tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post596176552454144887..comments2023-04-27T13:08:14.726+00:00Comments on J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign Blog: 7/7 Ripple Effect - A Rebuttal and RejectionBridgethttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04220942517267393608noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-70431964063941075542012-10-17T10:17:43.438+00:002012-10-17T10:17:43.438+00:00^ Hi Anonymous
It is unlikely that you heard any ...^ Hi Anonymous<br /><br />It is unlikely that you heard any news on the radio before 9am as the earliest we have found any reports of even the events on the trains was 9.16. We do know that Canary Wharf went into shut down that morning and that Brian Paddick was asked about rumours of a suicide bomber being shot at a news conference later that day.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/7-7-kings-cross-russell-square.html#suicidebomber" rel="nofollow">J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign | Incident Analysis: King's Cross / Russell Square</a>Bridgethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04220942517267393608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-34165480776564158422012-10-17T02:15:35.700+00:002012-10-17T02:15:35.700+00:00I definately remember a comment on Radio 4 and I t...I definately remember a comment on Radio 4 and I think it was before 9am on the morning of 7/7/2005 (on the news programme that may have been extended because of the emergency, so it could have been after 9), that the police had shot or were following and intending to shoot a suicide bomber in the Canary Wharf area. It was only announced once and i remember thinking at the time, "how do they know this is a suicide bomber if he hasn't already blown himself up and he's still walking around, unless, they already knew about him before that morning's events?"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-38535848011073579702009-09-19T13:54:41.643+00:002009-09-19T13:54:41.643+00:00Thanks Bridget,
Hope the truth will be establishe...Thanks Bridget,<br /><br />Hope the truth will be established in my lifetime :)<br /><br />Best wishes<br />RoryRory Ridley-Duffhttp://www.roryridleyduff.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-12842764832159163402009-09-17T23:27:57.843+00:002009-09-17T23:27:57.843+00:00Thanks Rory, J7 also believe that this line of inq...Thanks Rory, J7 also believe that this line of inquiry should not be closed. <br /><br />A fully Independent Public Inquiry and the Inquests into the deaths of the 4 accused must investigate these reports of shootings in Canary Wharf. Their post mortem reports would be a good place to start.Bridgethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04220942517267393608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-22852697070818642862009-09-17T23:13:04.687+00:002009-09-17T23:13:04.687+00:00Dear all,
I have access to news databases through...Dear all,<br /><br />I have access to news databases through my university. Here are all the key press reports of shootings at Canary Wharf on that day.<br /><br />There is a definite pattern here. All UK broadsheets who did *not* have their own staff witnessing events support the government version. All overseas news reports, and the Daily Telegraph, provide support for the 'unofficial' version. <br /><br />I don't believe this line of enquiry should be closed as I could not see any distortion of these reports in 7/7 Ripple Effect (whatever else may be wrong with it). The number of reports to overseas papers is significant - these have named sources. The UK papers claiming the reports are untrue do not provide named sources to support the denial.<br /><br /><br />CNN Breaking News, July 7th, 9:48 AM EST, Transcript Extract<br />“QUESTION: Can you tell me -- the rumors that a police sniper shot dead a suicide bomber at Canary Wharf (ph). Do you know anything about that?<br />BRIAN PADDICK: We have no reports of any police sniper shooting at anybody today.”<br /><br />GlobeAndMail.com (Canada), July 7th, 11:34 AM EST, Start of news item.<br /><br />Witness Describes Scene After the Attack<br /><br />Canadian Brendan Spinks sees massive rush of policeman outside the building, and flurry of police cars and yellow-vested men. Unconfirmed report of police shooting suicide bomber at Canary Wharf. Report posted 4:34 on day of attack.<br /><br />Vancouver Sun (British Columbia), July 8th, Final Edition<br />Lucy Hyslop, Daily Telegraph (London) editor, and former report for the Vancouver Sun, reports that Canary Wharf is sealed off completely to the public, and that friend reports two suicide bombers shot dead. Telegraph is only UK broadsheet not to report <br /><br />Ottawa Citizen, 8th July, Final Edition, extract.<br />Reported by: James Starnes<br /><br />“The radio is saying they shot dead a suicide bomber at Canary Wharf and that's right opposite my apartment across the river (Thames).”<br /><br />Huntsville Times (Alabama), 8th July, Second Edition<br />“Nicola's best friend was working in Canary Wharf - London's answer to the World Trade Center. She called in the afternoon, still in the building. Her office had been told not to leave, and rumors were flying. Someone had been shot.”<br /><br />The New Zealand Herald, 9th July, News Section<br />Reported by: (Not stated, News section).<br />“A New Zealander working for Reuters in London says two colleagues witnessed the unconfirmed shooting by police of two apparent suicide bombers outside the HSBC tower at Canary Wharf in London. ..He was not prepared to give the names of his two English colleagues, who he said witnessed the shooting from a building across the road from the tower.”