I’m not sure about this and I’d like some feedback.
THIS ARTICLE IS TO BE REPEATEDLY UPDATED AND AMENDED. While I have a lot, I don’t have the whole story so I would appreciate help with the uncertain parts. Thanks.
[23/11/13 One of the problems I encounter is that people helping don’t realise what I’ve already got. For example, I got the ’empty’ lead years ago when I was ignoring it as it was repeatedly raised.]
It’s a good day (to start).
Context, Terrorism, 2005 election, Inquiries Act, Bristol Indymedia, G8 & Privy Council ruling, Dust explosions, London Bombings, Cobra meeting for G8 not 7/7, Jerusalem Post articles, Ian Blair, murder of Jean Charles de Menezes
Terrorism is a godsend for governments. It provides a wonderful excuse for dodgy newly-developed airplanes falling out of the sky when their doors open at 30 thousand feet and it provides a wonderful excuse for dust explosions on the London Underground. It provides a ready excuse for shitty old Jeeps with documented faults crashing off motorways and bursting into flames. It provides for massive made for television sacrificial rituals to start already planned wars.
7/1/14 The magick is working, I’m making fine progress – it’s almost as if it was hidden in plain sight all along. It was.
Just a tiny piece today. On 7/7/2005 – the day of explosions on the London underground and the strange bombing of a double-decker bus an hour later – the boss of the Metropolitan police Ian Blair said“The most important message though however is just that it, while it is a confused situation it must be a confused situation in multiple sites like this, a co-ordinated effort is slowly bringing order out of the chaos.”
There are two issues about this statement. Firstly try finding it using a search engine. It’s almost as if I made it up. I didn’t of course but the web has been scrubbed. That takes the sort of power that only governments have.
Secondly, what is meant by the phrase ‘order out of (the) chaos’ which is explained very well here
The need to deter democracy by alienating public opinion from public policy, is one that has been long understood. Back in 1921, the highly influential political columnist and media analyst Walter Lippmann, wrote the book “Public Opinion”,where he discussed the need for the “manufacture of consent”; given the inherent pitfalls and barriers to an accurate and effective public opinion (democracy, essentially), it is necessary that this opinion is crafted by a higher sphere of influence. This was understood very well by Edward Bernays, who was the founder of Public Relations (he indeed coined the term), and the formulator of not just corporate, but also political PR. He sketches out his views on this in his 1928 work, “Propaganda where he states that “The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society”, suggesting like Lippmann, that democracy is a “chaos” that needs regulation from above. This “above” is a small section of elites: “We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of.” These are the people who will ensure that the masses are sedated, and free to run their daily lives, without participating in the broader picture of public policy, given the dangers that this would pose to the influence of said elites, and thus the smooth functioning of society. To paraphrase Bernays, a leader must serve by leading, not lead by serving. Read more: http://u2r2h.blogspot.co.uk/2007/08/911-and-propaganda-model.html#ixzz2pkrbXafu
As explained in the quoted section above, bringing order out of chaos can be understood to be ‘manufacturing of consent’, “the conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses …”
Well-educated people – better educated than myself – politicians and the like, people who … for whatever reason … have come to realise the meaning of the term would, er … recognise the term and know what it means. That there was a manipulation of events to manufacture consent going on.
8/1/14 Just for fun since we shouldn’t take ourselves too seriously, … he know’s I’m right. I’ve seen the light, it’s been revealed to Me, etc.
R.I.P. Jean Charles de Menezes murdered at Stockwell Tube Station 22 July 2005.
Jean Charles de Menezes was killed to send a message . The message was that another totally innocent person was to blame – somebody absolutely, completely not responsible – for the bombings. Ian Blair made many statements about how the murder of the innocent Brizzlian was so directly related to the ongoing terrorist investigation.
It is clear from the murder of Brizzlian Jean Charles de Menezes that there was absolutely no intention in pursuing those really responsible for the London bombings of 7 July, 2005.
