink (which didn't run) or the 7.48 as we have been told.
Ok.
Attrition should also know that there are two credible reports (one in the Cambridgeshire Evening news
http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/region_wide/2005/07/11/83e33146-09af-4421-b2f4-1779a86926f9.lpf
and one on Guardian On line http://nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?p=248#248
that the explosion on the two Circle line trains took place underfloor.
I was already aware of those statements.
I am not aware of any suggestion that this guy has any sort of forensics knowledge which would lead anyone to conclude his assessments of bomb damage would be in any way useful or of any merit compared to all those people who do have such experience who are involved in the investigation.
I am also aware that whatever question he was giving an answer to would have started along the lines of "tell us what you can recall right after you were blown up by a bomb".
Other reasons people are suspicious concern Visor Consultants parallel 'Terror Exercise'
That was debunked very early on. It was an excercise that in the same way all board meetings in offices are.
So to be more accurate you could in fact say that "people are suspicious because they read some speculative bullshit on prisonplanet".
Or just "they read prisonplanet" which says that just as effectively.
with London Underground and (?Verint Systems) management that very morning focussed on those stations (what are the odds?)
They didn't focus on those stations in any meaningful way which is why they didn't even know bombings had occurred until almost an hour after the fact. At which point the suits "switched from slow time to quick time thinking" in regard to how they conduct their business.
See the explanation given by the Visor Powers guy.
and also the speed with which the four men were identified when only one other victim had been identified.
Well the reason you would want to ID who was responsible as a priority is obvious.
Forensics are able to look at what is left and know where to start. From the extent and nature of the damage they can pretty quickly determine who was closest to a device. There are references for this online and you might find better results referencing Iraq since these investigations are undertaken for bombings there.
None of this is conclusive, but abuse and the withholding of evidence won't help anyone.
Help anyone what ? You are working on the basis that there is some point to finding an answer. A quick review of non-replies to that direct question here should set you straight on that.
Surely you would agree that it is in everyone's interest for conspiracy theories to be scotched (if false) or confirmed (if true)?
There is no theory here. As I have said there doesn't even appear to be a point to the question.
And since you appear to read English just as well as the rest of us lets not pretend that after reading references in September to websites containing factual errors on 7/7 that you think there is any likelyhood of a baseless theory being put down here.
Hi Attrition
Glad you're back I've missed your contributions and the very fact you feel you need to return makes me think I am doing something right!
I find it more and more difficult to untangle your points but firstly it is important for me to say that the point of this blog, as you well know, is to ascertain a few facts behind all the endles verbiage newsreel and newsprint that we have seen heard read since the 7th July. In amongst all of that are huge gaps in those facts. Instead we have conjecture supposition and allegation. I have said from the beginning that the facts are missing. I refuse to 'move on' while there is so little known about the events that morning. Over 9 weeks have lapsed yet NO CCTV from any platform or train or from Kings Cross Thamelink subway or around the Kings Cross area has surfaced yet there must be a good few, if we take the images available after 21/7 as anything to go by. In fact there is no proof AT ALL that is in the public domain that links what we have been told happened and what actually happened.
Until there is I for one am not prepared to believe that we are being told the truth, yet.
Is this a conspiracy theory? I dont really care Attrition what anyone calls it but I do realise that in this world their often exists Conspiracy Fact.
Quote:Glad you're back I've missed your contributions and the very fact you feel you need to return makes me think I am doing something right!
This must be the part where I refer you to subsequent posts.
In amongst all of that are huge gaps in those facts. Instead we have conjecture supposition and allegation.
Well ok. Seems to be going well though. Doesn't seem to be posing a big problem for anyone.
So why would anyone who you are questioning care ?
Take a minute and understand that figuring this out would help you get answers. Also that the people you are questioning already at an 8 hour job with 8 hours of work to do.
You want some perspective... I have read WRH daily for a couple of years now and even I would trash your emails. Get it ?
I have said from the beginning that the facts are missing. ... Over 9 weeks have lapsed yet NO CCTV from any platform or train ... Kings Cross Thamelink subway or around the Kings Cross area has surfaced yet
Well in the meantime why don't you unearth some policy documents which suggest they should have. These need to establish:
1. Precedent for CCTV being released for interest's sake rather than as part of a public call for ID.
2. Something which establishes that evidence in these murders should be made public rather than being subject to restriction
Without this you really have no basis for suggesting you should have already seen this stuff.
there must be a good few, if we take the images available after 21/7 as anything to go by. In fact there is no proof AT ALL that is in the public domain that links what we have been told happened and what actually happened.
I said case closed and so has everyone else. If you dont then you dont. You are exactly where you were the day before you started the blog.
