Who did it, MI5, MI6, CIA or Mossad?

Post by **TonyGosling** » Wed Apr 22, 2009 1:39 am

Nobody seems to know which organisation carried out the London Bombings in July 2005. Only one thing is for sure, it wasn't a fictional organisation called Al Qaeda.

Peter Power's "Spooky Coincidence" - Google blocks public domain 7/7 film
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/428001.html

I believe it was most probably a Private Military Company (PMC) with close links to British, US and Israeli intelligence. It may even have been commissioned to prepare and carry out the operation by a private business.

MI6 and Mossad have to be the prime intelligence collusion suspects for me. Not MI5, they have traditionally had to operate under BRitish law and are therefore don't harbour so many 'basket cases'.

Webster Tarpley describes most simply the various ingredients of a false flag operation

Peter Power has also dropped us a gem by outing Reed Elsevier as the company that commissioned his 'spooky coincidence' terror drills that morning, at the same times and the same three tube stations where the real bombs went off, lest we forget.

And one can see why he might do so. He may have been hoping the BBC Conspiracy Files documentary would get these facts out in the open and stop him having to risk his life and protect the perpetrators by his silence.

It's my guess that not a single person at Reed Elsevier has been questioned about their possible involvement in the murder of over 50 Londoners that day.

Boy will Mike Rudin and his not infallible BBC TV documentary team in White City have been leant on over the last year. Making the one documentary that would blow all the anti-Muslim racism and war on terror out of the water.

That documentary may even open the way to throw doubt on Robin Cook's death. All the ramifications that a public debate and enquiry would mean a lifting of the evil cloud of suspicion which has decended on our nation.

kbo234 · Post by **kbo234** » Wed Apr 22, 2009 1:22 pm

VERY BIG TERROR PLOT NOT VERY BIG OR TERRIFYING OR A PLOT, ADMIT POLICE

The very big terror plot uncovered by police last week is not big, does not involve terrorists and is not a plot of any kind, it emerged last night.

Quick resigned after jeopardising an operation that turned out to be a waste of time anyway. Brilliant.As nine brown men were deported for having beards, the police blamed the Home Office, the Home Office blamed MI5 and MI5 warned everyone it could kill them with its thumb.

An inquiry will now be launched into why the prime minister was allowed to scare the * out of everyone, though experts insist it may just have had something to do with the news agenda.

A police spokesman said: "We were really hoping to charge them with conspiracy to go to the shops to buy some crisps and Tizer, but according to our lawyers that that's not an actual offence, as yet.

"We have therefore taken the precautionary step of sending these men and their potentially explosive beards back from whence they came."

He added: "Come to think of it, Bob Quick must be absolutely * livid. Whadya reckon?"

A spokesman for home secretary Jacqui Smith said: "Embarrassed? No, we're way, way beyond embarrassment at this stage.

"That's a bit like asking a streaker if he's embarrassed because he hasn't shaved."

Post by **fish5133** » Wed Apr 22, 2009 1:39 pm

A police spokesman said: "We were really hoping to charge them with conspiracy to go to the shops to buy some crisps and Tizer, but according to our lawyers that that's not an actual offence, as yet.

Lack of evidence in that no cctv footage of them buying a battery in tesco was forthcoming and that none of them actually owned a rucksack. The tizer and crisps they bought were carried in a plastic bag.

looks like the only thing the police have got on them is that they might have been "overstayers" or "illegal immigrants"

Wouldnt it be graet if the countries they are deported to ask for all the evidence the UK Police have and then try them and find them totally innocent

paul wright · Post by **paul wright** » Wed Apr 22, 2009 9:34 pm

Most of them are being sent back to Pakistan, where they are liable to arrest and being tortured into confession by the ISI.
Thus justifying their arrest here?

Post by **TonyGosling** » Wed Apr 22, 2009 11:06 pm

paul wright wrote:sent back to Pakistan, where they are liable to arrest and being tortured into confession by the ISI.

Thanks Paul,
Absolutely key point in this case.

I listened to the interview with these lads' lawyer and the Manchester police press conference on five live this morning at about 11am.

You know what. I think MI5 may have turned a corner. May have realised they've been conned over 7/7 and dropped the Anti-Terror cops right in the doo-doo.
Nobody believes these guys have done anything at all and Quick and the anti-terror cops are falling to bits as a result.
Be sure your sins will find you out Mr Quick.
What is your lodge number?

paul wright · Post by **paul wright** » Thu Apr 23, 2009 12:10 am

Cheers, Tony
Not a shred of evidence here, not from their homes, not from their computers, not from anything regarding this huge falsification.
Nothing whatsoever as far as I can tell
Let's screw them by sending them back, on the back of an atrocious lie
Quick did this deliberately as part of the plot.
No doubt he is paid off handsomely, if underhand

redadare · Post by **redadare** » Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:51 am

TonyGosling wrote:
paul wright wrote:sent back to Pakistan, where they are liable to arrest and being tortured into confession by the ISI.
Thanks Paul,
Absolutely key point in this case.

