Thursday, July 21, 2005

London Bombers -Did They Board at Luton?

We are still waiting for the U.K. authorities to release a CCTV photo they claim to have, showing the alleged London bombers at King's Cross station before they split up. I suspect we will be a long time waiting.

In the meantime, let's take a closer look at the CCTV image of the four suspects entering Luton station supposedly to catch a London-bound train and wreak carnage.

There is an interesting anomaly in the photo which was released --a halo effect around two of the figures we can see. Sometimes these halos can appear as a side-effect of transferring an image from video to computer.

However it could also be because the four individuals have been photoshopped into the image --using earlier individual surveilance photos of the four alleged bombers. For such surveilance photos to exist, we assume these were pre-chosen patsies.

To illustrate, we removed the four from the photo -which is difficult. But, adding them into an empty CCTV image from earlier on the 7th July would be very easy.

Speaking of empty, it also interesting that apart from these four, nobody else is visible in the street -despite the time being 7:20am, well into the buzy morning rush.

Once you realize that the four may never have boarded any train for London -some alternative versions of the events of that day might occur to you.

See Also:
Evidence Luton CCTV Image is Fake
How Black Ops Staged the London Bombings


Anonymous Anonymous said...

interesting research

6:21 pm  
Blogger irishdrifter said...

I did some looking into this myself.

I saw the halo's you refer to. There is a distinct blurring around each person. 3 of the faces have been deliberately air-brushed out. The only distinguishable face is ruck sack guy. And thats not who its supposed to be either.

Also if you look behind the you will see reflections. The reflections dont match up!

7:52 pm  
Blogger irishdrifter said...

Fintan a most urgent matter, please excuse my thread busting.


8:52 pm  
Anonymous mzrti said...

Another interesting point to add, on the 7/7, in the U.K and N. Ireland, we were in the middle of a mini heat wave. So why were there puddles on the ground and the men wearing thick padded jackets. Just a thought.

10:27 pm  
Blogger lukery said...

fintan, while you are playing with that photo, take a closer look at face of the guy on the left (the bus bomber).

it looks as though his sunglasses were painted on - it looks odd when you start zooming in on it.
ive blown up the pic a bit here, but its a bit fuzzy. it looks like theres something hanging down from his left lense - is that just bad photoshopping?

12:46 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well that little stunt in London today pushed its little agenda ... the patriot act just got permanently reauthorized ... at least 14 of the 16 provisions due to expire this year. Way to go Karl, Tony, Dick, George and Richard ... Good fucking job! May your mothers continue to suck cocks in hell!!!

1:39 am  
Blogger irishdrifter said...

Please look at these two links.

There is another version of the Luton photo.

And guess what? There is the crosshairs of a [police surveillance?] camera clearly visible.



1:58 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Since this is from cctv footage they must have a sequence of images.
This is something that could be cleared up easily... if they so wished.

11:31 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

One thing for sure it was raining.

9:54 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bonkers conspiraloonery of the first order!

I suggest you see a doctor or consider taking up a career as a children's sci fi writer or something.

10:06 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the buffoon going on about the 'puddles on the ground': it rained overnight and in the morning.

You wanna get out more chum.

10:37 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

People like you are a danger to the rest of us, always looking for an excuse or some bullshit conspiracy.

You should be sectioned under the mental health act for being a bunch of pointless retards.

11:41 am  
Blogger irishdrifter said...

What time you get off duty pig?

You here to defend your amateurish photoshopping. What, did you get a bollicking for not getting it right?

My 5 year old said it was a fake.

Whos'the buffoon I wonder?

2:22 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Too much "mistakes" to be a fake

8:00 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I took a copy of the photo myself and inlarged it and found a big give away , check this out!!!! the guy with the white cap on, behind him is three rails the bottom rail goes throught this left arm! its fake.

1:43 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No, it does not. His left arm is not hanging down but is across his torso. You have mistaken the edge of the wall of the building behind for the side of Khan's body. If you examine the clearer pic linked here now, you will see that the lowest bar ends at about the point where the edge of Khan's body would be. It does NOT pass in front of his body.

1:15 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

the guy with the white cap on, behind him is three rails The upper rail goes on his face !

The picture is a fake !

12:34 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

My letter to Citizens for Legitimate Government & the Center for Research on Globalisation:

The surveillance camera footage (SIC / "image") DOES appear to be
doctored, however not in the manner specified (by

The claim about the railing appearing in front of the
figure's arm is flat out wrong. The elbow is bent and
the forearm extends upward and behind the head of the
figure in the center.

To assume that those perpetrating these crimes are
incompetent is not going to help establish
credibility. These are master manipulators, not high
school kids.

However, ALL of the figures in the image appear to
have been superimposed there, probably to establish
their location at a specific point of the timeline

All the figuress seem to have incorrect contrast
levels, because the lighting conditions of the
originals do not match the lighting on the street
(which was probably empty). These images with too
much contrast jump out as being fraudulent

Several figures have a white faded out halo effect on
the right side of their bodies. This is a sloppy cut
and paste indicator (not as sloppy as the alleged
railing claim, but quite sloppy nonetheless).

The figure on the left seems to be in the wrong place
to enter the doorway. He's too close to the far
doorway edge, so that he'd collide if he kept on that

The sneakers on the man in the middle are too bright,
compared to other "white" parts of the street. And
why do they reflect so much off of concrete?

The shadows appear faked also. The man near the
doorway has a much larger shadow than the others, and
it looks drawn in.

I would not be surprised if the original source of the
people in the video was from an indoor camera, rather
than outdoors.


John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State at:

I would add that the white pixels on the superimposed figures are whiter than the surrounding whites of the street. As for the sneaker, it should be darker, not brighter as it should be in shadow there. This gives away the fakery, if you bother to zoom in and take a close look for yourself.

See this article also, about the bombs having been under the floor:

12:09 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In the background of the London bomber pic which was also published in the July 25 Time Magazine edition, if those were mirror images of some of the so-called "bombers," wouldn't those images be the reverse of what we see from the front? I don't see them as shadows myself, they look like faked mirror images.

5:10 am  

Post a Comment

<< Home