<br /><br /><br />Sunday Telegraph (London), 10th July, Feature<br />Reported by: Nigel Farndale<br />“One thing about which all we rumour mongers were agreed was that a suicide bomber had definitely been shot by security forces while attempting to blow up Canary Wharf.”<br /><br />UPI, 11th July, 1:48 EST<br />Possible suicide bomber attack in London<br /><br />“The New Zealand Herald reported Monday a man claims police may have shot two apparent suicide bombers in London's East End…The New Zealander, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that police shot and killed the two men unidentified men (sic) wearing bombs strapped to their bodies at 10:30 GMT July 7. The report has not been confirmed. The paper quoted the New Zealander as saying that in the aftermath of the shooting 8,000 HSBC employees were told to stay away from windows and remain in the building for at least six hours. The New Zealander would not release the names of two English colleagues, who he said witnessed the shooting from a building across the road from the tower. Canadian Brendan Spinks, who works on the 18th floor of the tower, saw a "massive rush of policemen" outside the HSBC building, one of the three tallest in London, following the bombings in the center of the city.”Rory Ridley-Duffhttp://www.roryridleyduff.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-26966997657148670462009-09-11T00:24:11.011+00:002009-09-11T00:24:11.011+00:00Rory, J7's forum has a whole thread on the Can...Rory, J7's forum has a whole thread on the <a href="http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh/index.php?showtopic=374&st=0" rel="nofollow">Canary Wharf shooting</a>. <br /><br />Where do you think the makers of 7/7 Ripple Effect harvested all the information which was twisted into their speculative narrative?Bridgethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04220942517267393608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-75245014502474548662009-09-11T00:14:07.833+00:002009-09-11T00:14:07.833+00:00Perhaps in your hasty researches, you missed this ...Perhaps in your hasty researches, you missed this paragraph in the very article that you endeavour to take to task:<br /><br /><b><i>"On 7th July 2005 there were reports that 'suicide-bombers' had been <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/july-7-mind-the-gaps-part-2.html#wharf" rel="nofollow">shot dead at Canary Wharf</a>, Brian Paddick of the Metropolitan Police was even asked at <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0507/07/bn.03.html" rel="nofollow">a press conference</a> whether he could confirm these reports, and replied “We have no reports of any police sniper shooting at anybody today”. Once again, there is no tangible evidence to prove or disprove the reports, or the subsequent denial of these reports by Brian Paddick. However, <a href="http://julyseventh.co.uk/j-for-justice-77-ripple-effect.html" rel="nofollow">7/7 Ripple Effect</a> makes the claim that Khan, Tanweer and Lindsay were all shot at Canary Wharf, with a further stretch that perhaps they were attempting to find sanctuary in the offices of a newspaper...."</i></b><br /><br />If you had bothered to follow the links in the above quoted paragraph, you would find the very same links you offered in your comment.<br /><br />Far from trying to mislead readers, J7 merely highlights the highly speculative nature of the video and its claims.The Antagonisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01459201402366077472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-11276740833088081682009-09-10T22:46:20.809+00:002009-09-10T22:46:20.809+00:00It is helpful to read this page, but as a research...It is helpful to read this page, but as a researcher (working in a university), I am disappointed at the standard of investigation into the 7/7 Ripple Effect video. Whenever I come across a video that I initially disbelieve, I do what any good researcher should do - I check the information that is provided in the video (i.e. try to seek if it is false or misleading).<br /><br />As the Canary Wharf claims were central to an alternative thesis regarding the day, I checked the information provided in the documentary. Your rebuttal article claims there is no evidence supporting the claim of the Canary Wharf shootings. Such a claim is false. The 7/7 Ripple Effect video provided two sources: The New Zealand Herald, based on report from Reuters, and a TV broadcast that was subsequently never shown again. <br /><br />I was still not convinced, so I trawled the internet and found two further sources. The South London News carried a story just after the event (8th July). I also located a blog from the 7th July itself that provides a verbatim account of the unfolding events. It stated at 12:34 that:<br /><br />"Someone here at work has just been phoned by a guy he knows in Canary Wharf (I know, it's a bit removed, but I trust him). He says that marines have shot a man who they think to have been a suicide bomber."<br /><br />The three sources are:<br /><br />http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10334992 (New Zealand Herald, reported 9th July)<br /><br />http://julyseventh.co.uk/J7-london-bombings-dossier/dossier15-emergency-measures.html (South London News, reported 8th July 2005)<br /><br />http://europhobia.blogspot.com/2005/07/london-tube-explosions.html (Europhobia Blog, 7th July)<br /><br />The question arises, therefore, why your rebuttal article misleads its readers by claiming there is 'no evidence'. Whatever else might be written about this video, I can personally confirm that the use of the sources about Canary Wharf were reported in a fair way, without distorting the press reports. It may not be strong evidence, but its appearance in multiple (very different) sources adds to its credibility.