2005 London bombings

This page is out of date and poorly structured

 2005 London bombings (terrorist attack,  deep event,  false flag)

Date	7 July 2005 08:50 - 7 July 2005 09:47
Type	bombing
Interest of	Anthony John Hill, Nicholas Kollerstrom, Tom Secker
Description	A series of coordinated attacks on London's public transport system during the morning rush hour, allegedly carried out by four Muslim suicide bombers.

The 7 July 2005 London bombings, also known as 7/7, At least three bombs exploded within fifty seconds of each other at about 08:50 on three London Underground trains, a fourth exploded an hour later at 09:47 on a double-decker bus in Tavistock Square.

Official Narrative

The official story is that the bombing was conceived and executed by 4 Muslim suicide bombers.

Legal Status of issues arising from the attacks

As of June 2010, nearly 5 years after the events, there have been just two trials of so-called '7/7 helpers', the second a retrial. Both resulted in acquittals. No further judicial proceedings relating to responsibility for the attacks have been concluded. There have been two 'Pre-inquest' hearings into procedural matters concerning pending Coroners Inquests into the deaths. An Inquest into the deaths of the victims opened at the Royal Courts of Justice in Central London on 11 October 2010. The Inquest will also inquire into alleged pre-attack failings by the police and MI5. There is no jury so that the verdict will be decided by the appointed Coroner, Lady Justice Hallett. Victims families have been granted legal aid to be represented. Survivors will have 'witness status' rather than 'properly interested person status', which would have allowed them a legal representative with powers to question witnesses. An Inquest into the deaths of the alleged perpetrators is to be held separately; their families have been refused legal aid and denied the right to appeal this decision.

Official Reports

Other than the police investigation, there has been no official public inquiry into the events. There have been 3 major Official Reports published to date:

1. Home Office Official Account of the Bombings in London on 7th July 2005 - Published 11th May 2006
2. ISC Report report. - May 2006
3. Review of the Intelligence on the London Terrorist Attacks on 7 July 2005 - published May 2009

All take it as axiomatic that the guilty parties have been established beyond doubt. The 2009 report absolves the SIS's of any alleged failures. Darker possibilities are not mentioned.

Problems

It is also notable that, in its rather strange, folksy (not-to-say spooky) narrative style, the first report includes the following paragraph:

07.40: The London King’s Cross train leaves Luton station. There are conflicting accounts of their behaviour on the train. Some witnesses report noisy conversations, another believes he saw 2 of them standing silently by a set of train doors. The 4 stood out a bit from usual commuters due to their luggage and casual clothes, but not enough to cause suspicion. This was the beginning of the summer tourist period and Luton Station serves Luton Airport.

To the deep embarrassment of the government, necessitating a convoluted timetable revision and a statement to the House by the then Home Secretary John Reid, investigative reporter Nick Kollerstrom discovered and published the simple fact that the 7:40 train had been canceled that morning so that the alleged bombers had to have caught either an earlier or later train.

Information Sources

• The July 7th Truth Campaign - Among the most comprehensive and reliable on-line sources of information and documents on 7/7. It is nevertheless careful - editorially - to stay firmly on the 'official narrative' side of a very sensitive line between "elements of the State/SIS knew much more about plans for the attack than has been revealed" and "those same elements were somewhere between 'deeply complicit' and the 'orchestrators' of the attacks". The campaign's "July 7th - Alternative Hypotheses" document is an impressive exploration of nine possible hypotheses that, in varying degrees, fit the available evidence of what happened on that day. The Campaign site has also published an essay by Professor David MacGregor entitled 'J7 as Machiavellian State Terror'. It too is strictly hypothetical but provides disturbing insights into well established historical cases of State sponsored terrorism deployed against domestic populations as a tool of policy.
• The J7 London Bombings Dossier - Another J7 Truth Campaign document. It is an absolute must-read for serious 7/7 researchers. It's author, David Minahan, has this to say by way of introduction to what is a thorough forensic examination of the available evidence by a professional investigator with no axe to grind:

I was by occupation a claims investigator for an insurance company and later a leading firm of solicitors so I have some experience of "forensic" matters. I was also some years ago the National President of a major Trade Union (MSF now merged with the AEEU to form Amicus). I am convinced that there has been a massive cover up and campaign of disinformation about this matter.

• Official Confusion.com - Website maintained by the producers of the Video "Mind the Gap"</ref> is another comprehensive source of factual data and analysis about the events of 7/7 from the makers of the video "Mind The Gap" (See Videos below)
• Terror on the Tube Dr Nick Kollerstrom's blog - Author of a book by the same name ISBN 9781615770076
• J7:7/7 Inquests blog - Blog set up to discuss and comment upon the J7 Inquests hearings and evidence.

