Blog reports Oslo bomb before it actually happened

[uranian]

a blog published a story about the bombing 2 days before it happened:

http://www.bhrnm.org/business-news/bomb-rips-through-norways-capital

google date search to show that the blog did exist 20th july. you can also see links that refer to the story before 22nd, proving too that the blog existed 2 days before the bombing:

http://www.google.no/search?q=%22Bomb+Rips+Through+Norway%E2%80%99s+Cap ital%22&hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&tbs=cdr:1,cd_min:7/18/2011,cd_max:7/21/2011&prmd=ivns&ei=rKoxTviVBMbzsgbfxMHpBg&start=0&sa=N&filter=0

google's own data shows that the page was first indexed 20th july (using a firefox add-on "Link Diagnosis" that can reveal age of only those pages which are indexed by Google; basically, it gives the date when the web page was first indexed by Google):

http://lunaticoutpost.com/Topic-You-will-love-this?page=2

so absolute proof that this is another false flag. i actually saw the shock wave from this bomb reverberate windows 1km away from where it happened. among all the problems with the official story (the lack of a freakin' car, for example, in the wreckage outside of the buildings), the fact that google's own data proves that this website (which specifies a lot of accurate detail) was created 2 days before the bomb is definitive proof that this is the NWO (for want of a better term) at work again.



entertainingly i posted this on GLP and the thread was deleted within minutes. which confirms the tavistock theory about GLP for me.

[osoab]

Welcome back. It's been a few months.

[Neuro]

Good find Uranian! Who is the owner of the blog? Is it possible to change the name of the blog after the registration?

[uranian]

thanks, osoab. i've been hanging out at zerohedge lately.

neuro, a whois on the site reveals little; it's based in the caymans/similar, an anonymous web site creation service i think.

http://whois.domaintools.com/bhrnm.org

a bit odd is that the wiki reports that it's the "Basset Hound Rescue of New Mexico" site.

http://web.archive.org/web/20031213210231/http://www.bhrnm.org/

[osoab]

thanks, osoab. i've been hanging out at zerohedge lately.

neuro, a whois on the site reveals little; it's based in the caymans/similar, an anonymous web site creation service i think.

http://whois.domaintools.com/bhrnm.org

a bit odd is that the wiki reports that it's the "Basset Hound Rescue of New Mexico" site.

I went through about the first six pages of the site. There seem to be more articles about a place called Costal Bend.

It seems like a hodgepodge of stories about multiple different topics.

[gunDriller]

i didn't know you could do that with Google !

[uranian]

full text of that article, just in case it disappears:


A bomb ripped through Oslo’s central government district on Friday killing seven people, police said, and hours later a gunman opened fire at a youth camp on a nearby island.

One witness said he saw 20 dead at the youth camp, but police said they had no confirmation of deaths on the island.

“I’ve seen it with my own eyes, at least 20 dead people lying in the water,” Andre Skeie, 26, told Reuters by telephone. He said he had gone to Utoeya island with his boat to help people evacuate the island after the shooting.

Police declined to comment on casualties at the youth camp at Utoeya, north west of Oslo. State television said a man was arrested.

The Oslo bomb blew out the windows of the Prime Minister’s building, damaged the finance and oil ministries and scattered glass and masonry across the streets.

A Reuters witness said he had seen soldiers taking up positions around the center of the capital, while police said they feared there might be explosives at the youth camp.

With police advising people to evacuate central Oslo, apparently in fear of more attacks, Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg told Norwegian TV2 television in a phone call that the situation was “very serious”. He said that police had told him not to say where he was speaking from.

“It exploded — it must have been a bomb. People ran in panic…I counted at least 10 injured people,” said bystander Kjersti Vedun, who was leaving the area of the blast in Oslo.

Shortly after the bomb, a gunman described by a police official as tall and blond opened fire at the island of Utoeya north-west of Oslo, sending people scattering in terror. The target was a youth camp of Stoltenberg’s Labour party youth section.

“There was a lot of shooting…We hid under a bed. It was very terrifying,” a young woman present at the island youth camp told British Sky television. She said police helicopters were flying overhead.

Daily newspaper VG said on its website the gunman had been dressed as a policeman.

Norwegian commercial broadcaster TV2 said several people had been killed in the shooting spree.

There was no clear claim of responsibility and while the attacks appeared to bear the hallmarks of an Islamist militant assault, analysts said it was too early to draw any conclusions.

NATO member Norway has been the target of threats before over its involvement in conflicts in Afghanistan and Libya.

