The New Pearl Harbor

I read the article and it didn't seem even remotely proposed to me. Since it obviously did to you I dug around a bit more and found an entry on Wikipedia (not guaranteed to be accurate I know - but you can e-mail Visor Consultants yourself if really want to be sure).There is a reproduction of an e-mail issued by Visor Consultants from which the following quotes are taken : So there were no people at the Tube stations (or more to the point on the Underground trains, since that is where the bombs were - none of the explosions actually happened at a Tube station), it was just a bunch of suits in a conference room doing "what if" exercises.I suspect all of this became redundant when it was revealed the bombs weren't planted but were carried by suicide bombers from Leeds and Aylesbury (as opposed to Visor Consultants) - unless you think that's all somehow part of the conspiracy too ?P.S. The conference room bit is artistic licence - they might have used people's offices

---

Oops! Wrong Planet

Then you heard wrong. All four are now confirmed to be suicide bombers. This from the BBC website:

• MOHAMMAD SIDIQUE KHAN, 30, FROM DEWSBURY - detonated enough explosives on a Circle Line train to kill seven people
• HASIB MIR HUSSAIN, 18, FROM LEEDS - boarded the No 30 bus in London armed with enough explosives to rip the double-decker apart, killing 13 people
• SHEHZAD TANWEER, 22, FROM LEEDS - detonated a bomb on a Circle Line train between Aldgate and Liverpool Street stations which killed seven people, including himself, and injured over 100 more
• LINDSEY GERMAINE, FROM AYLESBURY, BUCKINGHAMSHIRE - thought to be responsible for the Russell Square Underground bomb, where 21 people have been confirmed dead and hundreds more injured

The 'thought to be responsible' about Lindsey Germaine seems to be because nobody yet knows much about him, but there is no doubt it was a suicide bomber. Ok I will own up to a mistake in my thinking here. You have been talking about evidence so much I was mentally substituting 'proposed' with 'proposed and backed up with some evidence'.I will cheerfully concede it is proposed. I would maintain, however, that there is nothing in the transcript of the Peter Power interview (which in the context of what did or didn't happen on the morning of the bombings is the only thing with evidentiary value in that article) that backs up this idea.The quote above is nothing more than the opinion of the person who wrote the article. As far as I am concerned it is no more or less valuable than the opinions you or I may put forward - but it has no real weight in terms of evidence.On the other hand I quoted from an e-mail from Visor Consultants which explicitly said: In what possible way can a desk bound exercise involving a few people be a cover for the physical placement of bombs in the London Underground? Especially as we now know it was suicide bombers carrying bombs, not placing them and walking away. That just makes absolutely no sense at all. This also makes no sense to me quite apart from the fact there was no physical side to the exercise. Maybe it's a difference in our cultural or legal frameworks but in the UK there is no way a private company could carry out such an exercise in a public place - it would be against the law (probably several). Saying to an offical of London Underground or a British Tranport Policeman "I'm part of an exercise being run by XYZ" isn't going to cut a lot of ice if you've just been caught doing something you shouldn't. An exercise based on doing something illegal isn't exactly a plausible cover story is it?To forestall the obvious question about what law you would be breaking - the first one that leaps to mind is that it is illegal to do something which is likely to cause public disorder (carrying something which is or could be construed to be a bomb in the packed-like-sardines evironment of the London Underground would be a good way to be start a panic). That in itself would probably get you into reckless endangerment - a panic in the Tube could well result in people being crushed or trampled to death. People who are better legal eagles on UK law can correct me or offer 'better' offences.Edited to add a quote box.This message has been edited by MangyTiger, 07-15-2005 04:29 PM

---

Oops! Wrong Planet

When I first read about this exercise that Visor were doing my immediate reaction was that it seemed an incredibly unlikely coincidence.When I thought about it a bit more I came to the conclusion I didn't have anything remotely like enough information to have even a feel for whether it is a likely coincidence or not.I've no idea how many companies offer these sort of disaster planning services, how many companies buy them, what percentage of the plans offered include Tube bombings, how frequently the exercises are carried out - basically I don't have any of the numbers needed to even start looking at the odds. In truth I don't have anything at all beyond my gut feel and/or personal incredulity on which decide whether it is a likely coincidence or not.

---

Oops! Wrong Planet