(Updated) BREAKING NEWS: Massive Series of Explosions rock Southern England

Sky News UK ^ | December 11, 2005

[Big Bad Bob]

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...

[papertyger]

That's why I detest hearing an automatic dismissal of terrorism...

They didn't make any automatic dismissal. They DID take active steps to lower the public perception it COULD be terrorism.

It's a small point, but I think it's important in that it demonstrates a clear preference on the part of authorities as to what the public believes.

[RegulatorCountry]

"It's a small point, but I think it's important in that it demonstrates a clear preference on the part of authorities as to what the public believes."

The fear and, yes, panic, that authorities exhibit in the face of a situation that could possibly induce fear and panic in the general population, is going to eventually lead to more death than being forthright and honest ever would have, in my opinion.

[papertyger]

I believe a government prostituting its own credibility is a greater evil than any fact.

[RegulatorCountry]

"I believe a government prostituting its own credibility is a greater evil than any fact."

I can agree with that. You've got to wonder about motivation, when governments show more concern about creating a panic, than they show about the actual attack itself. From a cynical point of view, one might get the impression that money is more important than the lives of citizens.

[papertyger]

From a cynical point of view, one might get the impression that money is more important than the lives of citizens.

While economics is definately a critical factor in any functioning society, I don't think it's about money.

I think it's about maintaining control over *free agents* that may not do what's in the best interests of those doing the controlling.

[BykrBayb]

That automatic dismissal shows that if there is any possible way of covering it up, they will try. Come to think of it, they've already tried. What are the odds that they will do an about face, and try to disprove their initial ruling?

[spokeshave]

"Surely these things are designed not to blow up from things like gas leaks and cigarette butts. What could have caused such a thing?"

The clothheads lost the entire natural gas processing and refinery in Qatar some decades ago......all gone in one big explosion.

[Brit_Guy]

I've been watching the news over here for the last 24 hours so far not a single person has gone on the media and said they saw a plane hit it. There have been plenty of people who have said they 'heard someone say someone saw a plane going down first', and plenty of people who say 'When I first heard the blast my first thought was a plane had gone down' but nobody at all has come forward and said they *actually* saw it. I'll swear some panic mongers actually *want* it to have been an act of terrorism as somehow the story is less boring otherwise.

Didn't you have a very, very similar disaster over in the States (Texas) last year that had even greater loss of life but was, when it came down to it, a terrible accident?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4377519.stm

[spokeshave]

trucker 1....lets hook this sucker up and go for tea.....

trucker 2....the grounding strip....don't forget to put the static discharge strip in place.

trucker 1....discharge strip....I always use a fresh Tetleys tea bag.

"trucker,,,looks like the explosion happened behind the loading racks where they load the trucks"

[little jeremiah]

Thanks for your local input. I am only reacting - and admittedly, merely speculating - to what I read on FR. I was theorizing about a plane going over the depot, since I had read accounts of people saying they "saw" or "heard" a plane, not of one going down.

I am not in one camp or another. But I am suspicious of government representatives stating that something is an accident, when they couldn't possibly have the facts yet. In the US there are a couple of plane crashes that many who have delved into the matter are convinced were terrorist attacks, which the gov't maintains were not. And then there's the Murrah building in OK.

[papertyger]

That automatic dismissal shows that if there is any possible way of covering it up, they will try.

That is pure nonsense. A total non-sequiter. The only thing is "shows" is they'd prefer not to have to address certain questions before they have answers.

To my knowledge, no one has "dismissed" anything at this point...other than the plane story.

[BykrBayb]

They dismissed eyewitness accounts before any investigation was even started. When the first order of business is to convince the public of the outcome of an investigation that hasn't even begun, how much should we trust that investigation?

[papertyger]

In the US there are a couple of plane crashes that many who have delved into the matter are convinced were terrorist attacks, which the gov't maintains were not.

Now that's where things start to get REALLY scarey. If the government can and will maintain the kind of control it requires to force the airline industry to make millions of dollars of useless retrofits without that industry being able to communicate its victimization to the public at large, it is truly time to take up arms.

As it is, I am unconvinced our government is capable of that level of stealth coercion, and so find the conspiracy theorists not compelling.

[papertyger]

They dismissed eyewitness accounts before any investigation was even started.

Eyewitness accounts of what?

[BykrBayb]

Are you enjoying going in circles?

[papertyger]

Why aren't you answering the question? It's not like we have a thirty post exchange going.

[BykrBayb]

I know. That's why I find it hard to believe that you've already forgotten where we started.

[papertyger]

When the first order of business is to convince the public of the outcome of an investigation that hasn't even begun, how much should we trust that investigation?

You have to prove that was the first order of business before you can offer such a conclusion. You have not done so.

Until you, no one on this thread has maintained anything other than skepticism about the value of the government statements. No one here has thought the government guilty of anything beyond "spin control" to this point. You are looking for reasons to claim malfeasance.

[papertyger]

I know. That's why I find it hard to believe that you've already forgotten where we started.

You're stalling.

[BykrBayb]

You jumped in at the end of the thread, without reading the other posts. Start over.