No Video of the 3 Bombers Inside the London Subway Cars before they blew up?
Global Research | 27.07.2005 19:30
The Police claim the bus videos malfunctioned, but made no similar claim about the video cameras in the Underground train cars. The Muslim men are claimed to have ridden from Luton to King's Cross where they split up to take separate trains. I've also read it takes about 25 minutes to ride from Luton station to where the bombs were detonated.
Therefore, there MUST be some 25 minutes continuous video of first four men, riding from Luton, then video of each (supposed) "Muslim" Bomber, seated with his rucksack on each of the 3 separate Underground cars, riding from King's Cross - to where the 3 bombs exploded SIMULTANEOUSLY!
Therefore, there MUST be some 25 minutes continuous video of first four men, riding from Luton, then video of each (supposed) "Muslim" Bomber, seated with his rucksack on each of the 3 separate Underground cars, riding from King's Cross - to where the 3 bombs exploded SIMULTANEOUSLY!
No Video of the 3 Bombers Inside the London Subway Cars before they blew up?
by Dick Fojut
July 25, 2005
GlobalResearch.ca
Editor's note
At present, the London underground has an analogue video network and video transmission at 180 stations. Confirmed by new reports, there are close to two thousand video cameras which monitor London's Underground and mainline rail stations.
It is estimated that "the average Briton is caught on various cameras up to 300 times on a normal day." (The Age, 8 July 2005).
The key issue raised in this commentary refers to videocameras inside the underground carriages. In most European metro systems, the trains are equipped with a videowatch installation, with video cameras inside each carriage. The driver of the train is able to see inside each of the carriages, and the digital video files would be available to police investigators.
EVERY London bus and Underground train car has multiple Video Cameras!
The Police claim the bus videos malfunctioned, but made no similar claim about the video cameras in the Underground train cars. The Muslim men are claimed to have ridden from Luton to King's Cross where they split up to take separate trains. I've also read it takes about 25 minutes to ride from Luton station to where the bombs were detonated.
Therefore, there MUST be some 25 minutes continuous video of first four men, riding from Luton, then video of each (supposed) "Muslim" Bomber, seated with his rucksack on each of the 3 separate Underground cars, riding from King's Cross - to where the 3 bombs exploded SIMULTANEOUSLY!
If the London Police CANNOT produce those videos they SHOULD possess, the accused 4 men, 3 supposedly with rucksack bombs, were NOT on the Underground train cars, did NOT detonate bombs! And the Police are LYING.
The 3 young men from Leeds apparently were innocent "patsies" used in a "False Flag" phoney Blair Government instigated "terrorist" attack! They weren't suicide bombers, or deceived dupes. They WEREN'T on the trains!
Instead of 3 falsely accused Muslim "patsies," either unidentified "others" must have carried on and detonated the bombs - OR the bombs were ALREADY concealed under seats, or UNDER the subway cars - and detonated by REMOTE CONTROL!
by Dick Fojut
July 25, 2005
GlobalResearch.ca
Editor's note
At present, the London underground has an analogue video network and video transmission at 180 stations. Confirmed by new reports, there are close to two thousand video cameras which monitor London's Underground and mainline rail stations.
It is estimated that "the average Briton is caught on various cameras up to 300 times on a normal day." (The Age, 8 July 2005).
The key issue raised in this commentary refers to videocameras inside the underground carriages. In most European metro systems, the trains are equipped with a videowatch installation, with video cameras inside each carriage. The driver of the train is able to see inside each of the carriages, and the digital video files would be available to police investigators.
EVERY London bus and Underground train car has multiple Video Cameras!
The Police claim the bus videos malfunctioned, but made no similar claim about the video cameras in the Underground train cars. The Muslim men are claimed to have ridden from Luton to King's Cross where they split up to take separate trains. I've also read it takes about 25 minutes to ride from Luton station to where the bombs were detonated.
Therefore, there MUST be some 25 minutes continuous video of first four men, riding from Luton, then video of each (supposed) "Muslim" Bomber, seated with his rucksack on each of the 3 separate Underground cars, riding from King's Cross - to where the 3 bombs exploded SIMULTANEOUSLY!
