There is a lead which has come to my attention, because of all the contradictions attributed to it (him), and which I would think needs to be followed. Especially since it is now obvious the MSM & the Police aren't going to.
"I'm just feeling unbelievably lucky. I had just stepped off the bus when I felt a huge explosion and heard a huge noise...I kept saying to people, 'I just got off that bus'." - Bus Blast Eye-witness RICHARD JONES
Some background is in order here. The explosion did NOT occur at a bus-stop. According to the majority of eye-witness accounts available - the driver had stopped to ask for directions from a parking attendant who was talking to someone else on the curb, in Tavistock Square, near "77" Russell Street *, after the bus was diverted and please note well - could not possibly have arrived at any passenger's legitimate destination.
* "77" Great Russell Street was the first headquarters of the World Zionist Organization that preceded the Counterfeit-Jewish State in (but not of) Israel and is where the Balfour Declaration was issued, which led to the now 57 year-old illegal occupation of Palestine.
In the first article I will link to shortly and quote from, Richard Jones makes it a point of stressing over and over again that the "bomber" was annoying him and that his fidgeting with a ruck-sack was responsible for making him and eleven other passengers get off the bus seconds before the blast even though they had not arrived at their destination. He did not think it was a bomb the "man" was playing with but an i-POD.
But marvel of marvels... Richard Jones also claims in another article, which I will also quote from, that he got off at his destination on his own, at Tavistock Square, which was not on any legitimate destination list since the bus had been diverted from its normal Route 30, and was exactly where the bus blew up seconds afterwards.
Richard moans repeatedly in the first article about the "bomber's" fidgeting with a ruck-sack, and claims that this fidgeting is the reason why he and eleven others, got off the bus (seconds before the blast) before arriving at any possible legitimate destination.
It is the first time I've heard of a miracle resulting from "annoyance". Still, you learn something new every day if you're not careful. But if you're not careful what is it you will learn? The truth or lies?
Would it be such a stretch of the imagination, to entertain the possibility that the real murderers are alive, not dead? Would it be conceivable, to your mind, that the Police are not infallible, and could have been misled by planted evidence at the scene, after the event? We already know the Main Stream Media aren't infallible, that's for sure...
If you have not been completely conditioned to see things backwards, the way the (earthly) "powers that be" wish you to see them, please read on. And even if you have, I doubt many of you will choose to stop... and that should be a clear indication to you from a certain (for sure) point-of-view, that you don't really believe the Government, MSM & the Police version of events.
But before you see the quotes attributed to him: please be aware of a very important factor in this "77" equation - Richard Jones' account is the ONLY "solid"(?) evidence the Main Stream Media have in this investigation so far, which has come up with patently ridiculous conclusions about who truly carried out the bombings, moulded around previous False Flag Ops.
Please consider, what other "solid" evidence do they have? After the Police blowing up cars, several rooms if not entire houses, and tainting the crime or clue-scenes with military-type explosives?
What have the Police got so far except cctv camera images (it is claimed) which captured "Four Bombers" who were enjoying themselves immensely according to the descriptions of the as yet publically unseen footage? And who have not been observed on any train or getting into any train but rather outside, or partly inside, King's Cross Station.
Neither for that matter, have the Police revealed how they knew these four Brit-born Muslims were carrying bombs, from the footage, and were not just possible passengers, or hired "actors" playing the role of "baddies" in the DRILL taking place on the same day.
What do we have except an apparently manic schizophrenic's * claims that he saw one of the "bombers" on the bus, especially when the FOUR cctv cameras on the bus were "coincidentally" out of order that day?
* You'll see what I mean.
We should also take with a pinch of salt the ludicrous claims that the "Four Bombers'" identity has been established from the blast sites - reminiscent of the "nuke-proof" passport/s from 9-11...
And let us not forget poor Mr. Mohammed el Guerbozi, who has been accused of being a Madrid 3-11 ringleader living in Britain, all over the MSM, and who acted promptly to counter this slander:-
In fact Mr Guerbozi read these newspaper reports at his Kilburn flat and rang a local police station in London on Saturday to volunteer himself as available for any interview if so required. He was put on "hold" for so long that he finally put the phone down.
