/** Tools */

11 August 2005

Another 7/7 Survivor Supports MetroNet Power Surge Story

Quoting from The Antagonist's own LiveBlog of the events of 7 July 2005, and picking up on something that escaped even The Antagonist's watchful eye for rather longer than it should have done, the survivor account of Justin at pfff.co.uk:
18:47: Another eye-witness account of the Edgware Road incident citing electrical malfunction as the source of the explosions (via Nosemonkey):
The train left the tracks and started to rumble down the tunnel. It was incapable of stopping and just rolled on. A series of explosions followed as if tube electric motor after motor was exploding.

Each explosion shook the train in the air and seems to make it land at a lower point.

I fell to the ground like most people, scrunched up in a ball in minimize injury. At this point I wondered if the train would ever stop, I thought "please make it stop", but it kept going. In the end I just wished that it didn't hit something and crush. It didn't.

When the train came to a standstill people were screaming, but mainly due to panic as the carriage was rapidly filling with smoke and the smell of burning motors was giving clear clues of fire.

1. What was the train doing leaving the tracks before a series of explosions occurred? Of course, we all know it's not the first time MetroNet have derailed tube trains, so it is interesting that the train is reported as being off the rails before any explosions were heard.

2. "A series of explosions followed [the train leaving the tracks] as if tube electric motor after motor was exploding". Which is a pretty accurate description of what might occur based on MetroNet's original story of power surges.

3. "The smell of burning motors." Yet again supporting MetroNet's original power surge that the world now finds so difficult to believe.

How much more evidence supporting the original MetroNet power surge story of 7 July does anyone need before anyone dares to investigate it further?

A number of mainstream media sources are regular readers of The Antagonist's blog, yet despite the huge volume of evidence that gives lie to the notion of a terrorist attack on London, no mainstream media source has yet dared even hint that the power surge story might be true.

The Antagonist has a sneaking suspicion that the recalcitrance of the mainstream media to pick up on the original, and admittedly rather less exciting, story of yet another fatal accident on the Underground so far down the line would be to admit to the world that, for over a month now, they have done nothing other than spin lies, rumour, speculation and conjecture to create a world of hysteria into which far too many people have been led.

Then factor in to the equation that if the media did decide to pursue the incredulous notion that MetroNet were telling the truth when they announced to passengers, and the world, that there had been power surges on the Underground, not only do the media destroy their own already tarnished and practically worthless reputations, but they also take with them the rapidly diminishing credibility and reputations of the Metropolitan Police and the government that hides behind them.

It'll be a cold day in hell before that happens. Luckily, all the evidence is out there for the rest of us to decide for ourselves that something just isn't it right with the 'official' media version of events on 7 July.

1 comment:

The Antagonist said...

Jeff Porter, a train driver of 18 years whose Circle Line train was hit by the blast that tore through a westbound Tube heading to Paddington on 7 July is quoted in a BBC story, I'm lucky to be here, says driver:

"He said he saw a bright flash but did not hear the explosion as it shattered his cab windscreen.

"'I was coming into Edgware Road station, as I do every morning,'" said Mr Porter, who has driven a Tube for 18 years.

"It was like it happened in slow motion in my mind. As the other train passed me, my windscreen shattered.

"There was smoke and dust everywhere. I was confused and just wondered what had happened. I didn't hear a bang or a boom."'

"I didn't hear a bang or a boom."

What sort of new ear-friendly bombs are these then?

Close enough to see the blast that destroyed the windscreen immediately in front of him but not close enough to hear it.

Maybe there was no blast, just a power surge?