If the London Police CANNOT produce those videos they SHOULD possess, the accused 4 men, 3 supposedly with rucksack bombs, were NOT on the Underground train cars, did NOT detonate bombs! And the Police are LYING.
The 3 young men from Leeds apparently were innocent "patsies" used in a "False Flag" phoney Blair Government instigated "terrorist" attack! They weren't suicide bombers, or deceived dupes. They WEREN'T on the trains!
Instead of 3 falsely accused Muslim "patsies," either unidentified "others" must have carried on and detonated the bombs - OR the bombs were ALREADY concealed under seats, or UNDER the subway cars - and detonated by REMOTE CONTROL!
Global Research
Homepage:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=FOJ20050725&articleId=734
Comments
Hide the following 36 comments
More boring conspirisy theorys...
27.07.2005 20:10
Couldn't you at least make in a bit more interesting? Maybe you could include some Alies and the CIA next time. Or how about Elvis and Tupac?
LK
I could be wrong about this
27.07.2005 20:30
sceptic
yaaaaaaaaawn
27.07.2005 20:43
i switched off the minute i read that baloney.
P
no vidceo
27.07.2005 21:03
the journey from Luton to Kings Cross would have taken place on an above ground train not an underground train. these trains do not on thw whole have video cameras on them.
bad call - sorry.
trainspotter
Blair's Story is a Conspiracy Theory
27.07.2005 21:10
Not unrealistic at all. Bliar, Bush, PNAC, etc. LIED to us about the dire threat posed by Saddam's WMD, all the while knowing that "the facts were being fixed", in order to start an illegal war of aggression for profit which slaughtered over a hundred thousand innocent men, women, and children.
Suddenly you think they're above another LIE, in order to distract from the documentary proof of their LIES, as words like "INVESTIGATION, IMPEACHMENT, and PROSECUTION" grow in both popularity and volume?
Last week's "incidents" are were so clearly designed to place "evidence" into the hands of investigators, planted devices which would point supposedly to one of the next PNAC targets for Naked Aggression.
And the Brazillian man shot SEVEN TIMES IN THE HEAD had obviously witnessed something which would blow this thing wide open.
"I only read about 20% of it but still...."
No, you read the whole thing, otherwise you wouldn't have gotten to the Theory part, since the first part pertains to the glaringly MISSING EVIDENCE, which would exist if the Government's Conspiracy Theory was true.
This was the exact ommission which caused so many to see that "911" was also a False Flag attack, carried out in order to kick-start these wars and this agenda desired by the Neo-Fascists who have seized power in the USA and, apparently, Britain as well.
"Couldn't you at least make in a bit more interesting?"
It IS interesting. And compelling, given that the evidence cited is missing, the Government's fable, unproven.
"Maybe you could include some ..."
Funny you should mention that. It's called DISINFORMATION, and in employing it consistently in regards to the critical questions surrounding 7/7, you only make yourself glaringly obvious.
SO WHERE IS THE VIDEO?
Don't Fall for the PsyOps
hysterical ravings won't help
27.07.2005 21:23
Sham
Conspiracy Theorists are in the pay of MI6/FBI/Mossad
27.07.2005 21:52
These conspiracy theories like "faked photos" and "missing CCTV" are themselves a conspiracy by the Security Services to discredit Indymedia and anyone else who speaks out against the government, by making people look like paranoid nutters and diverting people's energies they hope to undermine alternative media. So when someone new visits Indymedia they will see these nutty conspiracy theories and not take Indymedia seriously!
So fuck off all you spooks your cover has been blown!
Spook Buster
Please Be Patient
27.07.2005 22:31
to fix the facts
to frame Iran
for the attacks.
T. Bliar
Homepage:
http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=426&row=0
SO WHERE IS THE VIDEO ...?
27.07.2005 22:59
sceptic
the little dog laughed to see such sport...
27.07.2005 23:28
Hey maybe the bus never existed. Maybe we don't exist. Maybe we live in David Icke's dreams.
