London Truthers to demonstrate on 9/11

[funk de fino]

Mancman

I am almost certain the photo of the bombers is from Luton station.

The court has been shown the CCTV footage of the bombers in london but I think the only london stuff in the media is from trial runs prvious to 7/7. I may be mistaken on this though.

Regardless, the evidence has been presented in a court of law in the UK. The claim by JJ is false.

 

[Mancman]

Mancman

I am almost certain the photo of the bombers is from Luton station.

The court has been shown the CCTV footage of the bombers in london but I think the only london stuff in the media is from trial runs prvious to 7/7. I may be mistaken on this though.

Regardless, the evidence has been presented in a court of law in the UK. The claim by JJ is false.

Yes, you're right about the image of the four of them. The Hussain footage is from Kings Cross though.

 

[AZCat]

Bush and Blair do not, after all, produce their own rhetoric, they buy it by the yard.

Not really. England uses the metric system.

 

[JihadJane]

Is this guy a truther?

What's the matter? Have you lost your twooferometer?

 

[funk de fino]

What's the matter? Have you lost your twooferometer?

Care to answer any of the other points or are you in flight mode now?

 

[JihadJane]

Care to answer any of the other points or are you in flight mode now?

I am a ground-based organism, despite appearances. I'll be back later, provided I can summon the will . A lot of people on this site, eager to feed their obsessions, ask me lots of questions. I usually answer them and, but when my answers do not fit with my questioners' beliefs they are, frequently, simply ignored, or dismissed because the source can be labelled a "twoofer", i.e. they question the truth of government narratives, a foolproof get-out clause!

I am beginning to lose interest in sharing my perceptions with people who do not appear to be willing to listen.

I know I haven't answered some your questions in the past, such as those about the dodgy dossier and the BBC. Sometimes I find the depth of ignorance too overwhelming to confront single-handedly and prefer other pastimes!

While you wait I suggest you read the entire manuscript that I linked to in comment #57, above, and also the book on the subject by the same author, "The London Bombings: An Independent Inquiry", with or without your twooferometer!

You are technically correct in calling my comment about CCTV evidence false. I should have included the words "in the public domain". I have further comments on the matter, however.

 

[funk de fino]

I am a ground-based organism, despite appearances. I'll be back later, provided I can summon the will . A lot of people on this site, eager to feed their obsessions, ask me lots of questions. I usually answer them and, but when my answers do not fit with my questioners' beliefs they are, frequently, simply ignored, or dismissed because the source can be labelled a "twoofer", i.e. they question the truth of government narratives, a foolproof get-out clause!

I am beginning to lose interest in sharing my perceptions with people who do not appear to be willing to listen.

I know I haven't answered some your questions in the past, such as those about the dodgy dossier and the BBC. Sometimes I find the depth of ignorance too overwhelming to confront single-handedly and prefer other pastimes!

While you wait I suggest you read the entire manuscript that I linked to in comment #57, above, and also the book on the subject by the same author, "The London Bombings: An Independent Inquiry", with or without your twooferometer!

You are technically correct in calling my comment about CCTV evidence false. I should have included the words "in the public domain". I have further comments on the matter, however.

A fine example of goal post shifting. (Even though mancman provided public domain evidence). You do know there is to be a retrial of the supposed helpers and that after this the evidence shown at the trial will be made public? I told you it had been shown in court and you asked for details so you obviously did not know this.

How exactly was this too difficult for you to answer also?

Who would have benefitted from a 7/7 falseflag?

What do you mean almost immediate naming of suspects?

 

[JihadJane]

A fine example of goal post shifting.

Speculate away! I just don't have the time or the inclination right now

(Even though mancman provided public domain evidence).

It was evidence of nothing criminal.

You do know there is to be a retrial of the supposed helpers and that after this the evidence shown at the trial will be made public? I told you it had been shown in court and you asked for details so you obviously did not know this.

I knew about the court evidence but forgot.

How exactly was this too difficult for you to answer also?

Who would have benefitted from a 7/7 falseflag?

What do you mean almost immediate naming of suspects?

They are simple questions and not too difficult to answer but you are going to have to wait! Meanwhile, are you going to read the educational material I suggested?

 

[funk de fino]

Speculate away! I just don't have the time or the inclination right now

No, it was a blatant shift of goalposts.

It was evidence of nothing criminal.

It places him in London which you say has never been provided. Get your claims straight JJ

I knew about the court evidence but forgot.

But of a schoolboy error for one so smug

They are simple questions and not too difficult to answer but you are going to have to wait! Meanwhile, are you going to read the educational material I suggested?

I know why I have to wait. You can not come up with a viable explanation on who benefitted without tying yourself in logical knots.

Also you know your claims are wrong about almost immediate naming of suspects. I know you are wrong and I have proof. You are desperately looking for something you can back up your claim eh?

In any case I feel another goalpost shift coming for the "almost immediate" claim.

What makes you think I have not read what you provided me with yesterday? An earlier post should have allayed those fears if you had been paying attention.

 

[cludgie]

It places him in London which you say has never been provided. Get your claims straight JJ

I think JJ wouldn't be convinced unless you produced ultra-high speed video footage of them as the bomb actually detonated.

 

[SatansMaleVoiceChoir]

Are you suggesting that the British Government orchestrated 7/7 for propaganda reasons? If so, what would the point be in that? British Troops had already been in Iraq and Afghanistan for years at the time of the 7/7 bombings, so 'another 9/11' to spur the British people into backing action in Iraq and Afghanistan was unnecessary.

