Buncefield - worst-hit building - the MI5 connection (Stephen Lander)
banana | 14.12.2005 01:13
The building that sustained the worst damage during the Buncefield blasts was the HQ of a company called NORTHGATE INFORMATION SOLUTIONS.
One of its directors is STEPHEN LANDER, who was head of MI5 between 1996 and 2002.
The company describes itself as "the UK’s leading supplier of specialist software and IT services for the Human Resource and Public Service markets".
--
banana
One of its directors is STEPHEN LANDER, who was head of MI5 between 1996 and 2002.
The company describes itself as "the UK’s leading supplier of specialist software and IT services for the Human Resource and Public Service markets".
--
banana
banana
e-mail:
banana@REMOVE_THIS.borve.demon.co.uk
Comments
Hide the following 24 comments
link
14.12.2005 03:20
banana
Further Info
14.12.2005 04:59
Hypnotised
And the significance is...?
14.12.2005 09:34
(map
What's the connection you're implying with MI5?
choking local
northgate and shac
14.12.2005 10:05
can anyone confirm or deny this?
freedon to occasionally protest under controlled conditions (ftopucc)
So What
14.12.2005 10:34
Miles Davis
?
14.12.2005 11:03
M
and it supplies data solutions to the local hospitals
14.12.2005 12:28
You and Yours Listener
no back-ups!
14.12.2005 14:04
I also notice from their press-statements that their back-ups failed - laughable, the head of the secret service doesn't understand how to secure his computer data.
Danny
Directors
14.12.2005 19:14
Still waiting for someone to explain why "rich man gets directorship of company that, some time later, has HQ building damaged by explosion" is any way significant, by the way.
FTB
This reeks to high heaven
14.12.2005 20:33
Yes they do, ask any SysAdmin. They shouldn't, but they do. Which leads to cock-up with or without conspiracy. And it is a delicious defeat for those shits. and they have to be shits, you can't go from the head of the secret service in a country where we are selected for obedience, to the head of some automated HR personnel evaluation group without being dodgy.
"Still waiting for someone to explain why "rich man gets directorship of company that, some time later, has HQ building damaged by explosion" is any way significant, by the way."
Maybe it isn't. He isn't just any old rich man though is he ? And it isn't just any old company is it ? As a former head of the security services he is a dodgy guy with many enemies. Human Resources is the main filter of employment. Maybe there's nothing in it, but Banana made a valid journalistic link that I bet none of tommorows newspapers make. Save your scepticism for a better night FTB, this one is smelly!
Danny
Did you know...
15.12.2005 09:32
Bookshops are full of these thrillers. Thrillers are stuff that has been made up to excite people regarding some sort of intrigue, often political or criminal. Some of them are quite good. But I do suspect you'd be more than content with the very poorly made up ones.
M
Stranger than fiction
15.12.2005 14:59
Do I think the fact that the main building damaged was run by a former spy-chief proves the explosion was deliberate ? No, there isn't enough evidence for that.
Do I think that fact warrants further investigation ? Yes, and I find it strange that you don't.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not calling for 'an independent international investigation', I'm merely praising the folk here who discovered possible relevant information that the mainstream journalists didn't mention once in all the reams of newscoverage, and hoping that they keep digging up similar facts that may illuminate the matter, as our paid media won't.
Now so far the folk here who have been digging have been commendably free from to much speculation, but think of all the enemies that the former head of the British security services would have ( terrorists such as the Real IRA, foriegn secuity agencies, victims of the service, perhaps even other British security staff ). And then forget the spy link, think of all the enemies that the head of a corporation whose main role is to sift potential employees would have ( people whose careers had been ruined, competitor corporations, libertarians, foriegn security services ).
Nobody is saying that sort of speculation is useful execpt in establishing the credibility of a motive, but your blanket disinterest is lamentable. If it had been down to you, we'd still believe the Rainbow Warrior sank in New Zealand, the Real IRA mortar attack on MI5 HQ was just a gas explosion, and Evelyn le Chene is just a sweet old granny.
If 911 showed you nothing else, it is truth can be stranger than fiction - would you have finished a thriller that started with so outlandish a plot device ? After watching 911, was your first reaction that it was just a freakish combination of accidents or did you think someone may have been behind it ?