Maybe you should seek help.
mmmmmaaaaaaaaaaagggggggooooooo <- aim here!
Video?
27.07.2005 23:43
Also, every single stop and station is monitored by security cameras, as Englend is the most highly-surveilled country on the planet.
The point is that video evidence doesn't seem to exist, in any of the places where it should if Bliar's Conspiracy Theory were to be true.
Don't Fall for the PsyOps
Producing evidence
28.07.2005 01:01
Just to try and spread some sanity -
i) The police are under no obligation to produce evidence as they find it. It would be very bad if they were under such an obligation as all sorts of mis-carriages of justice would result. Evidence is gathered, the police decide whether they have a case and then the Crown Prosecution Service decides whether to prosecute it. Supposing you had been on the train that day, and your image was on CCTV.....that would be evidence you were linked to the bombing - surely you would want the police to investigate further before publishing this!
ii) While I don't deny the existence of black flag operations, without any evidence you have no grounds for suggesting this was one. By saying things like this most people will understandably just tune you out. It would be more constructive and realistic to argue along the lines of the bombings being Blair's fault because of his support of faith schools or something along those lines. Or in the case of 9/11 that the States funded and set up Osama Bin Laden - not that they flew the bloody planes themselves. You may have all sorts of problems with the security services but surely you don't think they're stupid? I'm sure they would've like to plant some WMDs in Iraq, but they realised that the risks of being caught and the resulting fallout made it untenable.
Stewart
Conspiracy theories etc.
28.07.2005 01:56
Indymedia *cannot* be expected to open the minds of everyone who uncritically accepts the establishment line on things by catering to their preconceived or received ideas about what is "sensible".
Everyone acknowledges that there have been false flag operations in the past - and if it wasn't for those who looked for proof of absence of the necessary evidence for the cover ups then, justice would never have been done.
Obviously a lot of IM posters are hyperbolic / illiterate / irrational / biased. But hey, that's the British Left for you!! At least they aren't all wretched, gullible, deferent idiots parroting the language of press conferences. The real value of IM is that it's a forum for free speech, not whether it can compete with Radio f******* 4 or the Guardian.
anon
Focus Is Interesting
28.07.2005 02:31
Certain people think the same Government that knowingly LIED to them about the dire threat posed by Saddam's "vast arsenal of WMD" shouldn't have to produce evidence to support the Conspiracy Theories, which they will then use to manipulate the public and possibly justify further illegal warfare, but the people questioning their unproven Conspiracy Theory should ...
Who's here on a mission ... ?
Don't Fall for the PsyOps
question from somewere else
28.07.2005 02:36
WERE?
WHEN?
WHAT?
WHY,
is the question,
dont forget about it.
Wrong questions ever lead to something insane,
thats for sure.
a german troll
askin
Government must substantiate claims
28.07.2005 06:42
The police can't avoid hypothesing as they follow leads in an investigation. Sometimes dogmatic thinking might impede an investigation. The police are human too and they do try to assess and improve their performance. They shouldn't be expounding their ideas willy nilly, but they do need to disseminate some information in order to gather more evidence. According to our principals of justice our trials, including the result of police investigation are normally made a matter of public record - this is different from theories presented by the government which are often aimed at the widest possible public.
The situation with the government is entirely different. It is politically unacceptable for governments to throw wild hypothesis around. I expect our politicians to turn their ideas into well founded theories. Of course this leaves debate. I'm extremely unhappy with the quality of political debate and argument in the UK and many other countries.
I guess the police are often an enemy because of bad law. Particularly I think drug law, which crimminalizes huge sections of the population. A lot of people simply won't get involved with the police on minor offences because of these bad laws. However in this case I think this police seem to be doing a good job at fulfilling a very necessary function.
Whoever you are if you put something forward as a theory then I want to see evidence. If you're hypothesising (where all theories start) then thats fine - just don't pretend its something diifferent - you turn a useful cognitive tool into nothing but mumbo jumbo.
