Topic awaiting preservation: Drill Occurred Simultaneously With Bombings on 7/7? (Page 1 of 1)

There is an audio clip floating around from BBC5 in which the managing director from a UK consultancy agency known as Visor Consultants claims to have been running "drills" at the precise time and locations of the actual attacks.

Considering the source is mainly Alex Jones at this point there is need to be wary, as while he spreads a lot of good information, I am always a little skeptical of him and his paranoia, and his penchant for bending truth, but the clip itself appears to be authentic.

The interesting thing to note is that there were also drills being run on the morning of 9/11. If this is true that would be an awfully strange coincidence, not to mention the even larger coincidence of the drills being held at the same locations and times as the actual bombs. What is the probability?

Here is a link to the article on infowars, and an alternate link on Aljazeera.com.

Can anyone confirm/debunk this and/or possibly point towards any other sources covering this independent of Jones?

edit: Telephone number for Visor Consulting if anyone over there feels like investigating: 0207 917 6026

I sent an email earlier this morning but have yet to recieve a reply.


Ramasax
www.AmericanSerf.us

(Edited by Ramasax on 07-11-2005 17:51)

Here is a link to video with the same guy saying the same thing:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2005/110705bombingexercises.htm

EDIT: Was typing when you posted that (apparently ITV sourced) video link from the same site, so didn't see it before posting. Um... dammit - I'll be back. *hunches over browser and clicks away like a madman*

Potential scenarios - this guy does these very exercises every day; misinformational contextual realignment; complete coincidence (though not an entirely unlikely one); or evidence of governmental conspiracy thrown sloppily and carelessly to the public by a man obviously not hired for his discretion by those we might fairly presume to be a little more than paranoid about the activities they are involved in...

Original post follows:
___________________________________________________



It isn't hard to make almost anything seem extraordinarily conspicuous under such circumstances, but then I've always loved a good conspiracy. Even when I stripped the ludicrous claims from the 9/11 conspiracies, there were still so many niggling little things that couldn't be pinned down to mis-statement or misinterpretation, misinformation, or plain rumour-mongery - which is probably usually the case after events saturated in press (reports and misreports) and subjected to the refractive nature of time and speculation.

Don't get me wrong, I am not convinced of anything. The way I remain generally unconvinced by most things leaves me somewhere out in limbo on almost everything.

I am having trouble finding any mention of this interview on Radio Five Live's website (which says little, really) though I can find no reference at all to Peter Power anywhere on the BBC sites. Perhaps I'm just too tired to look properly.

I found 'usual-looking' background stuff on Peter Power at Visor Consultants' website.

Interesting note:

quote:

---

"Peter's recent appearances on TV and Radio include interviews on numerous live News broadcasts as well as documentaries, and taking part in the recent BBC TV Panorama current affairs programme examining the impact of terrorism on London. He is specifically quoted on the BBC web site in relation to his role at the scene of several previous major incidents in the UK.

---

Obviously, I'm not looking hard enough..?

I bet you could pull-up a dozen sound bites if you know where/how to find them. Whether they would deepen the mystery or simply confirm the identity of Peter Power, I don't know.

Pulling up the Visor Consultants page info. shows nothing more than that this is a small, anonymous, unsecured, amateur-looking site with a lot of nothing-much-to-say. To be honest, it reminds me of those boards you see up in stores, introducing the gratuitously grinning management and floor staff to its uninterested customers.

Now, while I am unable (and not frankly bothered at the moment) to find anything substantial on this, I have noted that every single site relating to it is responding directly to the article (co-?)written by Alex Jones. There isn't a lot of independent data. Perhaps it will 'appear' when the right people start looking for it.

Got any links to unique reports of this interview? I'm sure there must be some, somewhere..? I am unable to find a UK-based site reporting on this claim, or mentioning this interview. I find this very odd, as I would assume that Brits (not least, Londoners) form a large part of the Radio 5 listening community; it would therefore logically follow that someone, somewhere heard this interview and kicked-up a bit of a fuss. They love these revelations in the Monday morning tabloids!

I don't recognise the voice of the un-named host that this article claims was allegedly holding this interview at some unspecified time on the evening of the 7th, but then I don't tend to listen to BBC - Radio Five Live, which I believe is the "BBC Radio 5" referenced in the article. I am not refuting anything, but have so far been unable to tie the claims to anything more substantial than the sound clips. I cannot find an original source for the clips, and the only clue to dating is in the name starting "090705".

The article itself is written in a fashion that appears to deliberately omit even the most basic information, and appears just a little maniacal.

It is all just a little annoying and obscure at the moment, and I'm not entertaining any ideas until further facts have arisen. I'm off to sleep soon, so anybody care to help me?

(Edited by White Hawk on 07-11-2005 21:46)

Anybody notice that the interviewer in both clips says almost the same thing (not too oddly, I suppose).