Wikipedia on 7/7

The main 7/7 Wikipedia article provides useful reference material and links. It is a good primer on the official narrative, presenting it as it does without serious question. It is also a good example of the inability of mainstream media to address deep political issues effectively and is in fact the subject of the WikiSpooks Project article The Problem with Wikipedia. In other words, whilst the article marshalls copious useful facts and information links, it's basic assumption is that the official narrative of the events of 7th July 2005 is broadly accurate.

Videos about 7/7

There have been a number of good videos of the issues surrounding 7/7, notable among them are:

• 'Mind the Gap' - an early video narrated by David Shayler,
• 'Ludicrous Diversion' - A reference to Tony Blair's expressed opinion about the need for an official Inquiry - very professionally produced
• 'Ripple Effect' - an amateur production that caused quite a stir with it's plausible hypothesis of SIS orchestration drawn entirely from public domain information.
• '7/7 The Big Picture' An amateur production comprising public domain material. Detailed analysis of released video footage, stills and the anomalies concerning missing/smudged time-stamps and other timing issues. Puts the events in their broader 'war-on-terror' context. Up to date as at July 2010.
• '7/7:Seeds of Destruction' Another professional production. The film examines some of the questions and theories about 7 July London bombings.

The first half of the film examines covert operations from three different periods - Central America 1954-63, Italy 1945-1990 and Afghanistan/Pakistan 1979-Present day. These operations are used to provide context to the second half of the film, which is a detailed analysis not only of the events of the day of 7/7, but of the intelligence and security policy of the War on Terror in which 7/7 happened. Also available on the 7/7 Archive and in 18 parts on YouTube

The BBC - Gatekeeper of the official narrative

In 2008 the BBC produced its own program as part of its 'Conspiracy Files' series. As quintessential establishment mouthpiece, it did not disappoint. The July 7 Truth Campaign wisely declined to take part. Skeptics who DID take part were rewarded with ad-hominem hatchet job attack making it clear that, 'When your own case evidence is shaky, attack the man' - or kill the messenger - is alive and well at the BBC. The linked video is a small part of the program; the remainder is available from the linked page.

Those so attacked were Dr Nick Kollerstrom for alleged 'Holocaust denial' and Anthony John Hill (aka Muad' dib) for his allegedly wacky spiritual beliefs. The program set out to debunk Hill's video 'Ripple Effect'. The Wikipedia article on the Video , true to form, claims that it did just that. Whereas Dr Rory Ridley-Duff of Sheffield Hallam University demonstrates in his essay "What Happened at Canary Wharf on 7 July 2005" that the probability of 'Ripple Effect' being closer to the truth of what happened on 7/7 than the 'Conspiracy File' version (ie the official narrative) varies between 50 and 75% depending on the 'theory of truth' used to analyse the available evidence.

Update 11 October 2010

A stark illustration of the mindset of the Establishment mouthpiece and its spokesmen:

To mark the opening of the Inquest on the victims of the bombings, BBC Radio 4's Today Program did an interview with Rev. Julie Nicholson whose daughter was killed in the attacks. John Humphreys asked her:

"What do you want from this inquest? We know what the verdict will be, that goes without saying, but what do YOU want?"

See Also

• Terror and Torture: Protecting the Deep State - Nafeez Ahmed 7 July 2010
• ISBN 0-930852-73-7 - Terror on the Tube:Behind the Veil of 7/7 - An Investigation by Nick Kollerstrom - 2009
• Web site for Nick Kollerstrom's Book "Terror on the Tube"
• Complete newspaper archive of 7/7 coverage
• London Bombings Information Archive
• How to set up a Patsy
• The London Bombs - Blog
• The 7/7 Inquest blog - From the team behind the J7 Campaign main site and discussion forum
• More Brits Think Government Behind 7/7 London Bombings Rock Creek Free Press

 

