Posted on 12/10/2005 10:42:38 PM PST by Big Bad Bob
Edited on 12/10/2005 11:05:40 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
Reports of up to Four Explosions at a fuel depot Near Hemel Hempstead, North West of London, according to Sky
__________________
Update:
Explosion Near London
The first picture, taken by a Sky News viewer
Map of the area
Updated: 06:41, Sunday December 11, 2005
There has been a large explosion followed by two smaller blasts in the St Albans area, around 25 miles north of London.
Sky Correspondent Sky Meade has said he can see flames about 200ft in the sky and there appears to be burning fuel.
Speaking by telephone from his home, Meade described "burning tongues" of flames in the sky.
The first blast happened at 6.03am - the other explosions followed about 20 minutes later.
Meade, a seasoned war reporter said he can see what looks like "burning aviation fuel".
"This fire is extremely intense. It is a bright orange glow on the horizon," he said.
Witnesses have told Sky News they heard the blast near Junction 8 of the M1. It is thought to be centred around Bunsfield fuel depot, near Hemel Hempstead.
The blast was felt at Sky Centre - more than 20 miles away in west London.
It was so powerful it blew out the windows at a hotel in Hemel Hempstead. There are reports of injuries there.
And one witness has told how the explosion shook his mother's house and lifted the roof.
Witnesses have told Sky News that emergency services are converging on the area.
Sky News producer Anwar Tambe heard the blast from his home in Luton and is currently stuck in traffic on the M1.
He said blasts are "going off regularly" and debris has blown onto the motorway.
More follows...
John Reid, the British defense secretary, was interviewed this morning in the UK. He said there was no reason to suspect anything other than an accident. He confirmed that the armed forces were on stand-by to provide assistance to the civil authorities if required.
(Yes, it really irritates me that pronouncements are made before anyone can possibly know!)
"He confirmed that the armed forces were on stand-by to provide assistance to the civil authorities if required."
Why would this be necessary if they were convinced it was just an accident. They've been saying there will be some more blasts and explosions but nothing to the magnitude of the initial one.
There's still more to this than what they're telling.
Thank you 1066AD.
"Why would this be necessary if they were convinced it was just an accident."
That's one of the functions that the army fulfills. Similar to the way the National Guard might was used in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, for instance.
Latest update was accident I hear
Watch for BP gas prices to go off the charts.
Can't be. The FR armchair experts have told us it has to be terrorism. /sarcasm
"Watch for BP gas prices to go off the charts."
Not just BP, all of it. Still a lot of speculation, just waiting to pounce on any pretext for another run-up.
Surely you jest. While the flames were engulfing the falicity, before anyone could get a look at what might have caused it, they immediately announced it was "not terrorism." They couldn't possibly have known, and neither can you or any of us. Yet, you, like they, can't wait to actually find out what happened before making your (uninformed, because no one has had the chance to investigate) own flat statements. You don't know jack, and neither does anyone else.
"they immediately announced it was "not terrorism.""
You know that that wasn't actually what 'they' said, right?
I do? Funny, that's what I heard them say on the news this morning, and so far, in all of the print reports too. Maybe you were watching a news channel I didn't see.
If Bin Laden is alive, then why don't we see him on video?
Give me one good reason the islamo facists wouldn't want him to appear on TV?
I saw the Chief Constable of Hertfordshire and the Home Secretary say that there was 'nothing to indicate' that this was a terrorist act. That's not at all the same as what you said.
If what you said was the case, then there wouldn't currently be specialist anti-terrorist police involved in the investigation, would there?
"If what you said was the case, then there wouldn't currently be specialist anti-terrorist police involved in the investigation, would there?"
"Thus far, nothing to indicate" would be a far more forthright and honest statement on behalf of authorities, particularly in light of these police anti-terrorist specialists being on the scene, wouldn't you say?
"Nothing" is definitive, and lends credence to Mizsterious's objection to a premature dismissal of terrorism. "Thus far, nothing" makes no definitve claim and is much more accurate.
""Thus far, nothing to indicate" would be a far more forthright and honest statement on behalf of authorities"
Well of course it's thus far, when else would they be speaking about? As of next week, there is nothing to indicate terrorist involvement? The police have made no secret of the fact that the investigation into the causes is ongoing.
"Well of course it's thus far, when else would they be speaking about?"
There is nothing. There is nothing thus far. One is final, and one is ongoing. If you see no difference between the two, well, I'm just not sure what to tell you.
"Too many people here want to think every time a plane crashes, something in the petroleum industry goes BOOM, or there is a natural gas explosion in a building, it is really a terrorist plot being covered up by the government."
And too many people in positions of authority have immediately stated that terrorism has been ruled out, when there has been no time to establish cause. Take, for instance, the first plane to crash into the World Trade Center.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.