Until these clips and their context have been verified, I am simply going to assume that they could easily be faked, dubbed, or misrepresented.

I STILL can't find anything relating to Peter Power on the BBC or ITV sites.

Gah. Give me someone who knows the truth, then just lock me in a room with them.

quote:

---

The article itself is written in a fashion that appears to deliberately omit even the most basic information, and appears just a little maniacal.

---

lol, that is Jones for you. Also why I am somewhat skeptical.

I know it could just be a crazy coincidence, but what are the chances that they were doing these drills in the exact places, times, and under a scenario mirroring reality?

If it is true, then some other independent media will pick it up. Don't expect BBC or anyone of corporate stature to do so though. It will not happen, at least not for another year or so. It took about that long for the reports of a similar activity on 9/11 to come out.

Big media's job right now is nothing but PR for the powerful, who benefit on fear and control.

I have learned to follow the money, and who stands to gain most.

edit: perhaps an email to BBC5 or iTV could clear this up. Still waiting, probably in vain, for a response from Visor.
Ramasax
www.AmericanSerf.us

(Edited by Ramasax on 07-12-2005 02:03)

More good news: Blair Rejects Calls for Probe into London Bombings

quote:

---

British Prime Minister Tony Blair rejected on Monday Conservative calls for launching a government investigation into the deadly attacks that hit London on Thursday July 7, 2005, claiming that such a move would distract from the task of catching the perpetrators.

Downing Street said the prime minister insists that an inquiry into the attacks which claimed the lives of at least 49 innocent people and injured more than 700 would be a "ludicrous diversion."

---

And the Scotsman: Blair rejects inquiry calls but hints at new terror laws

quote:

---

Key points:
? New terror laws may soon be in place
? Police and intelligence services could require more powers
? PM rejects calls for inquiry

---

Financial Times: Blair rejects calls for probe into bombings
Guardian: Downing Street rejects Howard call for inquiry
Telegraph: Howard's call for an inquiry angers PM
Bloomberg: U.K.'s Blair Rejects Call for Probe of London Blasts

I am getting a strange feeling of Deja Vu.

Sorry WhiteHawk, but this is starting to really stink to high heaven. We have a lot of coincidences piling up. Some small, some big, some possibly of no consequence, some exposing an agenda much like the aftermath of 9/11 in the states. I am sure this list will grow as time passes.

1) Rudy Giulliani, the 9/11 mayor, happened to be in London the day of the attacks to offer "solace" to Londoners.

2) The camera on the bus that was blown up was conveniently out of service, scratching what would have been an iron clad clue.

3) Israeli government allegedly contacted the UK before the blasts.

4) Israeli government contacted Netenyahu and told him to stay in his hotel before the blasts (story removed from AP, original copy here).

5) Israel ordered all officials to not speak about the event after the previous two leaks got out.

6) London just got the 2012 Olympics, and this event will bring security concerns to the forefront. Those providing the infrastructure for such will clean up in process.

7) The G-8 meeting was going on with all the leaders huddled in one place, and this allowed for some grandstanding and also a way of showing solidarity in a time of waning support for their war on terror. Of less consequence, for the first time ever, Bush wears a Tan suit, along with Chirac, so as not to overpower the stature of Blair in his dark blue suit. Choreography so transparent that it was my 8 year old nephew that pointed it out.

8) 7/7 turned out to be the heaviest trading day of the year in Britain, fortunes were made.

9) Blair is rejecting a call for a probe into the blasts (above).

10) Purported "drills" of the same scenario, time, and places as the attacks. (above)

10) British Home Secretary Charles Clarke is calling for the monitoring and storage of all emails, phone calls, instant messaging for up to one year.

11) British Home Secretary Charles Clarke is set to rush through emergency powers.

12) There were similar "drills" being conducted on the morning of 9/11 by FEMA.

13) The server on which the purported claim of responsibility message was originally posted is owned and operated by a Texas man (Last 4 parahraphs) by the name of Roy Marsh, who counts among his friends President George Bush's former sister-in-law, Sharon Bush, and the president's navy secretary. The owner of the website claims the message is part of the "zionist sceme" and was not put there by him. The message itself was found to have misquoted the Quran, which MSNBC's translator Jacob Keryakes said was unlikely.

14) Military grade explosives are believed to have been used.

15) Body scan machines to be used on Tube passengers - read: more profit, more security

One of these days we may have to face the facts that certain indivuals within our governments have been perpetrating these attacks on their civilians for numerous political and personal motivations: profit, control, justification of war. They are not going to tell us themselves, and neither are the big media conglomerates who are controlled by them, we the citizens will have to realize this for ourselves.

