RSS Feed
� July 4, 2006 - Fake terrorism broadcasts planned for 7 July 2005
The hightlighted section above reads
"Yesterday we were actually in the City working on an exercise involving mock broadcasts when it happened for real.
When the news bulletins started coming on, people began to say how realistic our exercise was - not realising there really was an attack. We then became involved in the real crisis which we had to manage for the company."
Why should fake broadcasts be part of a so-called anti-terrorism exercise?
Doesn't it look as though a huge disinformation exercise i.e. manufactured fake terrorism, has gone tragically wrong?
http://antagonise.blogspot.com/2005/07/london-underground-bombing-exercises.html
During the Radio 5 Live interview, aired on the night of London's
tragedy, Peter Power announced to listeners how his company had
run an exercise earlier that day in Central London involving 1,000
people and which was based on "simultaneous bombs going off precisely
at the railway stations where it happened this morning".
I am concerned that the so-called anti-terrorism exercise may have inadvertently caused the tube explosions e.g. by using a firework to simulate an explosion which caused dust cloud explosions.
[I've lost the source of the image. Thanks to whoever it was.]
UPDATED 5/7/06
Thanks Bridget, image from http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh/index.php?showtopic=350
Comments have been disabled due to malicious commenting
The following comments were made to this post
� July 4, 2006 - Untitled CommentPosted by Bridget
Hi dizzy
The July 7th People's Inquiry forum perhaps?
http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh/index.php?showtopic=350
Permanent Link
� July 5, 2006 - Untitled CommentPosted by Anonymous
So how does the bomb on the Bus in Tavistock Square fit in with this conspiracy theory ?
How does one allegedly "accidental" explosion magically turn into three of them underground ?
Permanent Link
� July 5, 2006 - Even these questions answeredPosted by dizzy
Thanks for your comment. I hope that I've managed to answer your questions.
>So how does the bomb on the Bus in Tavistock Square fit in with this conspiracy theory ?
This article is not a conspiracy theory. This is simply understanding what Peter Power said. You can see what he said in bold print in the article.
Do you notice that they intended to use fake broadcasts?. Peter Power actually uses the phrase "mock broadcasts". I call them fake broadcasts because I know that by mock Power means fake.
Do you notice that he said "When the news bulletins started coming on, people began to say how realistic our exercise was ...". What this means is that Peter Power's exercise intended to put out fake news. Since people were complementing him on what they considered to be the quality of his fake broadcasts, then his intention was to put out fake terrorism news.
After putting fake terrorism news out, they're not going to withdraw it - they're not going to retract it and say that everyone has been mislead. The intention is to mislead. The intention is to exagerrate the threat from terrorism.
What the bus explosion in Tavistock Square does is cast the - possibly accidental dust explosions - as terrorism. Because the 'bombing' of the bus was so dramatic, it forced the context of terrorism to all the explosions.
This is now made more complex with this revelation that there was at least one group ready and intending to push fake terrorism news. The Tavistock Square 'bombing' is ideal fake terrorism news because it casts the earlier accidental explosions as terrorism.
Visor Consultants is often portreyed as a PR firm. I get the impression that they are actually more of a disaster recovery company. I'm sure that I've read some phrase like "turning a disaster into an unplanned audit" at their website. In the situation I'm describing, that's exactly what they would have needed to do (although they may also have caused it).
>How does one allegedly "accidental" explosion magically turn into three of them underground ?
I am suggesting that more than one firework would have been used.
Please consider this:
Peter Power is on record as saying that they organised the exercises without any help external to his company. This means that they did not consult a fireman or safety consultant.
People generally are not aware of the danger of dust explosions, so it is resonable to suspect that the danger of dust explosions was not considered while the exercise was planned.
But, Peter Power's company wanted to give the impression of terrorist attacks - people were complementing him on his fake terrorism broadcasts without knowing that they weren't his fake terrorism broadcasts.
For fake terror, you need a fake bomb. This is where the firework comes in - to make a bang that sounds like a bomb so that people think that there was a bomb. You would need a firework for each fake bomb.
I am suggesting that these fireworks can cause dust explosions. I am not saying for certain that it was fireworks that caused dust explosions and I am very keen on The Antagonist's theory that power surges caused the explosions.
Permanent Link
� July 6, 2006 - Conspiracy Theory: They were Blair's bombsPosted by dizzy
Continuing from the previous comment, here is the conspiracy theory.
The explosions of 7 July 2005 were part of a huge disinformation campaign designed to exagerrate the threat of terrorism.
To create fake terrorism, images of dirty and dusty passengers were needed. The tube was bombed as part of the disinformation campaign. It was intended that Blair's bombs would cause minimal damage but secondary dust explosions caused such carnage.
|
|
|