<br /><br />Dr Rory Ridley-Duff<br />Sheffield Hallam UniversityRory Ridley-Duffhttp://www.roryridleyduff.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-44148450267240660452008-10-03T13:29:00.000+00:002008-10-03T13:29:00.000+00:00There has been much nonsense written about why my ...There has been much nonsense written about why my company ran an exercise on 7 July 2005 that had very close parallels to the real thing that day. Since then I have made several attempts to add my own comments to numerous sites that seem to get increasingly excited about their own conspiracy theories and in the process exclude any rational debate. It seems those who occupy the world of finding conspiracy theories to replace just about any coincidence, do not want to have any dialogue with those offering a different view, but I have not yet given up hope. I am therefore hoping, perhaps naively, that someone might like to read an honest and factual account about a particular exercise my company ran in London three years ago.<BR/><BR/>Unfortunately, the BBC have just postponed a programme in their ‘conspiracy files’ series that would have done this. Our client three years ago agreed to be named in the BBC programme since the attitude of the producer and his team was very balanced (several conspiracy theorists were also invited to take part). We even allowed our complete exercise material to be made available to the BBC. Regrettably broadcasting it now might jeopardise an ongoing court case, so they had little choice about postponing it to next year.<BR/> <BR/>Early in 2005 Reed Elsevier, an organisation specialising in information and publishing that employs 1,000 people in and around London, asked us to help them prepare an effective crisis management plan and rehearse it before sign-off. Several draft scenarios were drawn up and the crisis team themselves set the exercise date and time: 9.00am on 7 July.<BR/><BR/>The test was planned as a table-top walk through for about six people (the CM team) in a lecture room with all injects simulated. Everything was on MS PowerPoint. The location of their Central London office near to Chancery Lane was chosen as one test site. With many staff travelling to work via the London underground system, the chosen exercise simulated incendiary devices on three trains, very similar to a real IRA attack in 1992, as well as other events. <BR/><BR/>As there had been eighteen terrorist bomb attacks on tube trains prior to 2005, choosing the London Underground was logical rather than just prescient. With this in mind it was hardly surprising that Deutsche Bank had run a similar exercise a few days before and, prior to that, a multi-agency (and much publicised) exercise code-named Osiris II had simulated a terrorist attack at Bank tube station. Moreover, I had also taken part in a BBC Panorama programme in 2004 as a panellist alongside Michael Portillo MP et al, in an unscripted debate (we had no idea at all what the scenario was to be?) on how London might once again, deal with terrorist attacks, only this time it was fictional (created entirely by the BBC). <BR/><BR/>In short, some of the research for our exercise had already been done. The scenario developed for our client even started by using fictitious news items from the Panorama programme then, as with any walk through exercise, events unfolded solely on a screen as dictated by the facilitator without any external injects or actions beyond the exercise room. Also factored into the scenario was to be an above ground fictitious bomb exploding not far from the head office of the protected Jewish Chronicle magazine where for exercise purposes, our imagined terrorists would have been aware that commuters would now be walking to work (past a building already considered a target) as some tube stations would have been closed. <BR/><BR/>Of just eight nearby tube stations that fell within possible exercise's scope, three were chosen that, by coincidence, were involved in the awful drama that actually took place on 7 July 2005. A level of scenario validation that on this occasion, we could have done without. <BR/><BR/>An exercise that turns into the real thing is not that unusual. For example, in January 2003, thirty people were injured when a tube train derailed and hit a wall at speed. At the same time, the City of London Police were running an exercise for their central casualty bureau where the team quickly abandoned their plans and swung into action to cope with the real thing. <BR/><BR/>For a surprising number of people such coincidents cannot be accepted as such. There just has to be a conspiracy behind them, despite the obvious point that painstaking research will always identify probable above possible scenarios. By the way, the only reason I was asked to speak on TV news that day, when there was still much confusion about the real tragedies, was to encourage more organisations to thoroughly plan their own exercises knowing the threat of terrorism is and remains, very real. One tragic consequence being Islam, a great Abrahamic, monotheistic faith (along with Judaism and Christianity), has undeservedly become vilified by some people. <BR/> <BR/>Peter Power<BR/>Visor ConsultantsPeter Power Visor Consultants Londonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12422201463496926841noreply@blogger.com