I suggest that you look at all the shit Ian Blair did from the very start -libertines, cocaine. he was never a copper, always pursuing a different agenda
Frank ly it’s Jean Charles de Menezes
Later edit: The point about the murder of JCd was that it was a message of who should be targeted for responsibility for the July 7 explosions. Get it?
directly related to the ongoing terrorist investigation – all that shit …
To clarify: Jean Charles de Menezes was killed 911 days after the introduction of the shoot-to-kill policy known as Operation Kratos. To clarify – I am saying 911 days after the introduction of Operation Kratos. If you do the math there is a difference of 912 days but it is still 911 days after. There is a similarity here that the event known as the Madrid Bombings or 3/11 occurred 911 days after the event known as 9/11 in New York. 911 is not a coincidence. It is the beginning of killing people under Operation Kratos.
I have shown that Jean Charles de Menezes’ name can be interpreted using Agrippa’s code. It produces a description that can be taken to indicate me and my location.
Jean Charles de Menezes was Brizzle-ian.
Ian Blair on the day described the police murder of Jean Charles de Menezes as directly linked to the ongoing terrorist investigation. JCd was deliberately murdered to send a message.
I’ve been wondering what it takes to start an investigation by the police into a crime. I would expect that it would just be reasonableness that a crime has been committed. I wouldn’t expect much interest in trivial crimes like shoplifting or minor criminal damage but I would expect more interest in more serious issues like murder, incitement to murder, terrorism, etc.
and the problem is that it’s not normal criminals that are doing this. Instead it’s governments, police chiefs and international criminals protected by privy council above-governmental dictat according to some above-law divine protocol.
Don’t look at this the protocol says … this is above justice …
Instead the privy council dictat says everyone invited to G8 2005 are above UK laws. They can’t even be arrested or questioned. They are above the law. These Neo-Con cnuts can do what they like without any legal recourse …
They can’t even be arrested or questioned
They can commit murder or mass-murder without even being arrested or questioned
If these b’stards did the 7 July 2005 bombings they could not be arrested or even questioned because of a privy council dictat made by Tony Blair
Thursday, December 18, 2008 – Danger of dust explosions on the London Underground
This blog was mysteriously deleted in early December 2005. [edit: 2006] Here is a posting from the deleted previous content. [19/8/11 It was actually mysteriously deleted in early December 2008]
� January 10, 2006 – Danger of dust explosions on the London Underground
Danger of dust explosions on the London Underground
This article argues that the danger of dust explosions from combustible tunnel dust on the London underground has not been properly recognised and addressed. It suggests that the RMT union urgently investigates the dangers of dust explosions on the tube so that it is able to ensure the safety of its members and the public.
In the last 20 years industrial dust explosions have accounted for several hundred deaths and hundreds of millions of dollars of insurance money and yet they are one of the least recognised of industrial fire hazards. They can occur within any process where a combustible dust is produced, and can be triggered by any energy source, including static sparks, friction and incandecent material.
There are a few basic rules to observe to see whether a dust is capable of causing a dust explosion:
The dust must be combustible.
The dust must be capable of becoming airborne.
The dust must have a size distribution capable of flame propagation.
The dust concentration must be within the explosible range.
An ignition source must be present.
The atmosphere must contain sufficient oxygen to support and sustain combustion.
London Underground does not recognise tunnel dust as a potential fire and explosive hazard.
Mike Strzelecki, LUL: It’s dust, it’s caked on dust, it’s a mixture of iron from the action of the rail on the wheel and vice versa, it’s human dust in terms of skin and hair particles which we all shed routinely, and it’s quartz from the brake locks on trains. Now, a lot of research has been done into this over the years, including very recently, indeed we had an Institute examine all the research that’s been done to determine whether this stuff is dangerous to people’s health or not, and the answer is that there is no evidence that it is, and the most sort of compelling evidence that it isn’t, is that the staff who work on the underground who are obviously are in the underground environment much longer than customers, there is no evidence of any medical problems occurring from long hours and many years of exposure, working in the underground.