It is far likelier, as usual, that the real murderers remain alive, and I'm sorry that is not the case for the victims of the attack including the four Brit-born Muslims, who were set-up to take the fall. Possibly through being secretly hired by the Company carrying out the secret (at the time) DRILL, as actors playing the part of "terrorists". They would have to be of Pakistani origin, since the next False Flag Op scenario was fabricated with that angle in mind at least a year ago. The ISI and Musharraf had promised to play ball on the next one.
Prior to the US stolen "elections" last year, it was claimed that communications ("chatter") had been intercepted between Pakistan and Britain. The MSM spinned this as a possible attack on the US but later changed its story to "Britain was the target" and that the locations were not definitive... once Bush had grabbed his second-term on November 2nd 2004.
Nov. 17 2004 The Real Target? New intelligence suggests that Al Qaeda was planning to attack London, not U.S. financial centers, in the run-up to the presidential election.
The new view is that there was indeed an active Al Qaeda plot underway earlier this year-one that involved coded communications between high-level operatives in Pakistan and a British cell headed by a longtime associate of September 11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed.
... subsequent analysis of the Pakistani computer evidence-and other evidence gathered in related raids in Britain-now puts much of that intelligence in a different light. While follow-up investigations have produced little corroboration for the idea that operatives in the United States were still working on an attack against the financial targets, the evidence gathered in Pakistan and Britain has shed important new clues to Al Qaeda's intentions.
Evidence gathered in the two countries included messages between suspects in Pakistan and Britain in an elaborate and initially opaque makeshift code. One break in the case came when a captured suspect agreed to help investigators decipher that code. They concluded that suspects in Britain-including a key figure who is believed to have been previously involved in the surveillance of the U.S. financial buildings-were working with a computer and communications expert in Pakistan on an active plot against targets in the London area.
According to a source familiar with evidence in the investigation, the alleged plotters' plans for possible action in Britain were very elaborate and flexible. Some of the alternative targets-including Heathrow Airport and Westminster Abbey-were considered in detail by the plotters, though the evidence suggests they never settled on their final objective.
Some U.S. law-enforcement officers based in London, NEWSWEEK has learned, have become extremely concerned about evidence regarding possible active Al Qaeda plots to attack targets in Britain. According to a U.S. government official, fears of terror attacks have prompted FBI agents based in the U.S. Embassy in London to avoid traveling on London's popular underground railway (or tube) system, which is used daily by millions of commuters. While embassy-based officers of the U.S. Secret Service, Immigration and Customs bureaus and the CIA still are believed to use the underground to go about their business, FBI agents have been known to turn up late to crosstown meetings because they insist on using taxis in London's traffic-choked business center.
As you read this of course, please recall those "scurrilous" rumours flying about prior to the US "election". Remember? If Bush wins - "Al Qa'ida" won't attack. Well he didn't win. But he stole it and that was good enough for those who don't view playing fair as a virtue but as a weakness. And so, the "Al Qa'ida" attack was shelved.
Until 77/05, London. When the NWO, through the Mossad and probable involvement of other agencies like the CIA and MI5, resuscitated this post-poned "Al Qa'ida" plan and decided it was time to give Britain a taste of "Islamic terror".
There is absolutely nothing of any real value whatsoever so far that pins the blame on the four accused except this man's testimony... or is there anything at all of any value? That is what I hope we will find out through investigating a little bit more about Mr. Richard Jones and the schizophrenic statements attributed to him.
The following quotes are not in a particular order. The article, as it is written, can be viewed by clicking on the highlighted words. This article is from the Sunday Mail, apparently from 12th July:-
Richard, originally of Ardrossan, Ayrshire, ended up on the bus after the Tube was evacuated because of the earlier bombs.
He spoke of his astonishing escape yesterday and said he only got off because he was so annoyed by the man next to him fiddling with a rucksack.
