London bombings.... more than one perp needed?
 

In article , (LeMod Pol) wrote:

3- The people that wrote the article I quoted are
infinitely more experienced with suicide bombings.

Possibly, but the article contains a load of obvious (to an outside
observer familiar with the attack sites) rubbish.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

London bombings.... more than one perp needed?
 

On Sat, 9 Jul 2005 09:42 +0100 (BST), (Colin
Rosenstiel) wrote:

In article , (LeMod Pol) wrote:

3- The people that wrote the article I quoted are
infinitely more experienced with suicide bombings.

Possibly, but the article contains a load of obvious (to an outside
observer familiar with the attack sites) rubbish.

And I'd personally like to know how they can see a train coming the
other way on the Piccadilly Line even with the step plate junction just
south of Kings Cross. Perhaps they can see through tunnel linings and
solid earth?

The theory about the buses is also claptrap because if the intent is as
stated then "they" failed miserably.

The whole theory is misguided because the damage and loss of life would
have been far greater if bombs have been detonated in the obvious large
stations near to the incident sites rather than in tunnels.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

London bombings.... more than one perp needed?
 

In article ,
(Paul Corfield) wrote:

The whole theory is misguided because the damage and loss of life would
have been far greater if bombs have been detonated in the obvious large
stations near to the incident sites rather than in tunnels.

I have a feeling that a bomb as small as they used in a packed tube train
carriage in a tube tunnel caused about as much carnage as it would have
anywhere. :-((((

--
Colin Rosenstiel

London bombings.... more than one perp needed?
 

On Sat, 9 Jul 2005 22:39 +0100 (BST), (Colin
Rosenstiel) wrote:

In article ,
(Paul Corfield) wrote:

The whole theory is misguided because the damage and loss of life would
have been far greater if bombs have been detonated in the obvious large
stations near to the incident sites rather than in tunnels.

I have a feeling that a bomb as small as they used in a packed tube train
carriage in a tube tunnel caused about as much carnage as it would have
anywhere. :-((((

Sadly a matter of simple physics - the blast doesn't have anywhere
else to go. The Circle line bombs were less destructive because there
was more space for the explosion to dissipate, the bus even more so.
That said, horrible though it seems, some eyewitness accounts suggest
that many people on the Piccadilly train near to the blast were
"sandbagged" by the people closer to it, and cushioned by those
furthur away. Had the car been half-empty, rather than packed,
fatalities may actually have been higher.
--
Nick Cooper

[Carefully remove the detonators from my e-mail address to reply!]

The London Underground at War:
http://www.cwgcuser.org.uk/personal/...ra/lu/tuaw.htm
625-Online - classic British television:
http://www.625.org.uk
'Things to Come' - An Incomplete Classic:
http://www.thingstocome.org.uk