Stewart
Stewart
28.07.2005 08:11
You see the people with an agenda are really, really stupid and all they have for reference material is some channel 5 movie scripts and an Andy McNab novel.
They know 99.9% of people are gullible sheep (except the 30-odd people that read prisonplanet.con) and won't ever question authority. Including authority itself. They know fine well that they can easily order the police, spooks etc to cover up and absurdly obviously black op because they are all dehumanised drones with no sense of morality or justice.
Unless people apply the same logic as the bible code to any information as it emerges we'll all be drugged and chipped in our sleep. This is a police state just like Saudi or the Soviet Union- if it weren't so IM wouldn't keep hiding all these really plausible reports about Operation Half-arsed.
moonlit magoo
Now WHY couldn't I WORK that OUT myself?
28.07.2005 09:30
Let's try some logic. The fact that something is possible doesn't mean that it is indeed the case. The fact that one group may well in some ways benefit from a situation or play that situation to their advantage doesn't mean that they have instigated it. Is this complicated?
Using CAPITAL LETTERS as if it's just so INCREDIBLY OBVIOUS that what you SAY is TRUE and anyone that doesn't get it is a FOOL or a STOOGE does a great deal to undermine a hypothesis that is so INTELLECTUALLY FLIMSY that it really can't stand ANY more pressure.
I don't know any more than anyone else here who planned these bombings or why. I do know that there are many people in the world who have both the desire and the capability to mount attacks like these in the cause that I will broadly call Islamist extremism.
By your logic, the IRA is more likely to be a front organisation of MI5 comprising mostly of "patsies" and agents provocateurs rather than a genuine terrorist organisation that are prepared to fight, and if necessary die, for the cause of a united Ireland.
But then what would I know? The police just pay me to come here and make sarcy comments to further their sinister hidden agenda.
Zorro
Good grief
28.07.2005 09:30
The police have only released CCTV etc images so far for identification purposes. They're there to help in the hunt for dangerous murderers. They're not there to satisfy the gruesome demand for lots of pictures and they're not there to make people intent on spreading bullshit happy.
I would not expect them or want them to release hours and hours of CCTV footage. Doing so, of course, would leave them open to the charge of prejudicing any trial.
Chatterton
Chatterton
e-mail:
chatterton@hotmail.com
Zorro
28.07.2005 10:00
I mean to say what could the muslims of the world possibly have against us??? We brought freedom, democracy and amoebic dyssentry to Iraq, a new set of heroin warlords to Aghanistan, supply saudi with all the hardware to kill and torture its dissidents, and support Israel with an illigal occupation and war crimes. What MORE can we do for them!!!
It must be the government, there's no other logical explantion! Besides, Aled Jones said so and he's dead brainy and makes lots of money selling tosh to loons.
hopping mad conspiracy loon magoo
MI5 inspired drivel
28.07.2005 10:04
How do we know that the left is not being led down blind alleys by the secret state propagating all these bizarre half baked "theories", in an attempt to discredit us?
>>Not unrealistic at all. Bliar, Bush, PNAC, etc. LIED to us about the dire threat posed by >>Saddam's WMD, all the while knowing that "the facts were being fixed", in order to start >>an illegal war of aggression for profit which slaughtered over a hundred thousand innocent >>men, women, and children.
The WMD claims were untrue (and propagated against the feelings of the secret state, it seems), but WMD was only one plank of the case for war, which also involved the undoubted fact that Saddam was a brutal dictator. Or do we think that all the people Saddam killed were really killed by the CIA, or that it was really the British army that invaded Kuwait? It's also the case that Saddam had used chemical and other weapons (we know this because British and American and other firms sold the stuff to him), and certainly wouldn't have been opposed to developing them. One can oppose the war while acknowledging all the above.
>>And the Brazillian man shot SEVEN TIMES IN THE HEAD had obviously witnessed >>something which would blow this thing wide open.
Yeah, you see you use words like "obviously" and "clearly" and "apparently", but you don't actually have any grounds for such judgements. At all. As far as I can see, you're just making it up.