I listened to the interview with these lads' lawyer and the Manchester police press conference on five live this morning at about 11am.

You know what. I think MI5 may have turned a corner. May have realised they've been conned over 7/7 and dropped the Anti-Terror cops right in the doo-doo.
Nobody believes these guys have done anything at all and Quick and the anti-terror cops are falling to bits as a result.
Be sure your sins will find you out Mr Quick.
What is your lodge number?

Tony, what makes ypu think MI5 'may have turned a corner'?

redadare · Post by **redadare** » Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:59 am

Peter Power's "Spooky Coincidence" - Google blocks public domain 7/7 film
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/428001.html

I've tried the link, and it starts with the 7/7 film but after about 30 seconds switches into what I think is John Snow talking about Gaza?

Any ideas?

kbo234 · Post by **kbo234** » Thu Apr 23, 2009 10:38 am

Is this your 7/7 film, Tony?

Anyway, it now cuts out as soon as the talking starts.

Chi_of_life · Post by **Chi_of_life** » Sat Apr 25, 2009 11:17 am

MI5 did it. I saw them do it and leave the bus.

There's also more footage/evidence currently in the courts on its way pointing to this.
But ultimately the head of MI5 resigned over it not the head of MI6, Mossad, or the CIA.

andyb · Post by **andyb** » Sun Apr 26, 2009 1:57 pm

Daniel, you really are silly aren't you. I do take it that you have heard of libel? If not, you should read up about it, although it's a bit late now I've saved the page

cem · Post by **cem** » Sun Apr 26, 2009 8:39 pm

andyb wrote:Daniel, you really are silly aren't you. I do take it that you have heard of libel? If not, you should read up about it, although it's a bit late now I've saved the page

Andy,

You sound more like a gate-keeper than a truth activist.

I don't think the MI5 or any other branch of the War Establishment need your defence against "libel" as they have their own army of people paid to suffocate dissent.

Being the sole surviving witness of the 2005 London Bombings brave enough to risk his life by speaking out, Daniel is perfectly entitled to question the role of the MI5.

.

Prole · Post by **Prole** » Sun Apr 26, 2009 9:10 pm

cem wrote:
andyb wrote:Daniel, you really are silly aren't you. I do take it that you have heard of libel? If not, you should read up about it, although it's a bit late now I've saved the page
Andy,

You sound more like a gate-keeper than a truth activist.

I don't think the MI5 or any other branch of the War Establishment need your defence against "libel" as they have their own army of people paid to suffocate dissent.

Being the sole surviving witness of the 2005 London Bombings brave enough to risk his life by speaking out, Daniel is perfectly entitled to question the role of the MI5.

.

Wrong end of the stick? I think andyb is referring to this: http://www.the4thbomb.com/we-are-change ... mod-front/

paul wright · Post by **paul wright** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 12:09 am

So what? Is Andy going to take Daniel to court over a supposed libel
Daniel's ok in my estimation, so is Andy B
What on earth's all this silly talk of litigation.
It isn't going to happen, nor should it

Post by **fish5133** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 12:23 am

No andy,

You're silly for making fun of any 7/7 survivor.

andyb wrote:Daniel, you really are silly aren't you. I do take it that you have heard of libel? If not, you should read up about it, although it's a bit late now I've saved the page

Disco_Destroyer · Post by **Disco_Destroyer** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 7:59 am

I caught the coment on here somewhere that Gareth, Andy and Toseef are an MOD front, after splitting up the London Truth group

I can understand Andys come back.

andyb · Post by **andyb** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 10:16 am

fish5133 wrote:No andy,

You're silly for making fun of any 7/7 survivor.

Fish, I ain't making fun out of anyone.

Funny how Gareth get's banned for pointing out facts yet others seem to be able to post all sorts of nonsense and get away with it.

Pugwash · Post by **Pugwash** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 2:51 pm

Daniel Obachike's quote regarding the assertions made on the above [Prole's] link.

There are mountains of evidence from a number of sources, (one being MI6). Its been open knowledge for 2 years.

At the same time affording Daniel Obachike great respect for his courage in standing up to intimidation in order to give a highly valuable information regarding the 7:7 bus bombing, quoting MI6 as a reliable source of information is highly suspect. Having little knowledge of the personalities involved and without particular instances from the 'mountains of evidence' or the naming of reliable sources we can only conclude that the allegations are unsubstantiated.

andyb · Post by **andyb** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 6:30 pm

Pugwash wrote:Daniel Obachike's quote regarding the assertions made on the above [Prole's] link.

