Bomb Blast in London

[Setras]

do not like just copy and pasting...

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...-over-incident

"Commuters on a tube train reported hearing a bang and a fireball flying down the carriage during Friday morning rush-hour. Pictures and video, purporting to be from the train carriage, were posted of flames coming out of a carrier bag containing a white bucket.

London ambulance service said it had taken 18 patients to a number of hospitals. None was thought to be in a serious or life-threatening condition.

Neil Basu, the senior national coordinator for counter-terrorism policing, declared it was a terrorist incident.

A Met spokesman said: “At present we are aware of a number of people who have suffered injuries. It is too early to confirm the cause of the fire, which will be subject to the investigation that is now under way by the Met’s counter-terrorism command”.

Downing Street said Theresa May would be chairing a meeting of the government’s Cobra emergencies committee on Friday morning. It said the prime minister was receiving regular updates on the situation."

Will have keep an eye on this one and see how the narrative unfolds...

[Tintin]

Posted by Setras (here)
do not like just copy and pasting...

Will have keep an eye on this one and see how the narrative unfolds...

Yes, I'm keeping an eye and ear on this too; just gleaning as much information as possible. The national security threat level is likely to be reviewed and possibly raised to critical. There are always several strands to these sorts of events that fall conveniently into the hands of the PTB, that ultimately lead to further suppression of civil liberties and further draconian laws expedited.

On spec, this could just be a random individual with a gripe to bear, possibly right-wing, may be even Caucasian. The Admiral Duncan bombing in 1999 scenario immediately leaps to mind. However, as you say, let's see where this goes. Particularly how quickly they may produce a name, if they do, and the amount of information that they may have to share - a reminder of the extraordinary access to personal information that the 'state' can get its hands on.

There seem to be conflicting testimonies but that is fairly usual in these sorts of scenarios, crisis actors not-withstanding.

UPDATE: Terrorism threat level raised to 'Critical' https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...-over-incident

[sunwings]

Police officers escourting an injured woman following the explosion on a tube train near Parsons Green station

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=4MvSto-MYW0

Since when is an injured person paraded down the street in front of the media? something doesn't smell right with this BS!!

Worst Crisis actor ever, not a hair out of place.

Has she just had her wisdom teeth out in a Looney Tunes cartoon?

[Tintin]

Posted by sunwings (here)

Worst Crisis actor ever, not a hair out of place.

This is exactly what hit me as well when I first saw this broadcast yesterday. Another giveaway was the glance to camera - I don't remember this individual being interviewed either; it did look somewhat staged.

[East Sun]

And the police constantly parade their masons black and white squares same as in
Australia, Scotland etc.

[Tintin]

Posted by East Sun (here)
And the police constantly parade their masons black and white squares same as in
Australia, Scotland etc.

It isn't really that which bothers me so much as it's all around us, all the time and I'm aware of that, but the fact that this person was being escorted by police, at all. The 'victim' already appears to have received treatment - this is the interpretation of the image that we are supposed to make. And, this woman appears in other footage with just the woman police officer. It really does look staged.

Was this all a drill of some sort, in a similar way to Sandy Hook, 7/7? I don't know for certain of course. And in any case why are the authorities still with-holding CCTV footage? They were extremely quick to release footage very quickly after the events of 7/7 and that was a 'drill' to disguise a false flag event, that had real casualties.

It's considered guesswork on my part, yes, but I'm keeping vigilant all the same with regard to what comes our way. Most vigilant concerning any possible changes to the Terrorism Act of 2000 and whether there are, or will be, any further draconian revisions to that legislation, in particular with reference to Article 41: Terrorism Act (2000) UK ukpga_20000011_en.pdf the arrest without warrant bit.

[Nick Matkin]

Interesting article in Fortean Times recently (July 2017) about the psychological need for a small percentage of the population to look for 'evidence' of false flag scenarios during man-made or natural events, and how quickly the conspirasphere starts 'connecting' all sorts of the initial random loose ends. Crisis actors and scenes taken out of context, why conflicting initial reports 'confirm' the 'all-is-not-as-it-seems' event, how citizen journalists scrutinise the media for inconsistencies.

Maybe there are those who might like to read it - and pick holes in it? Like it or not, the article contains some excellent points that we see here over and over.

https://www.pressreader.com/uk/forte...81569470713242

[Tintin]

Posted by Nick Matkin (here)
Interesting article in Fortean Times recently (July 2017) about the psychological need for a small percentage of the population to look for 'evidence' of false flag scenarios during man-made or natural events, and how quickly the conspirasphere starts 'connecting' all sorts of the initial random loose ends. Crisis actors and scenes taken out of context, why conflicting initial reports 'confirm' the 'all-is-not-as-it-seems' event, how citizen journalists scrutinise the media for inconsistencies.

Maybe there are those who might like to read it - and pick holes in it? Like it or not, the article contains some excellent points that we see here over and over.

https://www.pressreader.com/uk/forte...81569470713242

'citizen journalists', from the article - boy, that's a condescending piece of writing if ever I saw it. So, and this is addressed to the writer of the article, so, real journalism is trawling through twitter feed and drawing conclusions based on the collating of that? Are we then to conclude the writer/s of the article to be engaged in 'citizen psychology'?

There are those who are guilty of leaping to immediate conclusions based on a pre-conceived bias, and, that is really most unhelpful. Of course, things do just happen. Not everything is staged, nor everything a conspiracy, and this has always to be borne in mind. This is my approach and I certainly don't engage in asking reasonable questions of the information presented to me, particularly in incidents like this, from any psychological need.

And from the angle that most, not all, of these high profile incidents are enabled/state sponsored and are often part of a psychological operation is it any wonder that people respond - there is a psychology involved anyway.These can often be done just to affect and gauge a public response: 'fun and games' as Fletcher Prouty once described the activities of the OSS/CIA, for example.

More awakened folk have become increasingly fed up with the continual bombardment of provable falsehoods through established media (which is not the same as journalism: media and news these days is nearly always 'entertainment') in the past and widely disseminated by them that it should come as no surprise that there should be reasonable suspicion.

As I think I have fairly scribed in this thread: I have my doubts about some of the information coming to me through the mainstream media and won't leap to any firm conclusion until more comes to light. If one of the results of this 'event' be it state sponsored or not is to seek further internet censure based upon somebody genuinely obtaining bomb making instructions from the internet and 'having a go' and botching it, then, they have done none of us any favours.

[Nick Matkin]

@ TQ. Thanks. That's a well written response.

However, the article relates to an academic study; it's not just something he's hacked together for the hell of it - I don't think.

[Tintin]

Posted by Nick Matkin (here)
@ TQ. Thanks. That's a well written response.

However, the article relates to an academic study; it's not just something he's hacked together for the hell of it - I don't think.

And thank you Yes, you're right, it's certainly a study and it does make for quite interesting reading, from a particular viewpoint. The Fortean Times normally don't tend to publish hacked material, and this reminds me - and thank you for triggering it - that I need to revisit this FT more regularly! Been ages since I last read it.

[Tintin]

UPDATE: 18/09/2017

If the sources are reliable and this is bona fide footage, it's the first we've seen: it appears that ISIS did not as earlier stated by MSM, despite claiming responsibility, have a hand in this, it seems. UK Home Secretary Amber Rudd, speaking on the Andrew Marr Show said there was "no evidence" to suggest ISIS were behind the attack. (source: Huffington Post: Graeme Demianyk))

Full ITV article here http://www.itv.com/news/2017-09-17/c...n-tube-bomber/