The British Government went to 'war' in the Middle East despite massive protests from the public; why would they try and sway public opinion years after the fact?

What about the attempted car-bombing of Glasgow Airport? How does that fit into the scheme?

Care to answer my post JJ?

 

[JihadJane]

The UK governemnt hasn't released any CCTV images placing the alleged bombers in London on the day of the attacks

It places him in London which you say has never been provided. Get your claims straight JJ

Spot the difference.

 

[funk de fino]

Originally Posted by JihadJane
The UK governemnt hasn't released any CCTV images placing the alleged bombers in London on the day of the attacks

Originally Posted by funk de fino
It places him in London which you say has never been provided. Get your claims straight JJ

Spot the difference.

yes, lets spot the difference with your initial claim pre goalpost shifting

The UK government has not presented its promised conclusive evidence even placing the alleged bombers in London on the day of the attacks.

Yes, it has. In a court of law. The defendants lawyers obviously did not dispute the evidence therefore it is deemed to be verified?

You have time to come back and play semantic games yet you cannot answer some simple questions. Keep on running JJ

 

[funk de fino]

The UK governemnt hasn't released any CCTV images placing the alleged bombers in London on the day of the attacks

Yes, they have.

At a press conference on July 14th, DAC Peter Clarke announced , "The picture shows Hussain at Luton train station at approximately 7.20am on the morning of July 7. We know he traveled from West Yorkshire and that he arrived in London with three other men. You can see from the CCTV image that he was carrying a rucksack."

Hussain was not part of the group whom did the dummy run on 28th June. The CCTV images that mancman supplied are of him at Luton and at Kings Cross and were taken on 7/7 and released by the authorities into the public domain.

On October 2nd, just under three months after the London bombings, another still image was released of Hasib Hussain on his own.

Will we hear another scrape across the pitch?

 

[brodski]

evidence that Kings Cross is in London?

 

[dudalb]

Jihad Jane asks for proof placing the 7/7 bombers in London the day of the attacks. She gets it, then plays verbal games and does some major league goal post moving.
I guess this is more "poltical literacy is much more important in understand 9/11 and 7/7 then scientific literacy".
Jihad Jane has developed a system that allows her to dismiss any evidence that does not fit in with her rather extreme political views.
I really think arguing with her is a waste of time.

 

[JihadJane]

Hello my long lost friend, dudalb! Congratulations for your first ever partially accurate misquote of my words. Do you not know about the cut/paste function? I have yet to understand "debunker" bitterness. With so much power and authority behind their Movement why the pissing competitions and the strutting cocks?

Evidence proving that the 7/7 bombers were in London on the day of the attacks has been referred to in court but none has been placed in the public domain for scrutiny. Maybe it will be in the future. The record for releasing promised, conclusive evidence has not been good so far.

To the rest of the frothing bandwagon:

I'm currently compiling the requested list of 7/7 beneficiaries but it is proving harder than expected because it is so large. I am doing my best to whittle it down to manageable proportions. Please be patient. There's always next week.

P.S. dudalb, what are my "rather extreme political views." I am very interested to know about them.

P.P.S. funk de fino, I hope you are enjoying reading about the relationship between the UK security services and Islamic Fundamentalists. I'll give you some more material later. There is a reason why the French Intelligence called London Londonistan.

 

[funk de fino]

Evidence proving that the 7/7 bombers were in London on the day of the attacks has been referred to in court but none has been placed in the public domain for scrutiny. Maybe it will be in the future.

Youb are a liar. Mancman has produced the photographs placing Hussain in kings cross on 7/7. Evidence you said had not been released. You are ignoring and running away now.

To the rest of the frothing bandwagon:

I'm currently compiling the requested list of 7/7 beneficiaries but it is proving harder than expected because it is so large. I am doing my best to whittle it down to manageable proportions. Please be patient. There's always next week.

Wrong, you are desperately trying to come up with a scenario that will allow you to claim possible false flag when in reality the people who could have perpetrated it (remembering what you have posted in this thread already) have not benefitted in anyway.

P.P.S. funk de fino, I hope you are enjoying reading about the relationship between the UK security services and Islamic Fundamentalists. I'll give you some more material later. There is a reason why the French Intelligence called London Londonistan.

I read it already. It has a lot of what ifs, and someone saids in it eh? I do not see any hard evidence showing the relationship between the bombers and the security services like you claimed.

What I also cannot see is your acknowledgement of false statements you have made or answers to questions asked. You are on the run and everyone can see it.

You are wrong about the almost immediate naming of suspects and about the evidence. Admit it and move on.

 

[JihadJane]

Youb are a liar. Mancman has produced the photographs placing Hussain in kings cross on 7/7. Evidence you said had not been released.

How can cropped photos without time stamps be called "evidence"? As far as I know the authorities who released these photos did so to jog eye-witnesses memories, not as evidence. They would be extremely foolish if they did so because they would be laughed out of court. Sometimes, however, they do do foolish things.

The rest of your comments probably belong in the paranormal sub-forum where claims of remote viewing and mind-reading are discussed.

 

[funk de fino]

How can cropped photos without time stamps be called "evidence"? As far as I know the authorities who released these photos did so to jog eye-witnesses memeories, not as evidence. They would be extremely foolish if they did so because they would be laughed out of court. Sometimes, however, they do do foolish things.

The rest of your comments probably belong in the paranormal sub-forum where claims of remote viewing and mind-reading are discussed.

You said the evidence was not released. It has been. By the authorities. Into the public domain. Keep moving the goalposts JJ

When will we see the "faked" accusation?

Keep on running.........