Richard said: 'I thought he was maybe playing with an iPod.
The young man got on at the same stop * and immediately began to annoy Richard with his constant fidgeting. Finally, Richard got up from his seat and asked the driver to let him off.
'The fact this guy was annoying me so much was another reason why I was happy to get off. **'
As he and another dozen frustrated *** passengers who had also abandoned the bus began to walk away, it was ripped apart by the bomb. Thirteen people, believed to include the bomber, were killed and others were horribly injured.
Richard said: 'I had to bang on the front door and shouted something like, 'Come on, Jimmy, we want off'.
'About half a dozen got out the back door just before us and the same number, including me, left by the front.
* Which bus-stop? Why are these details always missing, if not because they would contradict the official story?
** Really Richard? "Another reason why I was happy to get off "? One would think the "annoyance" would pale not only into insignificance but into oblivion considering the carnage which ensued and which you "astonishingly" survived.
*** Where are the other eleven passengers who Mr. Jones claims got off the bus with him in the nick of time because the accused "bomber" was "annoying" them too? Where are their statements? Why have we only heard from Richard Jones?
Please be reminded that the statements in the articles I have quoted from, might very well not be Richard Jones' words. I do hope however, if this letter and/or others reach him, that he will be greatly offended by realising what an utter buffoon he is being made out to be by those newspapers he has granted interviews to, and will kick up a fuss at the very least.
Okay. How about some smoke & mirrors now? After all, someone with even the most rudimentary knowledge that 2 + 2 cannot equal 5 might notice some irregularities here and there...
Please take a look at today's Sun newspaper and what it says "Mr. Jones says" on 14th July:-
Passenger Richard Jones was convinced he saw the bomber setting his device *.
He said he became suspicious ** of the olive-skinned man because he looked anxious and was fiddling constantly with his bag.
Richard, 61, said: "I noticed him as he looked nervous. He was continually diving into his bag, rummaging round and looking in it."
"I did not see his face because he was constantly looking down."
Richard stepped off the bus at his destination ***. Seconds later it exploded behind him - with the "bomber" still on board.
* So now, according to the Sun, Richard is convinced the "bomber" was setting the device instead of "annoyed" with the "bomber's" fidgeting, as the Sunday Mail reported.
** He is now also suspicious not just "annoyed".
*** Stepped off the bus at his destination? Oh really? When the bus had been diverted from its normal Route 30? It had nothing to do with "annoyance" after all? Where is the mention now of the eleven other passengers who were "annoyed" and got off as well? The Sun, ladies & gentlemen, has vanished them into thin air.
In fact, shredding the previous story up into practically unrecognisable blather, in order to confuse people and keep them guessing about what the story really is. In this case, Mr. Richard Jones' story, who is either taking us all for a ride or being taken for a ride himself by the presstitutes (you really deserve being called by your true name) he's granting interviews to.
Here is yet more contradiction, in the very same article, which one would think at least they would have noticed, but no...
Terence Mutasa, 27, a staff nurse at University College hospital, said: "I treated two girls in their 20s who were involved in the bus bomb.
"They were saying some guy came and sat down and that he exploded *. The girls received minor injuries and were in shock and distressed.
"They said the guy just sat down and the explosion happened *. They thought it was a suicide bomber."
* No fidgeting, no "annoying", no playing with I-POD's or setting a bomb device he just sat down and exploded.
So who's telling the truth?
None of them.
The nurse is only a second-hand witness and he doesn't even know for a fact if those two un-named girls had been in the bus. And from what we've seen of both the Sunday Mail and the Sun they are making 75% of it up anyway.
I doubt very much if they would allow a witness to speak the truth about how the blast went off or if they even know how it happened.
From what we've heard of Richard Jones, he is not a reliable witness, and yet the Main Stream Media is utilising his "testimony" as the strongest "evidence" with which to convince the sheeple that four British-born Muslims planned and executed the operation. Richard Jones is the only named "witness" of a "suicide-bomber" in action, so to speak. And he is the PRIME corroborator of the "suicide-bomber" theory.