The attack came just over a year after three men were arrested on suspicion of having links to al Qaeda and planning to attack targets in Norway. It came also less than three months after U.S. forces killed Osama bin Laden in a raid on his hideout in Pakistan.

Violence or the threat of it has already come to the other Nordic states: a botched bomb attack took place in the Swedish capital Stockholm last December and the bomber was killed.

Denmark has received repeated threats after a newspaper published cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad in late 2005, angering Muslims worldwide.

The Oslo blast tore at the facade of the 17-storey central government building, blowing out most of the windows and scattering shards of metal and other debris for hundreds of meters .

The building of a publisher which recently put out a translation of a Danish book on the Mohammad cartoon controversy was also affected, but was apparently not the target.

The blast scattered debris across the streets and shook the entire city center at around 3:30 p.m. . A Reuters witness saw eight people injured, one covered in a sheet and apparently dead.

MOST VIOLENT “SINCE WORLD WAR TWO”

Madrid suffered an Islamist militant bomb attack on commuter trains in 2004 that killed 191 people. Four suicide bombers killed 52 people in an attack on London’s transport system in 2005.

The Reuters correspondent said the streets had been fairly quiet in mid-afternoon on a Friday in high summer, when many Oslo residents take vacation or leave for weekend breaks.

“This is a terror attack. It is the most violent event to strike Norway since World War Two,” said Geir Bekkevold, an opposition parliamentarian for the Christian Peoples Party.

The district attacked is the very heart of power in Norway, with several other key administration buildings nearby.

Nearby ministries were also hit by the blast, including the oil ministry, which was on fire. Nevertheless, security is not tight given the lack of violence in the past.

The failed December attack in Stockholm was by a Muslim man who grew up in Sweden but said he had been angered by Sweden’s involvement in the NATO-led force in Afghanistan and the Prophet Mohammad cartoons.

That attack was followed weeks later by the arrest in Denmark of five men for allegedly planning to attack the newspaper which first ran the Mohammad cartoons.

In July 2010, Norwegian police arrested three men for an alleged plot to organize at least one attack on Norwegian targets and said they were linked to individuals investigated in the United States and Britain.

John Drake, senior risk consultant at London-based consultancy AKE, said: “It may not be too dissimilar to the terrorist attack in Stockholm in December which saw a car bomb and secondary explosion shortly after in the downtown area.

“That attack was later claimed as a reprisal for Sweden’s contribution to the efforts in Afghanistan.”

Political violence is virtually unknown in a country known for awarding the Nobel Peace Prize and mediating in conflicts, including in the Middle East and Sri Lanka.

[uranian]

there are actually a few more pages that report the same story word for word:

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22I+counted+at+least+10+injured+people%2 2+%22Kjersti+Vedun%22&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=a3t&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-GB%3Aofficial&prmd=ivnso&sa=X&ei=HdkxTsy6J8z2sgaqnf3oBg&ved=0CA4QpwUoBg&source=lnt&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A7%2F4%2F2011%2Ccd_max%3A7%2 F21%2F2011&tbm=

and again some of them are dated 20th july, first indexed by google 20th july:

http://www.ccnetx.com/finance-guide/twin-terror-attack-in-oslo-norway
http://www.johnmichaelashley.com/2011/07/norway-bombing/

[JohnQPublic]

I am trying to determine how Google determines publication date. The site itself may actually tell Google when it was published. This is from Google related to indexing News Items (note this is not a news item necassarily, but the ideas likely still hold):
http://www.google.com/support/news_pub/bin/answer.py?answer=93994

Recommendations


Follow the date formatting recommendations below:

Place a clear date and time for each of your articles in between the article's title and the article's text in a separate line of HTML. The date should specify when the article was first published.
Remove any other dates from the HTML of the article page so that the crawler doesn't mistake them for the correct publication time.
If you'd like to use a date metatag, please contact us first. Date meta tags should be of the form: <meta name="DC.date.issued" content="YYYY-MM-DD">, where the date is in W3C format (http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-datetime), using either the "complete date" (YYYY-MM-DD) format, or the "complete date plus hours, minutes and seconds" (YYYY-MM-DDThh:mm:ssTZD) format with a time zone suffix.
Create a News Sitemap (http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=74288). The <publication_date> tag will ensure we're able to pick the correct date for your articles.
Here is another from the same page:


Invalid date meta tag

Explanation

The HTML page contains a date <meta> tag that we were unable to parse.
Recommendations

Date <meta> tags should be of the form: <meta name="DC.date.issued" content="YYYY-MM-DD">, where the date is in W3C format (http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-datetime), using either the "complete date" (YYYY-MM-DD) or "complete date plus hours, minutes and seconds" (YYYY-MM-DDThh:mm:ss) format, with optional fraction and time zone suffixes. The date should specify when the article was first published.

