Finsbury Park Cover-up? PM May says ‘Lone Wolf’ – But 4 separate witnesses say THREE men were in attack van
19 June, 2017
21st Century Wire says…
Metropolitan Police Commissioner Cressida Dick stated that the incident was “quite clearly an attack on Muslims.”
According to police, the attacker has been as 47 year-old father-of-four, Darren Osborne, from Cardiff.
Theresa May announced that the police were on the scene in only 1 minute, and that incredibly, police had officially declared the event a “terrorist incident” after just 8 minutes. Police apprehended one white-caucasian man, Osbourne, who they say was motived by ‘hate for Muslims.’
As media interviewed the Imam Mohammed Mahmoud and other witnesses, there seems to be some confusion at to what Osbourne actually said. While the Imam said the alleged assailant was quiet, another man said Osbourne had shouted, “You [the victims] deserved it,” followed by, “I did my bit.”
IMAGE: The suspect in custody was driving a rented white van (pictured above).
This afternoon in her lunchtime statement, Prime Minister Theresa May reiterated that the terror attack was indeed a ‘lone wolf’ attack.
Watch the following BBC segment from this afternoon; at the 1 min 50 second mark, May clearly states, “The early assessment with the police is that the attacker acted alone.”
However, at least four separate testimonies were made on camera this morning at the scene of the incident – which tell an entirely different story.
Question: With such a high-profile incident, how is it possible that the official statement could differ so greatly from multiple eye-witnesses on the ground?
Watch the following segment broadcast on Sky News, where Mohammed clearly states that there were 3 men in the alleged attack van – one man was and held down by the crowd before eventually being apprehended by the police. Watch:
The next segment shows the BBC at the scene in the immediate aftermath of the event, and interviewing a man by the name of ‘Khalid’ who, like Mohammed on Sky News, clearly states that there were 3 men in the alleged attack van. “… Two, they ran, and one got arrested after people surrounded him there [at the scene].”
Here is third man at the scene, interviewed by Ruptly News Agency. His testimony is secondhand but on-the-scene nonetheless. He describes how he came out of the mosque and photographed the suspect arrested by police and was told by persons close to him that two other men were in the van and who quickly ran on foot. Watch:
The following was a statement given by Adil Rana, 24 years old, on the scene of the incident, who spoke with Sky News and stated that there were three men in the van, and two escaped on foot. Rana’s full statement was available on video this morning as of 11:30am at Sunrise Radio’s website at the following page, which has been taken offline for some reason:
On a separate Sunrise Radio page is a reduced statement by Rana which only mentions one man – the driver of the white van.
If any one of these witness statements is true, and this was indeed a terrorist attack – then that means there are currently TWO fugitive terrorist suspects on the loose at present. If this is the case, then by definition, this omission by police and the government would be a cover-up.
Question: Are police currently looking for the two men who fled on foot – as testified by multiple persons on the scene?
Another odd aspect of this story is how the police reported that one man died from the attack, when it seems that an elderly man may have collapsed before the collision took place, based on this report by the London Telegraph:
“The white van ploughed into pedestrians who were helping an elderly worshipper who had collapsed in an area that was busy with people who had attended Ramadan night prayers. The pensioner they were helping later died. Police said he had already been receiving first aid from members of the public and it is not yet known if his death was caused by the attack.”
Question: Is it possible that the police and government jumped to conclusions as the event was breaking, and are still trying to resuscitate their original narrative?
Why does available information contradict the official story?