>>the first part pertains to the glaringly MISSING EVIDENCE, which would exist if the >>Government's Conspiracy Theory was true.
You haven't actually established that there is "missing evidence". All you've said is that the police have not put all the CCTV footage in their possession into the public domain, which is not the same thing at all.
Chatterton
Chatterton
At least some people have brains
28.07.2005 10:32
It's easy to start out with partisan prejudices on either side and make all kinds of assertions that we don't have evidence for. Of course we should be open to all possibilities and where the facts as we know them change, we should be prepared to change our minds. In the meantime, we have to make the best judgements we can based on what we know. To say that the most likely explanation given the evidence we have is our best attempt at understanding a situation doesn't imply that we have discounted all other explanations out of hand.
In the loon corner we now also have Dr Mohammed Naseem, Chairman (as I write) of Birmingham Central Mosque. Given his doctorate (from where and in what?) and his job, he is presumably an educated and intelligent man.
However, he also believes, and I hope I don't misrepresent him, that it's likely that the four dead suspects in the 7/7 bombings are innocents who have been targeted due to their race or their faith.
Dr Naseem, you could be right. But if you are, they are the four unluckiest guys no longer alive.
Having met in Luton early in the morning with their rucksacks packed for a healthy day rambling across the capital, their plans come to naught as two hours later they are all separately killed by explosions in different places. Of course it's possible, but it certainly isn't likely.
I should declare my prejudices against people like Dr Naseem. Not because he's a Muslim but because he's an idiot. Someone who starts from a political perspective and disregards the facts and most likely explanations about an event in favour of a hypothesis that is possible but extremely unlikely really should be relegated to spouting conspiraloon drivel on Indymedia rather than occupying a position in public life that clearly needs a great deal of sensitivity, discrimination and rational judgement. If Dr Naseem is a respected teacher, which I believe is one role of the imam, I hope I don't bump into too many of his students.
Zorro
chatterton is wrong
28.07.2005 12:31
and have YOU established that there is evidence for blaming muslims for jul 7?
is so,where is it?
righter
Obviously
28.07.2005 14:52
Like the case of the unity of the mainstream media when referring to the "apparent suicide" of Dr. David Kelly. So "clearly" and "obviously" an "apparent" suicide that no proper inquest (very unsual under anglo-saxon law) was supposed to be required. The Bliar-ordered political show-trial (Hutton inquiry) leading to the dumbing-down of the finding that Bliar as usuaul had lied (found to have chaired meetings on 'how to control Kelly' he previously had claimed to have no knowledge of), the shooting of the messenger (the enmasculation of the BBC) and the vindication of endless "spin", were deemed to be sufficient response.
unspun
righter
28.07.2005 15:11
So, I expect the Palestinians who regularly blow themselves and civillians up are just stooges too? The raids in Saudi were carried out by some governmental conspiracy (actually in Saudi that'd probably be half true).
Prove that Elvis is dead. Prove there was a haulocaust. Prove that crop circles aren't made by flying saucers. Prove that Oswald didn't kill JFK. There are scores of loons out there asking the same questions.
The UK inteeligence community was pissed of at the dodgy dossier. Germany called Bush a liar. Italy is hopping mad at the CIA for shooting one of its agents and carrying out "extraordinary renditions"... and you are trying to tell us that they could get away with faking terrorist attacks and keep it quiet? The spooks, police and MOD can't keep there mouths shut about so many things at the moment; why are there no reliable grumblings happening?
Now even if we entertain the concept of an NWO conspiracy. The first question that crosses my mind is: why would they need to get their hands dirty at all?
But hey, it's not good enough to state we are reaping what we have sown. You need your hate figures there pulling the trigger themselves.
Life isn't Scooby Doo.
magoo
spooks, police and MOD
28.07.2005 18:56
Be patient, Mr. Magoo. Maybe this is why the seemingly well-informed and -resourced right-wing-apologist ilk around here seem so concerned. But rest assured: The majority, surely, of the normally reasonably respectable professionals to whom you refer (on this or that side of the water) would not normally, willingly, informedly, official-secrets-act-not-withstanding, allow themselves to become part of, much less condone or by informed action do anything to support, what in this case would undoubtedly have to judged to be acts not only criminal but also of treason against the sovereignty of the British people and their invited guests.
