Of course the last gasp for the King's Cross theorists would be that these bags were put on at KX and had already been out to the terminus and were coming back again without having been spotted but it is frankly incredible.
# posted by  dsquared @ 22:58

 

Well as far as I know that's just plain wrong - about the non-suicidality. I have read a lot of stuff and - according to many reports only one of the four bombers made a serious attempt to save his skin by dropping the rucksack and then legging it.
The others apparently stood by the rucksacks as the detonators went off. Then they looked 'dismayed' and shocked. As you would if your attempt at suicide had just failed. One report has a suicide bomber lying over his exploding rucksack, hardly someone trying to save his skin.
Perhaps they knew that the detonators would go off but not the explosives. so they knew they would survive. But that beggars belief, why then have the explosives at all? Also they left ID all over the shop. Not something you would do if you intended to live and escape....
Am I missing something here? It seems that one of us is stupidly misreading all this. Could be me, I accept. But I think it's you.
# posted by  sean @ 18:20

 

Sean: I'd like to see some of those reports you mention. I haven't seen them. The bus bomb, for starters, went off on an almost empty top deck. Passengers on the bottom deck didn't even hear it. At least one other tube bomber dumped his back and legged it. As I said, I'd like to see your sources. Additionaly, I haven't seen the explosive content of the second tranche of bags confirmed. Plus, you're still not explaining why these were specifically targeted at empty trains/buses, and at the quietest times of day. That's a massive strategic shift for radical Islamists. Unprecedented, in fact.
# posted by  Jarndyce @ 20:01

 

Bob Crow General Secretary RMT Union

Press release 22nd July 2005

“Their concerns will have been fuelled by the revelation that an innocent Tube driver today found himself with a police gun at his head during the incident in Stockwell station in which a suspect was shot dead.

“No apology could ever be enough ever take away the trauma that that driver has suffered and there should be a full inquiry into the handling of the incident,”



Naturally press / media reports have been confused and confusing. "Official" statements have been minimal.

I saw the story that the train driver escaped from the train and ran into the tunnel and was there held up against the wall, by a highly trained plain clothes "policeman" who drawing on his extensive training, took a split millisecond decision not to pump him full of lead.

I think this driver , has like other eye witnesses, a tale to tell. Who gave the orders to delay the train ? Why ? Who gave orders to shut / open doors. Why ? Why did the driver leg it ?

Afterthought - maybe those CCTV stills are TOO good, some look well photoshopped. Perhaps no-one will recognise these guys - all pics single isolated individuals?
# posted by  Postman @ 20:15

 

Further, Ian Blair in his Sky interview today backed away from stating the explosive set-up of 21/7 and 7/7 were identical. He only claimed "similarities". Big difference: with what's already in the public domain and an Internet connection, I could probably build something that had "similarities" to the 7/7 devices.
# posted by  Jarndyce @ 22:56

 

"Victoria Line train passenger Ivan McCracken told Sky News he spoke to an Italian man who witnessed an explosion just after the train arrived at the platform.

"He told me he had seen a man carrying a rucksack which suddenly exploded. It was a minor explosion but enough to blow open his rucksack. Everyone rushed from the carriage. People evacuated very quickly. There was no panic."

"The man who was holding the rucksack looked extremely dismayed."

From the Evening Times:
A MAN has spoken of the moment he came face to to face with one of the suspected suicide bombers during the London explosions.
Business analyst Abisha Moyo heard a bang like a "pistol going off" and saw a fellow tube passenger lying on the floor of their carriage.
He approached him and asked, "are you all right, mate," but was then stunned to see the man was lying on top of a rucksack with smoke coming out."

Etc.


I also read another report - I'll find it if you insist - about a man who followed one of the bombers on to the Tube. He heard the man muttering what sounded like prayers, or something, and was curious. This of course is one of the classic signs of a suicide bomber.


Anyway, I think you get the point. I agree that there are very curious aspects to this whole thing, that need investigation. But to claim that these are definitely not suicide bombers as you do is glib and foolish. I wonder why you do it... wishful thinking? something else?

Think about the man lying on his exploding rucksack! Not exactly running away, was he? sounds to me like he was a suicide bomber. If you want to escape you don't, erm, lie on top of your bomb, do you?

FWIW my opinion is that these were low grade suicide bombers, low grade in terms of being less committed to the cause. A couple of them bottled it, i reckon - just chucked the bags and ran. And their bombs were duff.

I may be wrong, but i think the theory fits the facts better than just saying 'they weren't suicide bombers'. No?
# posted by  sean @ 23:08

 

ps I do, however, think your theory about the placement of the bombs is much more credible. This was an attack to spread terror and chaos, rather than kill hundreds. But i don't think the lack of precedent is important.... 9/11 was unprecedented!
# posted by  sean @ 23:10

 

PostmansKnock: you're the same guy who pointed me elsewhere to a claim that "it was Mossad wot done it", so I doubt your credibility. The CCTV pics are actually quite poor, not "Photoshopped". A couple of the guys' mothers would find it hard to identify them from those.

Sean: I'm still not sure what you're driving at here? Almost none of what I've written in the post depends on whether these were suicide bombers or not. At least two of them definitely weren't, as you suggest, for whatever reason. The other two you mention, questionably so. But I'm happy to concede there's a doubt at least - it makes no difference to any of the questions I ask. Much more important is the switch to a minimal loss-of-life strategy, which makes even less sense if two of the bombers also wanted to die. 9/11 was unprecedented only in scale, not in intention. Radical Islamists never shy away from killing - why now?
# posted by  Jarndyce @ 10:56

 

See what you mean. But it's that small part of your post that I'm takign issue with. My point was this: that its blinkered and possibly very very foolish to think there aren't more suicide bombers in the UK. Possibly lots of 'em. Saying there aren't, as you do, is just whistling in the dark. And dangerous at that.
The evidence points to at least two of these dudes being suicide bombers. Two is quite enough for me.
BTW I am getting the horrible feeling that the idea was to spread chaos and terror - then follow up with more mass killing in a few weeks. One more big series of bombs could have a very profound affect on us all. I pray it ain't so.
# posted by  sean @ 13:36