It was hard for me to swallow 9/11 was an inside job, but after tons of research and studying about the event, I am fully convinced. Interesting docu, Loose Change, download here: http://question911.com/links.php

On a lighter note, did you hear that friends and relatives of the missing were being charged up to 50p a minute when they called the police casualty bureau?

Ramasax
www.AmericanSerf.us

To anyone interested, I recieved a reply from Mr. Powers regarding the inquiry I made earlier.

quote:

---

Thank you for your message. Given the volume of emails about events on 7 July and a commonly expressed misguided belief that our exercise revealed prescient behaviour, or was somehow a conspiracy (noting that several websites interpreted our work that day in an inaccurate / naive / ignorant / hostile manner) it has been decided to issue a single email response as follows: It is confirmed that a short number of 'walk through' scenarios planed well in advance had commenced that morning for a private company in London (as part of a wider project that remains confidential) and that two scenarios related directly to terrorist bombs at the same time as the ones that actually detonated with such tragic results. One scenario in particular, was very similar to real time events.

However, anyone with knowledge about such ongoing threats to our capital city will be aware that (a) the emergency services have already practiced several of their own exercises based on bombs in the underground system (also reported by the main news channels) and (b) a few months ago the BBC broadcast a similar documentary on the same theme, although with much worse consequences. It is hardly surprising therefore, that we chose a feasible scenario ? but the timing and script was nonetheless, a little disconcerting.

In short, our exercise (which involved just a few people as crisis managers actually responding to a simulated series of activities involving, on paper, 1000 staff) quickly became the real thing and the players that morning responded very well indeed to the sudden reality of events.

Beyond this no further comment will be made and based on the extraordinary number of messages from ill informed people, no replies will henceforth be given to anyone unable to demonstrate a bona fide reason for asking (e.g. accredited journalist / academic).

Peter Power
Visor Consultants Limited

---

The answer I expected. Had Mr. Powers known of some "conspiracy" he would not hve been blabbing on about it. So chalk this up as another semi-extraordinary coincidink!

Bleh.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzz.....

This is from this weeks Private Eye on some of the conspiracy theories:

quote:

---

SOON after the first three bombs exploded across London's underground network at 8:50 on the morning of 7 July, the conspiracy theorists swung into action.

One rumour which circulated widely during the day - and. despite a clear denial from Met deputy assistant commissioner Brian Paddick at 3pm that afternoon, continues to do so on the internet, helped along by credulous reports in the New Zealand Herald and Canada's Globe and Mail - was that a fifth suicide bomber had been shot by police snipers in Canary Wharf at 10:30am.

This seems to have sprung from an intercontinental game of Chinese whispers started by one office worker calling friends in New Zealand with a second-hand story after noticing the increased police presence on the ground following the earlier bombs and being instructed to move away from the windows - a standard security procedure at times of increased threat since the IRA bombed the building in 1996.

The theory appears to be that the police agreed to "hush up" the incident because of a pending massive Asian investment in the Canary Wharf area - though no one has yet managed to explain why a) this would be more of a deterrent to potential investors than the four other suicide bombings they freely admit occurred in the capital that day; b) why the police would agree not to tell anyone about an attack they did successfully manage to prevent; and c) how the entire incident went unnoticed by any of the 8,000 people in the tower at the time, many of them journalists in the offices of four national newspapers which overlook the area in which it supposedly happened.

----------------------
ANOTHER rumour which has circulated widely is that Israeli finance minister Benjamin Netanyahu received prior warning of the bombs via the Israeli embassy and therefore declined to attend a conference in London that day.

This was based partly on an erroneous report from an "official at the embassy" which appeared on the Associated Press wire service, and partly on the determination of anti-semites to believe, just as they did with an equal lack of evidence after the 9/11 attacks in New York, that Jews were warned to vacate the area prior to an attack set up by Zionists keen to demonise Muslims.

This theory is rather hard to square with the fact that the meeting Netanyahu was scheduled to attend was the Israeli Opportunity 2005 conference organised jointly by the Israeli Embassy and the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange, and it was taking place at the Great Eastern Hotel almost directly above the bomb which exploded near Liverpool Street station, which meant that there was actually a significantly higher number of Jews than usual in the area when the bomb exploded.

Netanyahu, however, was not there - as the conference's schedule shows, he was not due to deliver his speech until 9.30, which meant that he had just left his own hotel to make his way to the Great Eastern when he received news of the explosion at Liverpool Street, at about the same time as even-one else. 9.15. when TV and radio stations began reporting it.

Unsurprisingly, his security guards decided to turn back. The unnamed official had simply muddled his times in the confusion (much as everyone else did; the police did not even realise the underground blasts had been simultaneous until the following day), and AP duly withdrew the claim - not that this stopped the Daily Express and Mail on Sunday from reporting it over the weekend, the latter under the spectacularly misleading headline ""No Alert' claim is thrown into doubt".