In this context, I would be interested to hear your opinion on "spin-doctors" or similar interpretators/manipulators professionally employed by supposedly 'democratic' governments to misinform, disinform or simply not inform at all?
unspun
Alistair Knobhead-Campbell
28.07.2005 20:43
Having worked in a related industry, I suspect that in the UK PR is basically the emporer's new clothes.. or perhaps a nostrum for the desperate. I personaly have encountered few folk (including mail & telegraph readers) that don't think most politicians are lying sacks of shit.
So why do they keep voting them in? What's the alternative? No right-minded person would give half the numpties that post here an ounce of power, let alone control of the MOD.
I think all that PR does in the UK is stop the haemorrage of the converted being fatal.
Do the d-notice comintee issue some dodgy decisions. Sure they do.
Are we in the vice like grip of Stalinist/Hitlarian propaganda: far from it, and travel further all the time.
The War against Terror[ism] has shot itself in the foot and I hear the same Mail & Telegraph readers discussing topic that they would've dismissed 5 years ago as paranoia.
Just because the average person thinks that anarchists are twats and no different to the BNP, doesn't mean to say they are blind.
magoo
travel further all the time
29.07.2005 00:26
This is why freedom of expression, real freedom, real expression, really for all, IMHO, is so essential.
"The War against Terror[ism] has shot itself in the foot and I hear the same Mail & Telegraph readers discussing topic that they would've dismissed 5 years ago as paranoia."
Well observed. Indeed: There's a sense of incongruity. Something doesn't quite add up.
"Just because the average person thinks that anarchists are twats and no different to the BNP, doesn't mean to say they are blind."
The average person is, of course, mis- or mal-informed.
Thank you sir. Please continue.
unspun
Has the author(s) been persuaded of error?
29.07.2005 00:37
I'll tacitly accept all your assumptions. The crux of your argument is put forward quite clearly (in your own words):
"If the London Police CANNOT produce those videos they SHOULD possess, the accused 4 men, 3 supposedly with rucksack bombs, were NOT on the Underground train cars, did NOT detonate bombs! And the Police are LYING."
This is absurd because the ability to produce the video evidence is actually determining the arrangement of matter in the past. It means that if the police are sitting in their office viewing these videos and then decide to burn them that people would be plucked out of space time. Would other video evidence, photographic and anecdotal evidence possessed by other parties suddenly fall into accord with the new reality?
Is this the start of a campaign against police control of all space / time? What is it that is so special about the evidence possessed by police that it can have this effect? I've got a tree I want removing from my garden so I went and took a photo of it, came back inside and carefully deleted the photo. The bloody tree is still there. Maybe I can persuade the British police to come and take a photo of it. Then my veggie garden will have done better last season and my larder will suddenly be brimming with carrots and other goodies.
I'm pretty sure that I'd share a lot of the sense of injustices in the world that you do. That's actually why (apart from the obvious amusement) I'm being critical of this idea - so that you can strengthen your argument.....or switch to an argument that will hold some water. It seems to me that other posters, like magoo, feel simmilarly. It is devisive and weakens your cause when you simply lump people like me into a group of right-wing apologists. In fact I simply don't subscribe to this simplistic left / right wing dichotomy that people keep referring to. I know that some of my ideas would be considered left wing and some right wing. I don't consider them either. I'm not a bloody anarchist either....if you insist on making me an ist then you can count me as a Stewartist. I have been practicing Stewartism for the last 33 years and have successfully resisted attempts at indoctrination from the Anglican church, the Mormon church, the conservative party and the socialist worker people (worse than limpets at a demo, I'm not your man - you force me back into the mountains). I guess my liberal parents probably got to me a bit!....but I'm not one of those either...honest.
Stewart
...