Eric Ollerenshaw: Is there a fire risk?
Mike Strzelecki, LUL: No, it doesn’t burn.
Having reviewed available evidence – concentrating particularly on incidents in 2003 – this article calls for an urgent investigation into the fire and explosive dangers of tunnel dust on the London Underground.
Is tube tunnel dust dangerous?
London Underground have conducted inquiries into the possible dangers of breathing tunnel dust. These inquiries provide an insight into the composition of tunnel dust. Care should be taken in evaluating the findings since the studies concentrate on suspended dust in stations and drivers’ cabs. It is likely that the dust actually inside the tunnels is different since it is a different environment. There is little movement of air, tube trains travel along sections between platforms and dust probably accumulates in the deeper parts of tunnels. Tunnel dust may have a higher iron content from wear of the rails and wheels and less organic content from passangers clothes, etc.
Studies into London tube tunnel-dust reveal that it is composed of iron, silica and organic products. Different studies have arrived at different ratios of these constitiuents with London Underground finding a roughly 50% iron content and a study conducted by IOM finding a 90% iron content.
It is generally accepted that dust must be smaller than 0.1mm in diamater to pose an explosive hazard, with smaller particles being more explosive. The dust inhalation studies on the London tube have been concerned with much smaller particles than this.
[PM10s are particles with a diamater less than 10 micrometres, PM2.5 have a diamater less that 2.5 micrometre. 1 micrometre = 1 millionth of a metre, 1×10-9m]
Institute of Occupationa Medicine report ‘Study of tunnel dust in the London Underground’
Composition of tunnel dust: Samples from station platforms showed that almost all (typically, about 90%) of the dust in the PM 2.5 samples was analysed as iron. There were trace amounts of chromium (0.1 ? 0.2%), manganese (0.6 ? 1%) and copper (0.1 ? 1.5%). No zinc was detected on any of the samples (<0.1%). Quartz, analysed in respirable dust, accounted for only 1-2%; these measurements were approximate, being close to the analytical detection limit.
The distributions from the three stations are remarkably similar, with the data from Hampstead being slightly finer. The median diameter for the dust from Oxford Circus and Holland Park is 0.4µm and for Hampstead 0.35µm. In each case about 80% of the particles have a diameter less than 1µm. Again, note that this underestimates the aerodynamic diameter of the denser particles.
[µm is micrometre – one millionth of a metre (1×10-6 m), equivalent to one thousandth of a millimetre.]
Does it burn? is the big question. If it burns, then it is explosive when suspended or thrown into the air.
Tunnel dust silica crystals have a coating of iron on their surface, which makes them less likely to cause fibrotic lung disease.
Since the silica is coated with iron, it will burn.
Have there been dust explosions on the tube?
Eyewitness accounts certainly suggest that there have been many dust explosions on the tube. Witnesses often speak of smoke, dust and fires. There have been many trackside fires. If not dust, then what’s burning? It’s almost as if there’s a conspiracy to deny this real danger to tube users.
Passengers involved in a horrific rail crash on London Underground told last night how they escaped death thanks to a miraculous chain of events after a Tube train lost a wheel and hit the tunnel wall.
Yesterday’s crash, which left 30 people injured and prompted fresh questions about under-investment in rail safety, happened shortly after 2pm as the train was travelling from St Paul’s to Chancery Lane.
Witnesses said sparks flew from beneath the train, which was carrying 800 people, before the three rear carriages left the tracks, bouncing from wall to wall and sending passengers flying from their seats. Last night one man was being treated for a suspected broken leg after being smashed into the opposite side of the train.
Amid scenes of panic as the carriages were plunged into darkness and smoke billowed through smashed windows and doors, some passengers helped others out along the track. ‘I was absolutely panicking,’ said Claire Ellis. ‘I was thinking: this is it, this is the day it happens.’