It is not clear that this mans anything. From the page itslef here is the tag they used:

<p class="timestamp"><strong>20 July, 2011 </strong></p>

So the author stated this is the publication date. Google may have accepted that.

[Joe King]

I was going to ask if the computers date could have been off, but figured I'd get attacked for doing so and end up getting blamed for "causing" myself to get piled on.

Thanks JQP for asking a sensible question.

[uranian]

google indexes stuff almost instantly. here's a screenshot of the google search result for the article title; they managed to get the GLP thread that's been deleted within an hour of its creation:

http://imgupld.lunaticoutpost.com/graphic/images/2011/July/28/95FF_4E31D658.jpg

also note that this post i made on LOP about an hour ago is now indexed:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=WeZ&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-GB%3Aofficial&q=%22ah+well+that+link+didn%27t+work%2C+try+this+o ne+for+google%27s+indexed+within+minutes+view+of+t hat+GLP+thread%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=

[JohnQPublic]

But if the publication date is stated in the code, Google may use that. You may be right, I am not sure, it appears Google does use crawl dates if publication dates are not available. But if the date comes up in a search (without using Advanced Search to filter by dates), then no date will show on the result unless a publication date is available. See this:
http://www.labnol.org/internet/search/find-publication-date-of-web-pages-in-google-search-results/3804/ (http://www.labnol.org/internet/search/find-publication-date-of-web-pages-in-google-search-results/3804/)

"Google is probably using the data available in XML sitemaps (or RSS feeds) to ascertain the publishing date of a web page.
That may be a reason why you get to see publication dates of mostly blog pages in Google or sites that publish feeds like Techmeme, New York Times, Twitter, CNET or even Digg."

Next they do say:

"If you like to see publication dates of web pages in Google that are not available by default, go to the advanced search (http://www.google.com/advanced_search) page and select a time period from the Date drop-down (say ‘past year’).
http://img.labnol.org/images/2008/07/googledateindex.png
Now when you perform a search, Google will display a date next to each of the search results – see example (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&as_q=gmail+email+labnol&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&num=10&lr=&as_filetype=&ft=i&as_sitesearch=&as_qdr=m6&as_rights=&as_occt=any&cr=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&safe=images).
This is the day when Google spiders first discovered the corresponding web page. It may not be same as the publication date but always very close."

I think this works ONLY if the publication date is not available.

In any case, this is worth checking into.

[nunaem]

I doubt that sixth rate blog had foreknowledge of the attack.

[Joe King]

But if the publication date is stated in the code, Google may use that. You may be right, I am not sure, it appears Google does use crawl dates if publication dates are not available. But if the date comes up in a search (without using Advanced Search to filter by dates), then no date will show on the result unless a publication date is available. See this:
http://www.labnol.org/internet/search/find-publication-date-of-web-pages-in-google-search-results/3804/ (http://www.labnol.org/internet/search/find-publication-date-of-web-pages-in-google-search-results/3804/)

In any case, this is worth checking into.Couldn't this be tested?

You are the admin. Set up a page here with an article that has the wrong published date and see what happens.

[JohnQPublic]

Couldn't this be tested?

You are the admin. Set up a page here with an article that has the wrong published date and see what happens.

I searched for the title of the blog article using advanced search, and got the July 20th date. So it proved nothing.

I suppose something like that could be done (your test). If I find time, I will try something.

[Joe King]

Cool. Seems to me that would be an easy way to see if it's possible to fool google and their indexing.

It'll either work or it won't.

[uranian]

try this page:

http://www.chaoticfate.com/2011/07/seven-dead-as-bomb-rocks-norway-several.html

dated 22nd july, first indexed 23rd july, suggesting that the date generated by the link diagnosis addon is the date that google first indexes the site (as it actually says in its description), and that google's index is based on the time/date of the crawl rather than any text in the web page.

[midnight rambler]

good find - that is most fascinating considering all the detail, as in the outcome was a foregone conclusion, except the island kill zone had over 3x as many deaths.

[uranian]

other relevant questions in the whole exercise:

* why the terror exercise the day before?
* why just over 1 hour response, when helicopters were available?
* why is the second shooter story almost forgotten already, despite multiple eye witness accounts of a second armed man?
* why is the damage from the car bomb to the top of the building?
* why were breivik's facebook/twitter accounts created 2 weeks ago?
* why has he not paid any tax (public info in norway) while living here and running a business in the last tax year?
* why were journalists able to access helicopters early during the weapons fire and police/military weren't?
* why did the local police wait almost quarter of an hour after hearing reports of automatic gunfire to contact anyone?
* why is there no burnt out car at the site of the car bomb?
* why did the police know breivik's name when they arrived on the island?


but the creation of these blog posts 2 days before anything actually happened is proof positive that this is another false flag.