29.07.2005 09:48
More than North Korea? Good grief. I must say, I have never seen a CCTV camera north of Berwick.
==> Life isn't Scooby Doo.
Although it does sound as if a slightly more lethal version of Scooby Doo was played out in Stockwell Station.
Alec
Eh?
29.07.2005 10:00
Righter:
>>and have YOU established that there is evidence for blaming muslims for jul 7?
Er, who, apart from the likes of the BNP is "blaming muslims"?
I'm curious about what motivates people who deny that the victims of imperialism might actually develop autonomous modes of resistance to imperialism, and that these modes might include both progressive forms of resistence and reactionary forms of resistance. Al-qaeda inspired resistence is analogous to fascism in that it feeds on real problems but offers reactionary and destructive solutions. A genuine anti-imperialist analysis understands all these factors.
You, on the other hand, seem to be suggesting that fascisms and other reactionary ideologies do not exist, have no adherents, and no roots in capitalism and imperialism.
I've *met* people who think al-qaeda style ideology (it's no longer an organisation) is the bees knees, and while the number of muslims who think the London bombings were a good thing is tiny, the number who think the bombers might have had some kind of point is somewhat larger. This is not unexpected. It's also a unique position among some muslims. Non-muslims simply don't have the religious-ideological basis that gives meaning to such actions.But that shouldn't stop us from analysing it.
I'd like to see you engage with real politics on the ground.
chatterton
Hmm
30.07.2005 07:15
Now clearly all of us in the UK know that, contrary to our poorly-spelling friend's position, that there aren't quite as many cameras as suggested. And even the ones there are don't work the way you'd expect. Just to compound matters, I once tried to report a road traffic incident on a Scottish motorway - remember, cameras every mile or two - to be informed by a very embaressed desk sargeant that they don't tape the footage, just have a guy watching it.
Boab
Despite Your Story ...
31.07.2005 23:07
That's what the UK Gov't pays that Israeli security company to do.
Don't Fall for the PsyOps
Really?
01.08.2005 20:11
Well that would make sense, but how do you know that for sure? Can you give us a link to the piece, or if its in hard copy scan it in perhaps?
Boab
Verint Networked Video Solutions
01.08.2005 21:00
Verint Networked Video Solutions enable government and commercial organizations to enhance the security of their facilities and protect people, property and assets. By networking video across multiple locations and applying advanced content analytics to extract actionable intelligence from live and stored video, Verint Networked Video Solutions are designed to deter terrorism and crime, increase operational efficiency, and improve organizational efficiency.
Automatically Detect Suspicious Activities
Verint’s advanced content analytics automatically identify significant movements and unusual behaviors that might otherwise take hours to detect. Verint’s MotionTrack helps organizations with expansive perimeters, geographically distributed sites, or locations that are topographically difficult to wire quickly detect and address security breaches. MotionTrack detects activity of interest, while filtering out conditions that trigger nuisance alarms
Organization: VERINT SYSTEMS LTD.
Contact: Name: Mr. Meir Sperling
Position: Managing Director
Address: 23 Habarzel St.
P.O.Box: 43096
Tel Aviv
ISRAEL, 61430
Telephone: 03-7662323
Fax: 03-7662333
Email:
WEB site: www.verintsystems.com
GENERAL INFORMATION
Established: 1982
Type: Industry
Ownership: Private
Parent: Comverse Technology Inc.
Core business
DIGITAL RECORDING AND MONITORING SYSTEMS
Digital recording and monitoring systems;
Multimedia archiving, processing and distribution.
Voice and video analysis solutions.
Employees: 1000
Market regions: Western Europe, North America, Far East
Main Markets: Wireless and Wireline Telecommunications Network Operators, Law enforcement and Intelligence Agencies.
more:
Surveillance Society
Whey-hey!
01.08.2005 21:55
I see a lot of euphimisms and catchphrases about monitoring, analysis, etc. but nothing about storage. Now I'm actually inclined to run with you on this, but can you point me in the right direction?
I wonder how you store that quantity of data? Must be an absolte shedload, or are there comparatively few cameras?
Boab