The hospital said many passengers had suffered smoke inhalation.
Economics student Humaiun Kobir, 25, was on the last carriage. ‘The train was being thrown from side to side, hitting both walls of the tunnel. All the lights went out and thick black smoke was pouring in. I could hear the driver over the radio shouting “Mayday, mayday” then the train stopped.
‘He asked all the passengers to get to the front as quickly as possible. My first thought was that it was some kind of terrorist attack. We were all terrified that another train was going to smash into the back of us. But we knew there was a fire and no one wanted to run into that.’
The Rail Maritime and Transport (RMT) union also claimed a “potentially serious” incident was averted on 11 October when a driver decided to evacuate a train and take it out of service because of a defect.
It said the train had a seized axle which could have resulted in a derailment if it had continued, but LU accused the RMT of exaggerating the incident.
Eyewitness Harry Anscombe, 22, arrived at the station at 1015 BST as emergency services pulled up outside. “There were lots of blackened faces and there was one man with bandages on his face and blood streaming down,” he said.
Mr Anscombe asked one of the passengers what had happened, but the man said he did not know because it was “so black down there”. The passenger said the derailment had caused a huge amount of dust to fly up, making it difficult to see.
Why we need an inquiry
This article raises the issue of the unacknowledged danger of dust explosions on the London tube. There is no indication that London Underground has investigated the danger of dust explosions. On the contrary, evidence is presented that suggests that London Underground has been complacent and negligent in its approach to public safety. The article suggests – through witness accounts – that dust explosions have played a role in tube incidents.
Should it be accepted that dust poses an explosive hazard on the London tube, then safety procedures must change. Maintence needs to be performed flawlessly so that nothing disturbs the dust and that there are no sources of heat to ignite it. Drivers and other staff need to be trained properly so that they can better ensure their own and the public’s safety. Drivers need to know that they should not drive through visible clouds of dust.
Ten minutes later, a driver on a following train reported Bethnal Green and Liverpool Street stations were “really dusty and murky”. The controller reports “there might be a problem with the train in front” and the driver replied “it ain’t half kicking up a lot of dust”. It is suggested that the RMT urgently investigates the dangers of dust explosions on the London tube.
� January 11, 2006 – Fire alert on London tube 11/1/2006
Posted by dizzy
REUTERS reports smoke and fire engines attending 2 tube stations.
Is it fair to assume that smoke is coming from a tunnel?No smoke without fire eh?
LONDON (Reuters) – No one was hurt in an alert that brought fire engines to two London Underground stations on Wednesday, police said.
A spokewoman for London Transport police said firefighters had checked reports of smoke coming from the Bakerloo line, but the incident was not threatening. Fire engines were sent to Oxford Circus and Piccadilly Circus.
� May 3, 2006 – Ignition
Posted by parallax
BBC NEWS – Track power surge releases flare
Last Updated: Saturday, 1 October 2005, 16:08 GMT 17:08 UKTrain passengers fled a platform after a power surge sent a flare 10 foot into the air from the track.
An eye witness described people screaming as the fireball moved along the track at London Bridge station on Saturday afternoon.
Electrician Peter Difolco, 44, was returning from a shopping trip when he said there was a large flash.
“It was like a Roman candle firework, there was lots of smoke and people were screaming and running out the station.”
Mr Difolco, who was with his wife, said he had an idea it was something electrical.
“I had guessed it was something electrical but there were a lot of frightened people.
“There was a small explosion like a firecracker. It went up quite high and started working its way down the track, it went about 120 foot and it lasted for about a minute.
“There were lots of police sirens and then the station was evacuated and staff were comforting people.”
British Transport Police confirmed there was an incident involving a power line at the station at about 1330 BST.
Here are some articles from December 2008 which were reposted after the blog was mysteriously deleted in early December 2008. I’ve not abandoned this line of research and understand far more about it now. Comments are moderated to stop spam but you’re welcome to disagree.