[JohnQPublic]

try this page:

http://www.chaoticfate.com/2011/07/seven-dead-as-bomb-rocks-norway-several.html

dated 22nd july, first indexed 23rd july, suggesting that the date generated by the link diagnosis addon is the date that google first indexes the site (as it actually says in its description), and that google's index is based on the time/date of the crawl rather than any text in the web page.

I get "6 days ago". 28-6 = 22nd. First one is restricting the search to chaoticfate.com (advanced search). The second is using normal Google search, but scrolling thruogh pages to find it.

<LI class=g>Seven dead as bomb rocks Norway; several shot dead at youth camp (http://www.chaoticfate.com/2011/07/seven-dead-as-bomb-rocks-norway-several.html)... (http://www.chaoticfate.com/2011/07/seven-dead-as-bomb-rocks-norway-several.html)

6 days ago – Seven dead as bomb rocks Norway; several shot dead at youth camp. Terrorism ravaged long-peaceful Norway on Friday when a powerful bomb ...
www.chaoticfate.com/.../seven-dead-as-bomb-rocks-norway-several.html - Cached (http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:giNTBdmkEC8J:www.chaoticfate.com/2011/07/seven-dead-as-bomb-rocks-norway-several.html+Seven+dead+as+bomb+rocks+Norway+sever al+shot+dead+at+youth+camp+site:chaoticfate.com&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com)



<LI class=g>ChaoticFate.com by qew (http://www.chaoticfate.com/)

6 days ago – Seven dead as bomb rocks Norway; several shot dead at youth camp. Terrorism ravaged long-peaceful Norway on Friday when a powerful bomb ...
www.chaoticfate.com/ - Cached (http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:xxb74BsRenoJ:www.chaoticfate.com/+Seven+dead+as+bomb+rocks+Norway%3B+several+shot+d ead+at+youth+camp&cd=33&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com)

[JohnQPublic]

try this page:

http://www.chaoticfate.com/2011/07/seven-dead-as-bomb-rocks-norway-several.html

dated 22nd july, first indexed 23rd july, suggesting that the date generated by the link diagnosis addon is the date that google first indexes the site (as it actually says in its description), and that google's index is based on the time/date of the crawl rather than any text in the web page.

How did you find when it was first indexed?

[uranian]

How did you find when it was first indexed?

using a firefox addon called link analysis, mentioned in the first post of this thread.

http://yoast.com/tools/seo/link-analysis/

edited to add that this addon has been taken off the web since yesterday, it seems. which is a little suspicious in itself. i have it installed here, so am happy to take screenshots (see the link to LOP for an example) if necessary.

http://imgupld.lunaticoutpost.com/graphic/images/2011/July/28/3D6B_4E31C5E4.jpg
http://imgupld.lunaticoutpost.com/graphic/images/2011/July/28/FCFE_4E31C5E4.jpg

you can dig the info out about to do this yourself, search ["first indexed" google date page age]

edited to add that despite that the addon has been removed from the mozilla site, it's still available (with description of how it works) here:

http://blog.linkdiagnosis.com/2008/03/06/how-to-find-out-how-old-the-page-is/

i've added the file as an attachment, just rename it from .zip to .xpi to install on firefox.


How it Works

Link Diagnosis is actually a robust plugin designed to analyze incoming links to a URL for SEO purposes. However, as one of its “hidden features” it is able to deteremine, approximately, the day the URL appeared in Google. It works simply by having the user right click the page they want to check, select the “Get Page Age” option and, after a few seconds they are greeted with a JavaScript popup containing the date the script detected the site appeared. It works by using Google’s INURL command which, when used in conjunction with a date filter, causes Google to display a date by each resulting URL. What the plugin does is take the URL you wish to check, create the search query and then automatically extract the applicable date, thus turning a multi-step process into a one-click solutions.

http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2008/06/06/finding-the-age-of-a-page/

[uranian]

Google tries to estimate the publication date for a page by using information such as the date when Google first indexed the page.

http://www.google.com/support/websearch/bin/static.py?hl=en&page=guide.cs&guide=1221265&answer=142143&rd=1

so google's own info on this is that the date shown by the link analysis tool is when the page was first indexed by google. which was 20th july.