Literally too... the release of the prime suspect's al Qaeda produced martyr video since seems to have had absolutely no relevance to your search for "facts". If you dont regard that as one then you don't. All that says is you were biased going into this making the whole excercise pointless.
Until there is I for one am not prepared to believe that we are being told the truth, yet.
You can do that without emailing people though. However if you want people to provide you information on the basis that they are serving any purpose you are gonna have to address that.
Is this a conspiracy theory? I dont really care Attrition what anyone calls it but I do realise that in this world their often exists Conspiracy Fact.
Well perhaps intentional delusion is a better term to describe your references to unsupported reports from the day as meaning something in September.
You dont get to suggest you were calling into question which trains were bombed (seriously) as an attempt to clarify facts.
Attrition
You say:
"Well in the meantime why don't you unearth some policy documents which suggest they should have. These need to establish:
1. Precedent for CCTV being released for interest's sake rather than as part of a public call for ID.
2. Something which establishes that evidence in these murders should be made public rather than being subject to restriction"
Is there any good reason in your mind why we are shown a tape recording of Mr Khan 8 weeks after the event which, if it is him, never mentions the actual incidents in London on 7/7 and yet no CCTV evidence from Kings Cross?
Given that there will be no trial of these 4 dead young people at which evidence can be heard and made public and Blair has ruled out an inquiry, how else will we ever see or hear this evidence?
You then say:
"I said case closed and so has everyone else. If you dont then you dont. You are exactly where you were the day before you started the blog."
Everyone else Attrition are you sure? Because just as the 9/11 truth movement is gaining momentum I find many voices questioning the events of 7/7. Mine being one of them.
We still have some civil rights left , I think, such as the Freedom of Information Act and this is not yet a police state and in that spirit I will continue to keep asking a very simple question.
As for being no further on than the day I started this blog, in fact, I am further along in realising that this question apparantly has no credible answer.
Attrition are you unaware that the trian timmes for 7/7 have not been released wheather or not there has been a scedule and the cctv has been tampered with if you look hard enough in the top left hand side so please give miss Bridget dunne some appreciation and lay off the grief as we have all been preocuppied with new orleans and maybe a future "terroriest attack" on london
Bridget said...
"Is there any good reason in your mind why we are shown a tape recording of Mr Khan 8 weeks after the event which, if it is him, never mentions the actual incidents in London on 7/7 and yet no CCTV evidence from Kings Cross?"
I think you are referring to the al Qaeda produced video where he refers to sacrificing himself to punish the UKs policies against muslims.
Yeah I do think there's a pretty obvious reason that made the news. If you can't think of one you really aren't worth anyone's time.
Don't take my word for it either. Write an email to someone in the government, police force, media, or any other random person on the planet and tell them you have no idea what the video was about. See how interested they are.
Given that there will be no trial of these 4 dead young people at which evidence can be heard and made public and Blair has ruled out an inquiry, how else will we ever see or hear this evidence?
I dunno... wait for the TV special ?
If the idea is you play dumb about the videos that are released while asking for other videos to be released then I really don't think I need to tell you how that's gonna work out.
Someone who couldn't work the choose an identity button said...
"Attrition are you unaware that the trian timmes for 7/7 have not been released
No. I am aware they have been released just as they were on all days prior and since.
"wheather or not there has been a scedule and the cctv has been tampered with if you look hard enough in the top left hand side"
All the CCTV you have ever seen has been tampered with in the same way. If you want to see untampered images stop looking at them on the web and go look at them on the CCTV monitors.
"so please give miss Bridget dunne some appreciation and lay off the grief as we have all been preocuppied with new orleans and maybe a future "terroriest attack" on london"
Ok then. I will lay off in the same way all the people she has emailed have.
Please see this link for much more information on the London bombings (and all the others as well).
http://www.crematonofcare.com (Joseph Skelton, Skipton, UK)
or http://www.threeworldwars.com (Michael Haupt, UK)
http://www.prisonplanet.com
(Paul Watson of the infowars.com
organization.) including http://www.propagandamatrix.com
to fix the typo above:
www.CremationOfCare.com
www.threeworldwars.com
www.prisonplanet.com
It turns out that the same network that was behind the recent London bombings were also behind Princess Di's and Dodi Fayd's assassination on 31-8-1997... and much more than those events as well.
I was up in Edinburgh the day the explosions happened. All week the G2& make poverty history demonstators had been harassed, beaten, and illegally detained by Police. All of a sudden these guys in the body armour start behaving as if they were heroes, and the demonstration was all very well and good but they had a war to fight against baddies.
The whole anti-G8ommentum of the campaign and protests were reversed in one fell swoop. The media dropped the whole issue. Gleneagles was over and done with. The timing was perfect.
Post a Comment