Thursday, July 14, 2005

Unanswered Questions 

Update: Thanks to Infowars for calculating the odds that a terror drill and a terrorist attack would exactly coincide in three different train stations, at the same time -- One chance in 3,715,592,613,265,750,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (or 3.715x10^39))

As the so-called MSM plays the "booga booga" card of homegrown terrorists in London, parroting the official story, I find myself with more and more questions about the whole thing. There are just too many anomalies, too many little glitches for me to accept that this was, in fact, a quartet of local terrorists who got their hands on military grade explosives and then blew themselves up.

Consider this: Bus #30, the double-decker that was blown up, was the only bus to be re-routed after the bombings. There's also this:
Also a point of interest....last saturday a contractor came to inspect the CCTV on the buses at the depot, According to my supervisor the person spent more than 20 hours over that weekend, 20 hours to see if the CCTV is working? Also that person who came was not a regular contractor, for security reasons the same few people always come to the depot to carry out work, this time it was different.
And, as we all know now, the CCTV cameras on Bus #30 were not working.

But -- even more disturbing and suspicious: when the bombings happened, a hypothetical terrorism drill was being carried out, one which played the "what if" game, mainly, "what if bombs went off" in the three stations that happened to have been bombed. You can read a very telling interview about it. Short version: what are the odds that a terrorist attack exactly mimicking a drill would happen at exactly the times and places envisioned by that drill? One would think that terrorists would have no access to the drill-planners plans. Or vice versa. Unless... well, you do the math.

An interesting scenario I've read is this: the drill was cover for a bombing plot, in case anybody got caught before the big boom. That is, if someone got snagged trying to bring a bomb onto a train, they could say, "I'm part of the drill. Looks like you did your job and stopped it. Heh heh." And looking at the info that's been put out regarding the bombers, my bullshit meter really goes off. Not a one of them seemed to be the suicidal type. The only common denominator among them was that they were Muslims. How convenient. More on that convenience here.

And don't forget -- on the very morning that 9/11 happened, the US was involved in an anti-terrorism drill which posited... (wait for it) commercial planes being highjacked and striking various civilian targets.

Finally, answer me this question: if the suicide bombers were, in fact, strapped to their bombs -- military grade explosives that made a really big boom -- how is it that personal documents were found so quickly? Shades of the highjacker's passport found, undamaged, in the 9/11 wreckage when most of the victims on the planes were identified by scraping DNA off of burnt metal. Truth to tell, it seems rather obvious that about all they'd find of the suicide bombers is... nothing. Paper burns at 451 degrees Fahrenheit. A high explosive going off strapped to your back is going to be much, much hotter. They might find a dental filling or two. I doubt that they're going to find an unburned wallet. Unless, of course, it was planted. I'd be interested to find out what actually happened in the searches of the bombers' homes. Did MI6 go in first, then turn over the evidence they "found" to the local police, who wouldn't be in on the plot?

And it all still comes back to the first question, posted earlier on this blog: Cui Bono? The UK was about to pull their troops out of Iraq. Now, they probably won't. The Olympics aren't going to be in London for another seven years. There was absolutely no strategic or political benefit for Al-Qaeda to go after London as a target. Rather than advancing their cause, these bombings really set Al-Qaeda back. And, say what you want about them (if there even is a "them" there), Al-Qaeda isn't stupid. If, as we've been told, they're a terrorist organization that kills people, then they're vermin and assholes who should be eradicated. But they aren't stupid.

Bombing London was stupid. 'Nuff said.

Comments: Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?