Nigel Glanvill Yea. I was very temped to comment on it but in the end couldn't be bothered. Does anyone read my stuff anyway? But between you and me I thought it was typical whitewash stuff with no real investigation or challenging questions. The nearest they got to it was Ian Blairs admission that he lied in stating that Jean Charles da Silva e de Menezes had been challenged and ran away before he was shot. CCTV proved neither were accurate or true. And the second was the brief interview with Brian Leonard Paddick, now Baron Paddick in which he said the 7/7 incident was the Met at both it's best and worst. The 'worst' however only referred to the de Menezes incident I as far as I could see. The programme was a professionally produced glossy reiteration of the official story line with no questions asked, particularly as to whether it was in fact a rogue state fraud from first to last. Nothing about the BBC run identical event the year before. Nothing about the parallel identical exercise on the same day. Nothing about the very significant problem of the four men not getting to Kings Cross in time and the false information about the train they caught which didn't run. Nothing about the suspicious 'other car' (the handlers?) at Luton station car park, Nothing about finding absolutely no DNA or other remains of any of the four alleged bombers. Nothing to challenge the location of 'the bombers' on the trains or the chemistry of the explosive used. Nothing about the reported shooting of four men in the city after the event. Nothing to challenge the alleged bomb making factory in 18 Alexandra Grove, Leeds. Then there was also the largely uninvestigated extraordinary circumstances surrounding the killing of de Menezes. How he could possibly be confused with the wanted man. Why he was not apptrehended for questioning on the bus when he was being followed. Who the officers were who rushed after him with the obvious intent to kill? None of them faced charges of course although the Met did admit a charge under the H&SWA of all thing but with no personal responsibility taken. The person with overall control on the day was (now) Dame Cressida Dick. In a familiar style she promptly move to MI6 at the Foreign Office and then back to be Commissioner of the Met and in charge of several more dodgy cases that I have covered in some detail. Interestingly the current Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley was actually parked up next to the Parliament attack by Khalid Masood when PC Parker was killed. These strange coincidences keep happening the terror arena. Of course I'm not for a moment suggesting that events are actually planned to implicate critical individuals, or that they are involved in any furtive way or that their subsequent promotion turns on their ability not to question or 'rock the boat'. But it is significant that however big the balls-up, or however tragic the consequences in these particular events, no one ever seems to suffer professionally. In fact the opposite is the case. We notice the same phenomenom in 9/11 and more recently on the 7th October to name but two. We have already noted the strange coincidene of Netanyahu in London on the day and pre-warned to stay in his hotel. (9/11 has the parallel of Ehud Olmert unpublicised visit to New York on 9/11 and flying out immediately after despite a national grounding) The video on the bus wasn't working and despite all the other video, there was no record of Hussain getting on. Needless to say, nor was there any trace of his body or even his DNA at the scene. (Yet again we are familiar with this particular aspect: no trace of the alleged 'suicide bomber' at the Manchester arena either!) The programme touched on the four follow up alleged attacks but these were all 'damp squibs' that challenged rather than supported the earlier story. These were charged, convicted and given long prison sentences. Are they still inside? Some claim the damage indicated explosives UNDER the carriages. The poor victim who lost her legs, and who allegedly sat opposite the bomber only feet away, raises questions as to the blast and why no remains of the bomber were found. Despite the fact that no remnants of any of the bombers survived, usefully property belonging to Khan found at a third scene, Tavistock Square and property belonging to Lindsay found at Russell Square. Identity cards apparently survived replicating the situation in New York on 9/11. Of course nothing to see here. For the full official and accurate narative of event see: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/.../5a7.../1087.pdf
The possibility of a police confrontation with a suicide bomber in the United Kingdom had reportedly been discussed following the September 11 attacks in the United States. Based on this possibility, new guidelines were developed for identifying, confronting, and dealing forcefully with terrorist suspects. These guidelines were given the code name "Operation Kratos".[
"
Based in part on advice from the security forces of Israel and Sri Lanka—two countries with experience of suicide bombings—Operation Kratos guidelines allegedly state that the head or lower limbs should be aimed at when a suspected suicide bomber appears to have no intention of surrendering. This is contrary to the usual practice of aiming at the torso, which presents the biggest target, since a hit to the torso may detonate an explosive belt.[70]""
It is very nigh impossible to discover what actual work Charles de Menezes did between March 2002 and 22nd July 2005 when he was shot dead (22 again!) other than he was an electrician and engaged in that specialism. Was he employed by a company or did he work for himself? Importantly, had he at any time prior to the bombings on the 7th of July, been engaged to work on any part of the London tube network?
The Independent: The 27-year-old Brazilian - who worked as a kitchen porter
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.