-------------------
THOSE who prefer their conspiracy theories served up in SyMt krin-style prose would do well to check out ttu ramblings of Michael James, a self-styled "British freelance journalist with a wealth of experience in sniffing out illegal MI6 activities in Germany" whose account of events on 7/7 is currently hosted on a number of websites.

"Blair caught a glimpse of himself in the dresser and checked his profile. Carole, his personal image advisor had told him to soften the pronounced jaw when seated next to Bush. 'You're overdoing the Winston thing,' she had said pointedly. Killing people was yesterday; starving Africans and rainforests is now the thing.' She was wrong about the killing, of course. The good Miz Caplin would never understand his rites of passage, at least not in the Brethren's sense of the term."

Yes, that's nght. It was all those pesky freemasons (interestingly also David Icke's preferred suspects), who apparently number among their ranks Blairs Tony and lan, Eliza Manningham-Buller of MI5, Netanyahu and Jack Straw. Or it was die four young Muslims whose bodies were actually found with the explosives. Take your pick.

------
PROVING that both sides in a conflict can be equal!) bonkers, however, Joel Leyden of the "Israel News agency", a blog site which claims to "correct biased distorted news", demanded to kaww "Has Islamic Terrorism bought the BBC"

Incensed by Ihe corporation's decision to refer to the teiimbls as "bombers", the former Jerusalem Pott reporter pointed out that the mere fact that there was absolutely no evidence of Osama Bin Laden having "invested millions" in the publicly-owned broadcaster was no proof that he hadn't. "The BBC.. executives are from the green forests of London." he pointed out, demanding "what is it going to take to get the BBC to stop siding with terrorists? IRA 'separatists' to-blow up their building in London?"

Leyden appears to be unaware that they did exactly that in March 2001. And just for the record, the BBC called them "dissidents".

---

Eye 1137:6

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org | Justice for Pat Richard | FAQs: Emperor | Site Reviews | Reception Room

if I went 'round saying I was an Emperor just because some moistened bint had lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd put me away!

I am still skeptical about the Netanyahu thing. It was all over the news during those early hours and then all the stories disappeared or were simply edited. There was also an article in Haraatz (sp?) talking about how the Israeli government told its members to quiet down. Can't seem to find the link again. (my bookmarks are in total disarray)

I do think there are still a lot of extraordinary coincidences surrounding the event. I am no statistician, but what were the chances of those drills occuring at the same time, places and scenario that the actual attacks happened. Has to be an astronomical coincidence, much like the FEMA drill on 9/11. I will admit my paranoia does get the best of me at times, but even so, I can't help keep asking myself the same question over and over: who benefits the most? Could the terrorists be CIA funded (as Bin Laden was a CIA asset during the 80's) and be perpetrating these attacks for a third party to justify the passage of draconian legislation, thus allowing certain multinationals to make billions instituting new surveilance tech, which your country is obviously fully supportive of now? Total 180 turn there, because before the 7th, I recall seeing a poll in which only 15% of Brits were in support of the ID cards. Sad.

This along with renewed support, to some small extent anyways, of the war on terra. Taking the focus off the Plame scandal. Yadda yadda.

One other thing which seems odd. Scenario: 4 bombers standing in the London underground. "Ok, you guys ready?" asks one of the bombers. "Yes," echo the other three. "Everyone have their ID on them so they can be found by investigators?" "Yes," answer the other three again. They might be terrorists, but how stupid is that?

As a sidenote, interesting article from the Jerusalem Post on the 7th stating "The multiple, simultaneous explosions that took place today on the London transportation system were the work of perpetrators who had an operational capacity of considerable scope." Now, how did they know the explosions were simulataneous when the British Government didn't realize or come forward with it until at least two days later?

In any case, parnoia or no, if the British gov't is anything like the US gov't, I'm sure more details will filter out in time.

About the feeble attacks yesterday, glad nobody was hurt this time round. They were a key part and mentioned many many times during our House of Reps debate on the patriot act. That along with the damn NYC subway now conducting searches, armed military personnel and watching for people "sweating".

bleh, perhaps I dwell on these issues too much, but I am more scared of government now than any "terrorist" threat. The fearmongers are in full swing now telling everyone how the only way to fight the war on terror is to give up our rights and it really makes me sick to my stomach. Sometimes I wish I'd stayed ignorant, was much easier that way.

Why is it the governments never evaluate themselves and admit the root cause of these atrocities is largely due to foreign policy blunders over the past six decades or more? Selling weapons to repressive regimes and Israel. Helping install puppet regimes in the area. Support of the Sauds so we can keep the oil coming. We have a long history in the region and putting myself in their shoes a reaction is totally justified, although the chosen techniques of attacking innnocents are totally despicable.

If I had a foreign government which affected my life in such a way and possibly caused a member of my family to be killed, I would be quite bitter.

Ramasax
www.AmericanSerf.us