If the statements which have been attributed to Richard Jones are not true, then it would appear Mr. Jones is playing along with the disinfo game for some reason, since I am hard put to remember when newspapers have taken so much liberty with what a person has said. The impression one gets is that he doesn't care about what they are attributing to him.
Therefore the Main Stream Media has no (real) evidence, just manufactured evidence to fit who the Zionists and B-liar wanted to frame from the beginning:-
Ex-Mossad Chief Calls For World War After London Attack:-
...There will be supreme tests of leadership in this unique situation and people will have to trust the wisdom and good judgment of those chosen to govern them. The executives must be empowered to act resolutely and to take every measure necessary to protect the citizens of their country and to carry the combat into whatever territory the perpetrators and their temporal and spiritual leaders are inhabiting.
The rules of combat must be rapidly adjusted to cater to the necessities of this new and unprecedented situation, and international law must be rewritten in such a way as to permit civilization to defend itself. Anything short of this invites disaster and must not be allowed to happen."
Speaking of "trusting the wisdom and good judgment of those chosen to govern them":-
"We know those who did this did so in the name of Islam" - Phoney B-liar, on the afternoon of "77".
At which time, there was absolutely NO "evidence" whatsover except a faked web-site attributing the attacks to a previously unknown comically named group. But this IS clear evidence of B-liar following the script that people like Efraim Halevi are writing, like a dog being wagged by its tail.
The Police investigation has been rushed through (with all those car explosions, etc) to its amateurish conclusions by its steerers at the "top", to try and stem the tide of growing evidence pointing to who really did it, and put the skeptics on the defensive.
Richard Jones the bus "bomber" witness (one and only) is described as an IT consultant. Can anyone please help in finding out some background about the bus "bomber" witness Richard Jones and answering the following questions please? Who does he work for, what are his connections? Was Richard Jones a consultant for ESCW (Executive Service Corps of Washington)? Is ESCW connected to IESC (International Executive Service Corps) which has amongst its Advisory Council members George Soros and Senator Joseph Lieberman? Has Richard Jones ever worked for Online Business Systems?
Or do we have to simply swallow the propaganda that every person presented to us as an "official hero TM" is a hero simply because the MSM say they are, without establishing this for a fact through impartial inquiry? Without putting in any work for ourselves because the MSM have their story straight already??
Remember, the government beast (and its propaganda vehicles) isn't going to inquire about the truth for you. It's going to lie, spin, twist, turn upon itself every which way it can and cover everything under a pile of emotional twaddle which will not serve to bring true justice to the victims of the London "77" attacks, and indeed will obstruct any unarguable & legitimate attempts to remove from positions of "authority" and bring to trial as war-criminals, those who are truly responsible for the London mass-murder; the Iraq mass-murder; the Afghanistan mass-murder; the Madrid mass-murder; the New York mass-murder; the Oklahoma City mass-murder, etc, etc, ETC.
Already there are many unanswered, even completely unaddressed questions, such as for example the reports of two men being shot dead in the Canary Wharf area around 10:30am on Thursday "77".
It would not be amiss to point out that there are approximately 8,000 possible witnesses, some of whom could be approached by "accredited" journalists and interviewed, since the New Zealand Herald report on 09-07-05 states that 8,000 people in the HSBC Tower were ordered to not look outside their windows for six hours.
How hard is it for an "accredited" journalist to establish if this is true or not please? Is it too much trouble to pick up the phone even? Are you really in credit, or are you in debt after all? In bondage to your evil Satanic NWO masters, responsible for spiritual wickedness in high places?
It is highly unlikely that "actors" would not be employed in the DRILL to play the role of "baddies". But we should also very seriously consider the very real possibility that actors, not necessarily of the "stage" or "screen" variety, may have been employed in a follow-up role for this murderous False Flag operation, and might be numbered amongst the "witnesses" who have given statements to the media and "leads" to the police.