Danny
Danny
15.12.2005 15:46
If it was a terrorist attack would they have done it at 06.30? Or is that part a lie???
I would be rather concrened about myself if I were to see conspiracies everywhere I looked. I'm sure you know what the medical profession thinks of such behaviour.
Methinks some people lack a little REAL excitement in their lives.
M
'most sensible people' don't type ??????
15.12.2005 16:30
You are right, most people do wait for credible evidence. However, they would be waiting a long time if it wasn't for the people who go out and find that evidence - for the most part police-investigators, security-service investigators and corporate media journalists. Much evidence that is found by these people or already known to them will not be made public for various valid and invalid reasons. Such as the fact the major building damaged is ran by the former head of the security services, you'd be waiting a long time for that particular snippet to get printed. Now whether that is relevant evidence or not, you must admit it is credible evidence ( ie its admitted to by the company website) that you would know nothing about if it wasn't for the amateur journalism of others here. So I feel you are unfair to criticise so early on, there hasn't been much speculation at least from the people doing the sleuthing.
"THEN the matter may be considered of any relevance."
Now you mean ? Good.
"If it was a terrorist attack would they have done it at 06.30? Or is that part a lie???"
Are you saying terrorists like to sleep in ? Is your question mark key sticky or are you over excited ? Why do you assume it was terrorists - are you a conspiracy theorist jumping the gun with no evidence ?
"I would be rather concrened about myself if I were to see conspiracies everywhere I looked."
I would be rather concerned about myself if I criticised every piece of successful participatory journalism on a independent media website as a conspiracy theory. If its not jealousy then it is inappropriate behaviour. This isn't as conspiracy theory site but it is an independent media site and its the facts that are filtered out of the mainstream that make IM worth reading.
"I'm sure you know what the medical profession thinks of such behaviour.
Methinks some people lack a little REAL excitement in their lives. "
If that's your level of contribution and analysis then perhaps you should save your wit and wisdom for the Sun letters page.
Danny
Oh dear!
15.12.2005 17:39
I didn't criticise the report. I criticised excitable the fools who got carried away with it.
The rest of what you wriote is just confused heated dross.
P.S. Get yourself a grammar book before you start criticising others' punctuation.
M
Ehmm ?
15.12.2005 18:28
That is true, although the shifts change there at 6 am, but if it was an attack then it doesn't seem to be have been timed to cause greatest number of fatalities. However, an attack by one of the terrorist or non-terrorist enemies of that company or upon the interests of its spook director would not necessarily be timed for greatest loss of life, perhaps even for the opposite.
"I didn't criticise the report. I criticised excitable the fools who got carried away with it."
You asked for evidence that it is the same person, which is would be admirable if the evidence hadn't already been given to you in the first link. How could you not accept that an admission on the companies own website that their director was a spook is not valid evidence ? You want someone to prove to you they are the same company - read the flipping website. You seem deliberately obstructive. You then compared the report to a thriller, fiction. Which in anybodies book is criticism. Now you say, or try to say, excitable fools got carried away by this report. Who on this page has been more excitable or foolish than yourself ?
"The rest of what you wriote is just confused heated dross."
I'm not at all heated or confused. Quite calmly and rationally I think you proclaim in others faults you recognise in yourself. The 'medical profession' call your behaviour 'projection', and they would call your phrase 'I criticised excitable the fools who got carried away' as a freudian slip.
"P.S. Get yourself a grammar book before you start criticising others' punctuation. "
Yes, I see you follow the 'Eats, Shites and Leaves' school of grammar. My grammar is poor but that isn't deliberate. I wasn't criticising your punctuation, I was pointing out your over-excited state of mind is betrayed by deliberately choosing to over-punctuate for emphasis, in much the same way I criticise Twilight for SHOUTING every tenth word. And someone in an over-excited state of mind shouldn't slur others as over-excited conspiracy theorists simply for pointing out facts.
You know, you can keep your feet on the ground without burying your head in the sand.
Keep up the good posts CW.
