US / UK foreign policy - yet another embarrassment

[David1819]

The terror drill he was simulating for a client he still refuses to name, was based upon bombs going off in "precisely" the same stations where the bombs actually went off, on the day they went off, at the time they went off.

And?

[Roch]

And?

You're behaving idiotically?

What is the mathematical probability that actual bombs would go off, in exactly the same locations, on the same day, at the same time, as a simulated terror drill; with the two events being completely unrelated?

[David1819]

And?

"That is indeed coincidence -- but an unbelievable one? 'Every week across the UK there are probably about hundred exercises, tests and simulations going on to get crisis teams familiar with their roles,' Power insists. 'We certainly do this regularly for many clients, the vast majority of them paper-based.'"

https://www.channel4.com/news/articles/uk/coincidence%2Bof%2Bbomb%2Bexercises/109010.html

[David1819]

The terror drill he was simulating for a client he still refuses to name

He disclosed the name of his client over a decade ago. It was Reed Elsevier.

https://bc.politics.narkive.com/V1Rrbw3w/peter-power-reveals-more-details-of-7-7-terrorist-bombing-drills

[Roch]

"That is indeed coincidence -- but an unbelievable one? 'Every week across the UK there are probably about hundred exercises, tests and simulations going on to get crisis teams familiar with their roles,' Power insists. 'We certainly do this regularly for many clients, the vast majority of them paper-based.'"

https://www.channel4.com/news/articles/uk/coincidence%2Bof%2Bbomb%2Bexercises/109010.html

This was a simulation in London, on the morning of the bombings, based upon the exact same locations, which occurred at roughly the same time.  Nobody is linking the actual bombs to a simulated response in Western Supermare or Chorely high street, on a different day at a different time.

[Roch]

He disclosed the name of his client over a decade ago. It was Reed Elsevier.

https://bc.politics.narkive.com/V1Rrbw3w/peter-power-reveals-more-details-of-7-7-terrorist-bombing-drills

For a long time, he refused to do so.  It would be interesting to find out whether there was any response. 

[David1819]

For a long time, he refused to do so.  It would be interesting to find out whether there was any response.

Response to what?

[Roch]

Response to what?

Revealing his apparent client and the client. Have you done your maths yet?

[David1819]

Revealing his apparent client and the client. Have you done your maths yet?

Why would his client comment? This "drill" was nothing more than a powerpoint presentation shown to six employees of the company. This whole thing has been grossly distorted and exaggerated by conspiracy nuts to try and make it seem like something it is not.

Here is Peters website from 2005

https://web.archive.org/web/20060831221643/http://www.visorconsultants.com/

[Roch]

Why would his client comment? This "drill" was nothing more than a powerpoint presentation shown to six employees of the company. This whole thing has been grossly distorted and exaggerated by conspiracy nuts to try and make it seem like something it is not.

Here is Peters website from 2005

https://web.archive.org/web/20060831221643/http://www.visorconsultants.com/

I wasn't referring to his client. Why wouldn't Visor Consultants have a website?  While not wanting to support any alternative conspiracy (for reasons already explained to you), the victims' families do not believe that the term 'conspiracy' should be used in a pejorative manner.

Finally, you do realise that the official version of events (the author of which is not known) is itself a conspiracy?

[David1819]

Finally, you do realise that the official version of events (the author of which is not known) is itself a conspiracy?

Yes. A group of people deciding to build bombs and detonate them to cause harm is conspiracy.

That is why all those in the failed attack later that month are convicted for conspiracy to murder.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/21_July_2005_London_bombings

[Roch]

Yes. A group of people deciding to build bombs and detonate them to cause harm is conspiracy.

That is why all those in the failed attack later that month are convicted for conspiracy to murder.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/21_July_2005_London_bombings

Loving how wiki is your main source.

If you support the official version of events for 7/7, then by default, and by your own personal skew on things David, you are a conspiracy theorist.

[David1819]

Loving how wiki is your main source.

If you support the official version of events for 7/7, then by default, and by your own personal skew on things David, you are a conspiracy theorist.

No, I am simply aware of what took place that day, due to common sense and critical thinking. A conspiracy theorist is someone who has an idea that is not proven hence the term theory.

What do you make of the failed 21/7 attacks? And the four would be bombers sitting in prison now not protesting their innocence? What about the failed shoe bomb attempt in 2001? Those who killed Lee Rigby and attempted suicide by cop (and survived)? The perpetrators of the 2006 transatlantic aircraft plot. None of whom deny what they did.

Do you think the government staged these failed attacks also? Do you think all Islamist terror attacks are staged or just 7/7?

[Roch]

No, I am simply aware of what took place that day, due to common sense and critical thinking. A conspiracy theorist is someone who has an idea that is not proven hence the term theory.

What do you make of the failed 21/7 attacks? And the four would be bombers sitting in prison now not protesting their innocence? What about the failed shoe bomb attempt in 2001? Those who killed Lee Rigby and attempted suicide by cop (and survived)? The perpetrators of the 2006 transatlantic aircraft plot. None of whom deny what they did.

Do you think the government staged these failed attacks also? Do you think all Islamist terror attacks are staged or just 7/7?

You're trying to deflect. But it won't work. I think you need to look up conspiracy in the dictionary. By supporting the official version of events you are supporting a conspiracy theory which is not supported by many of the victims' families. It is ironic, that the very people who you purport to be enraged for, actually do not support the official conspiracy theory, which you do support without question.

[David1819]

You're trying to deflect. But it won't work.

In other words you don't want to answer the question.

By supporting the official version of events you are supporting a conspiracy theory which is not supported by many of the victims' families.

The parents of the bombers don't deny what happened.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhHcyVo3Kuc