So what better place to start making absolutely sure that this is not the case, than with Mr. Richard Jones himself, the ONLY named "witness" at the moment who has actually come forward to say that he has seen one of the FRAMED "bombers" doing something which looked suspicious?
In Sherlock Holmes' "The Silver Blaze", the dog that didn't bark at night was the give away as to whom was responsible for the crime. It was a clever deduction... yet not a "rule".
It's not a "rule" because masters can also get their dogs to bark whenever they choose to.
And the barking is being heard loud... if not clear... from one "dog".
Below are some questions for Mr. Richard Jones, the MSM & the Police, and indeed for everyone to consider if they will. Please feel free to add your own questions to these.
(1.) Where are the eleven so far silent fellow-passengers who all got off the bus just in time along with Mr. Jones? Why aren't they coming forward and corroborating Mr. Jones' account?
(2.) Or who invented that fable about eleven other passengers getting off if Mr. Jones was not responsible for it?
(3.) How come Mr. Jones, as well as the eleven others, all got so "annoyed" because of a person's fidgeting, instead of feeling concerned or worried, or indeed afraid?
(4.) Or how come Mr. Jones alone got suspicious and failed to warn anybody else on the bus and simply stepped off at his so-called "destination" to save his own skin?
(5.) Which bus-stop was it that both Mr. Jones and the person he suspects was the "bomber", got the bus from?
(6.) Why was it that around six passengers left the bus through the back door and another six left by the front door? Logically thinking, would the six near the front of the bus have been "annoyed" by the person's fidgeting at the back of the bus?
As Monsieur Neary in Close Encounters of the Third Kind, demanded: "who ARE you (these) people!".
(7.) Or did the eccentric eleven never exist?
(8.) Why was it that Mr. Jones and the eleven "lucky" passengers preferred to get off the bus at Tavistock Square, which was not their destination, rather than put up with a little "annoyance". Indeed, why did they not ASK the "bomber" what he was doing and if he was alright? If he needed any help maybe?
Remember, they were just "annoyed" with him, not scared.
(9). Or, as the other story goes, if Mr. Jones got suspicious, and was convinced the "bomber" was setting the bomb... then why did he bail out on everybody else without even a warning?
So much for a hero...
(10.) Have you ever heard of twelve passengers getting off a bus before they arrived at their destination because all of them were "annoyed" with one passenger, until it "happened" in this case?
(11.) Or indeed, have you ever heard of an innocent man getting off the bus at his destination-detonation as he claims?
(12.) Why, if they were twelve, and the "bomber" only one, did they not ask the driver of the bus to ask the one person who was "annoying" them all, to please get off the bus?
(13.) Or indeed, why did they not ask him themselves to get off the bus, since they were the ones complaining of how this person "annoyed" them?
(14.) Does the bus-driver remember either Mr. Jones or the person Mr. Jones says was the "suicide-bomber", getting into the bus? Again, why hasn't anyone else come forward to support Mr. Jones' accusation?
(15.) Was Richard Jones ever on the bus? Since the contradictory statements attributed to him only concur on one account - that he saw a "suicide-bomber" on the bus?
(16.) Finally, as we can see, all these media reports paint an extremely non-sensical and contradictory picture of Mr. Jones and his reasoning, if not his motives. So when can we expect Mr. Jones to clear all these conundrums up?
If he's granting the interviews, he must be reading them, if not, he really is the fool he's being made out to be by the presstitutes.
Or is he happy with the result?
Time to start questioning the "official heroes TM", or for Mr. Richard Jones to swiftly & strongly denounce how the media are painting him - like a stupid brat who delights in telling different fables to different people, thinking they will never come together and join...the...dots.
Do not say that the struggle gains nothing,
and that the labour and the wounds are in vain,
and that the enemy does not faint or fail,
and that as things have been, they remain;
for whilst the tired waves seem to be vainly
breaking and seem no painful inch to gain;
far back through creeks and inlets making,
comes silent flooding in the main.