Danny
danny
15.12.2005 19:12
I'm still critical of fools getting carried away. This is a news site not alt.conspiracies. You have some meat to put on the bones, then share it! (Exclamation mark denotes the use of the imperative tense) But you don't. All that you, Jack and Jordan have is a load of hot air and a bad case of delusions of grandeur. Now news, just sepculation based on fevered imagination. Pure fiction.
I'll repeat: buy a grammar book before you start making daft remarks about punctation. Triple question mark signifies bemusement not overexcitement.
m
Me, Jack and Jordan ?
15.12.2005 19:56
I take it you mean Jackslucid who posts about 911 - I don't take any interest in 911 because I think the event is used to distract dissent from more pressing crimes like Iraq. I don't care who killed President Kennedy because he was a war-criminal anyway. I'm not sure if there is intelligent life in outer-space but there sure as hell isn't any on earth.
I don't remember much about any individual poster here, the general impression I have of your posts previously is that they were sceptical but rational, and that is fine, admirable. And maybe the more outlandish conspiracy theories here have skewed you to not reading the links thoroughly enough and not acknowledging that some conspiracies do exist, and some hidden plots poke through the curtain, and that investigation of these things isn't the same as holograms, pod-people and missiles up the WTC.
Just in general, most sensible people prick up their ears when they hear the words 'security service' linked to the word 'explosion'. Its pavlovian perhaps but its not irrational. Isn't 'M' a James Bond character ?
And by the way, which book on grammar says three question marks indicates bemusement rather than overexitement ? "The Sun exposes the Spelling B-'s".
('Eats, Shoots and Leaves' is a popular book on grammar, for those of an anally retentive disposition or for those who prefer structure to content). I have a grammar checker like I have a spelling checker, I choose not to use them, sorry but you seem to know what I mean most of the time. Maybe you should invest in a piece of software that evaluates whether your post serves any other purpose except embarrassing yourself unnecessarily. I do have you 'bang to rights' for not checking the original webiste before launching your attack on whoever you were attacking, and when you are stuck in a deep hole then it's time to stop digging. You are an intelligent and rational person, but you jumped in too hard and fast on this one - instead of carping about that the rational response would be for you to dig up as much evidence that you can to prove your inital bias, or shock ! Horror! Investigate for yourself with an open mind.
Danny
I've found nothing
16.12.2005 01:07
Computer Shop Name: Ramesys
Telephone: 01442 403100
Address: Unit 2/Grovelands Business Centre/Boundary Way, Hemel Hempstead Industrial Est, Hemel Hempstead, HP2 7TE
Computer Shop Name: Benq (UK) Ltd
Telephone: 01442 301000
Address: Boundary Way, Hemel Hempstead Industrial Est, Hemel Hempstead, HP2 7SJ
Computer Shop Name: Task It Ltd
Telephone: 01442 233573
Address: Boundary Way, Hemel Hempstead Ind Est, Hemel Hempstead, HP2 7SS
Printer Cartridge Supplier: Elecom (UK) Ltd
Telephone: 01442 270417
Address: Fujifilm House/Boundary Way, Hemel Hempstead Industrial Est, Hemel Hempstead, HP2 7RH
Alcon Laboratories (UK) Limited (company number 968373) a company registered in England and Wales whose registered office is Pentagon Park, Boundary Way Hemel Hempstead, Herts, HP2 7UD
Kyocera Service Centre, 01442 272720. Boundary Way, Hemel Hempstead, HP27HU.
KeySoft (MDIS) Boundary Way. Hemel Hempstead HP27HU. Phone: +44 1442 272660. Fax: +44 1442 231382. Email: CEO: William Wilkins.
3Com Europe Ltd Büro & Technik Premises Distribution Division,
Building 1, HP27HU Hemel Hempstead
None of whom seem important enough to blow up
Danny
and so it goes on and on and on...
16.12.2005 12:10
Sorry, even my own error still doesn't stop me from being tired of pointless speculation. Some ex-MI5 honcho is a director of a company in the area. So what!/? The info is presented bare as though it is some smoking gun in itself, I suspect. Some of us are tired of the ongoing Scoody Doo School of Jouralism that has latched on to IMC UK.