There are mountains of evidence from a number of sources, (one being MI6). Its been open knowledge for 2 years.
At the same time affording Daniel Obachike great respect for his courage in standing up to intimidation in order to give a highly valuable information regarding the 7:7 bus bombing, quoting MI6 as a reliable source of information is highly suspect. Having little knowledge of the personalities involved and without particular instances from the 'mountains of evidence' or the naming of reliable sources we can only conclude that the allegations are unsubstantiated.

He's been asked to substantiate his claims on many occasions and has yet to do so.

Tony, you seem to be able to ban Gareth within hours yet these claims have remained on this site for a number of days. As 'editor' you are responsible for the content of this site!!

Stefan · Post by **Stefan** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:16 pm

This isn't the first time, he's been playing at this on facebook as well. It would be funny how he steadfastly refuses to supply any evidence or even reasoning behind his claims if it wasn't such a serious accusation to make against an activist.

So if you have something to say Daniel, please say it now.

No innuendo, no unsubstantiated accusations - please lay out for us why you are so certain that the people you named on your blog are "MOD Ring Leaders"...

Start at the top...

Post by **TonyGosling** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 11:13 pm

That's misleading.
Daniel doesn't have to say anything here.
What he says is entirely his choice.
Now and in the future.

Stefan wrote:This isn't the first time, he's been playing at this on facebook as well. It would be funny how he steadfastly refuses to supply any evidence or even reasoning behind his claims if it wasn't such a serious accusation to make against an activist.

So if you have something to say Daniel, please say it now.

No innuendo, no unsubstantiated accusations - please lay out for us why you are so certain that the people you named on your blog are "MOD Ring Leaders"...

Start at the top...

Post by **TonyGosling** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 11:24 pm

As already explained.
Gareth was banned for running a coach and horses through the rulebook.

You, Andy, have no right to call any survivor's testimony or opinion 'nonsense' on this forum.
If you don't like it you should try, carefully, to persuade them that they may be wrong.

And we don't allow threats of legal action either.

andyb wrote: Funny how Gareth get's banned for pointing out facts yet others seem to be able to post all sorts of nonsense and get away with it.

Stefan · Post by **Stefan** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 11:37 pm

Yes Tony, Andy has a perfect right to respond to the accusation that he is an MOD infiltrator.

Post by **TonyGosling** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 11:39 pm

Lots has been going on while I've been offline I see
Rules being broken.

Daniel hasn't made any accusations here.

Andy's not allowed to.
Link to your own site by all means.

andyb · Post by **andyb** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 11:42 pm

I was not referring to Daniel's testimony as nonsense. I am referring to his slanderous allegations. Are you seriously saying that the forum rules allow slander but not the defence of slander?

Post by **TonyGosling** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 11:51 pm

He's a survivor.
You're not.
Now please Andy as you clearly want to refute this stuff, do it elsewhere.

What about here?
http://www.truthforum.co.uk/

andyb wrote:I was not referring to Daniel's testimony as nonsense. I am referring to his slanderous allegations. Are you seriously saying that the forum rules allow slander but not the defence of slander?

Meanwhile

Daniel's blog wrote:The calm before the storm troopers
http://www.the4thbomb.com/cnn-screen-da ... 0-protest/
CNN Screen Daniel Obachike At G20 Protest
Posted by Daniel7:7 on 4/20/09

Some MOD lads mingling among protesters at a march I attended glared at my ‘MI5 DID IT‘ placard. One of them whined ‘Mossad did it’. Hardly you idiot, I replied smiling, is that supposed to be some kind of Psy-Ops?? Duh!, MI5 DID IT… 100% Read it and weep. Haven’t you heard? Sarkosy cracks jokes about it!
MI5 Did IT

Understandably the terrified British press edit me out of any footage taken at protests but I didn’t expect CNN to be under the thumb of Nicholas Evans MI5 chief.

Here I am on April 1st outside the Bank of England. The front of my placard says ‘MI5 DID IT’ so they publish a picture taken from the rear.

Stefan · Post by **Stefan** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 11:52 pm

Discussing it elsewhere does not change the situation:

You are currently publishing libel on your forum.

Stefan · Post by **Stefan** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 11:58 pm

TonyGosling wrote:Lots has been going on while I've been offline I see
Rules being broken.

Daniel hasn't made any accusations here.

Andy's not allowed to.
Link to your own site by all means.

Daniel's signature bears an url including the words, "We Are Change UK Is An MOD Front" it is a hyperlink which directs to an article where Daniel makes named accusations without any evidence of several activists working for the MOD, Andy included.

So I think Andy is perfectly within his rights to respond to that, and I think most people would agree.

andyb · Post by **andyb** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 11:58 pm

The libel is on this forum Tony so I would prefer to defend myself here.

Post by **TonyGosling** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 11:59 pm

Where?
Do you mean the link?
How's this.
http://tinyurl.com/cf9u63