As for the rest of your speculation about the semantics of my last post, you are well wide of the mark and would benefit perhaps from asking questions rather than putting words in people's mouths.
m
Dial M for Mince
16.12.2005 14:13
"Sorry, even my own error still doesn't stop me from being tired of pointless speculation. Some ex-MI5 honcho is a director of a company in the area. So what!/? The info is presented bare as though it is some smoking gun in itself, I suspect. Some of us are tired of the ongoing Scoody Doo School of Jouralism that has latched on to IMC UK. "
Ah, so you go from 'being tired of pointless speculation' to criticising the info for being 'presented bare' in the space of a sentence. Well, there's just no pleasing you is there ? I realise you probably still haven't read the original link because he wasn't the head of MI5. A few bare bone facts and you can't even cope with them, this complicated old world must confuse the hell out of you. And it's Scooby Doo by the way, not Scoody Doo and journalism, not jouralism, as in ' M's pedantic misinformed carping proves M doesn't have a scoob about journalism '.
"Some of us are tired" yeah, claim a false consensus when really you are out on your own in your unfounded, baseless and ongoing nit-picking. You can lecture other folk on the merits of their journalism once you learn to read it, and maybe even think about it.
And maybe some of us are tired of folk who criticise everyone elses contribution without ever contributing anything themselves. CW and banana have proved themselves worth a hundred small-minded pedantic bores. I imagine some of the folk who actually contribute to the journalism here are sick of someone who hasn't even read the links demanding that they prove to you basic details already proven in the story. And lets face it, you aren't even qualified to correct their grammar let alone criticise their journalism. Sad, self-important and rather silly.
Danny
Danny
16.12.2005 19:12
If anyone here is suffering from blindingly obvious overexcitement at being rumbled it's you! I counldn't give a fuck how pendantic you get and how much you bleat, you got gaught with your hand in the "conspiracy loon" cookie jar and you are flailing.
Good night!
M
M, "conspiracy loon" Slayer !!!
16.12.2005 21:00
And you are lecturing me about grammar ? Is that 'irony' with only one exclamation mark ? i best refer to my pocket grammar book and see what that implies...
See I'm guessing this is the root of your problem, I'm guessing once in the distant past you posted some witty repartee to discredit a 911 nut, and someone praised you for it in passing, and you were delighted with yourself. And ever since then I bet you've seen that as your assigned role, to discredit "conspiracy loons". You are a disgrace to scepticism.
On the subject of punctuation though, putting inverted commas around a phrase implies that you disbelieve it. Yet you don't doubt the validity of the phrase do you ? So why the inverted commas ?
The trouble is in this case you have made an arse of yourself. That's why many of the other, laudible and far from reticent 'sceptics' such as Architect never backed you up here. You jumped in criticising Banana and CW's admirable reporting of the hidden fact that the head of this company was previously the head of the security services, only to be embarrassed by the fact the proof had already been given.
When I defended them - and begged for some speculation from them - suddenly I'm smeared as a 'conspiracy loon'. Along with Jack and Jordan, whoever they may be - do you see dead people little boy ?
Sorry bub, I just ain't a conspiracy loon and your hypersensitive radar is way off. Name a loony theory and I'll declare my disinterest. Loch Ness monster ? Pile of keech marketing to attract tourists to the ugliest Loch. UFO's ? Cover for US airforce chicanery. 911 theories ? Used to distract from bigger crimes in Iraq.
However when someone mentions that a big explosion occurred next to the head of the security sevices new place of work, unmentioned in the mainstream despite reams of coverage, then forgive me for paying attention. It's not sceptical to question that so unthinkingly, it's stupid and suspiciously stupid.
And to call me - anyone - a "conspiracy loon" for that shows it must be a habitual response from you for it certainly isn't rational.
If I was a "conspiracy loon" then I would suspect that you are paid to sit here and discredit valid theories by misdirection. I don't - I just think you an inquiring thought short of a rational mind.
Danny
Could try harder!
17.12.2005 10:52
I made an arse of myself for laughing at people reading conspiracy into no data. Guilty as charged!
"I don't - I just think you an inquiring thought short of a rational mind." And a rational mind jumps to conclusions on no basis. Again, guilty as charged hahahaha!
M