Related Quotations

Page	Quote	Author	Date
Juval Aviv	“It's easy to put a truck bomb, as we did, er, as happened in London.”	Juval Aviv
Peter Power	“POWER: Today we were running an exercise for a company - bearing in mind I'm now in the private sector - and we sat everybody down, in the city - 1,000 people involved in the whole organisation - but the crisis team. And the most peculiar thing was, we based our scenario on the simultaneous attacks on an underground and mainline station. So we had to suddenly switch an exercise from 'fictional' to 'real'. And one of the first things is, get that bureau number, when you have a list of people missing, tell them. And it took a long time - INTERVIEWER: Just to get this right, you were actually working today on an exercise that envisioned virtually this scenario? POWER: Er, almost precisely. I was up to 2 o'clock this morning, because it's our job, my own company. Visor Consultants, we specialise in helping people to get their crisis management response. How do you jump from 'slow time' thinking to 'quick time' doing? And we chose a scenario - with their assistance - which is based on a terrorist attack because they're very close to, er, a property occupied by Jewish businessmen, they're in the city, and there are more American banks in the city than there are in the whole of New York - a logical thing to do. And it, I've still got the hair....”	Peter Power	7 July 2005
Peter Power	“HOST: How do you effectively provide security on an underground system? POWER: You're quite right. Security at the very best is proportionate, it'll never ever be absolute. The thing that concerns me is that what are we doing for the thousands of men and women actually who are in London working. And I say that because at half past nine this morning we were actually running an exercise for a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning, so I still have the hairs on the back of my neck standing up right now. HOST: To get this quite straight, you were running an exercise to see how you would cope with this and it happened while you were running the exercise? POWER: Precisely, and it was about half past nine this morning, we planned this for a company and for obvious reasons I don't want to reveal their name but [if] they're listening they'll know it. And we had a room full of crisis managers for the first time they'd met and so within five minutes we made a pretty rapid decision that this is the real one and so we went through the correct drills of activating crisis management procedures to jump from slow time to quick time thinking and so on.”	Peter Power	7 July 2005
Peter Power	“There has been much nonsense written about why my company ran an exercise on 7 July 2005 that had very close parallels to the real thing that day. Since then I have made several attempts to add my own comments to numerous sites that seem to get increasingly excited about their own conspiracy theories and in the process exclude any rational debate. It seems those who occupy the world of finding conspiracy theories to replace just about any coincidence, do not want to have any dialogue with those offering a different view, but I have not yet given up hope. I am therefore hoping, perhaps naively, that someone might like to read an honest and factual account about a particular exercise my company ran in London three years ago. Unfortunately, the BBC had postponed in 2008 a programme in their ‘conspiracy files’ series that would have done this. Our client three years ago agreed to be named in the BBC programme since the attitude of the producer and his team was very balanced (several conspiracy theorists were also invited to take part). We even allowed our complete exercise material to be made available to the BBC. Regrettably broadcasting in 2008 might have jeopardised an ongoing court case, so they had little choice about postponing it to 2009. Early in 2005 Reed Elsevier, an organisation specialising in information and publishing that employs 1,000 people in and around London, asked us to help them prepare an effective crisis management plan and rehearse it before sign-off. Several draft scenarios were drawn up and the crisis team themselves set the exercise date and time: 9.00am on 7 July. The test was planned as a table-top walk through for about six people (the CM team) in a lecture room with all injects simulated. Everything was on MS PowerPoint. The location of their Central London office near to Chancery Lane was chosen as one test site. With many staff travelling to work via the London underground system, the chosen exercise simulated incendiary devices on three trains, very similar to a real IRA attack in 1992, as well as other events. As there had been eighteen terrorist bomb attacks on tube trains prior to 2005, choosing the London Underground was logical rather than just prescient. With this in mind it was hardly surprising that Deutsche Bank had run a similar exercise a few days before and, prior to that, a multi-agency (and much publicised) exercise code-named Osiris II had simulated a terrorist attack at Bank tube station. Moreover, I had also taken part in a BBC Panorama programme in 2004 as a panellist alongside Michael Portillo MP et al, in an unscripted debate (we had no idea at all what the scenario was to be?) on how London might once again, deal with terrorist attacks, only this time it was fictional (created entirely by the BBC). In short, some of the research for our exercise had already been done. The scenario developed for our client even started by using fictitious news items from the Panorama programme then, as with any walk through exercise, events unfolded solely on a screen as dictated by the facilitator without any external injects or actions beyond the exercise room. Also factored into the scenario was to be an above ground fictitious bomb exploding not far from the head office of the protected Jewish Chronicle magazine where for exercise purposes, our imagined terrorists would have been aware that commuters would now be walking to work (past a building already considered a target) as some tube stations would have been closed. Of just eight nearby tube stations that fell within possible exercise scope, three were chosen that, by coincidence, were involved in the awful drama that actually took place on 7 July 2005. A level of scenario validation that on this occasion, we could have done without. An exercise that turns into the real thing is not that unusual. For example, in January 2003, thirty people were injured when a tube train derailed and hit a wall at speed. At the same time, the City of London Police were running an exercise for their central casualty bureau where the team quickly abandoned their plans and swung into action to cope with the real thing. For a surprising number of people such coincidents[sic] cannot be accepted as such. There just has to be a conspiracy behind them, despite the obvious point that painstaking research will always identify probable above possible scenarios. By the way, the only reason I was asked to speak on TV news that day, when there was still much confusion about the real tragedies, was to encourage more organisations to thoroughly plan their own exercises knowing the threat of "terrorism" is and remains, very real. One tragic consequence being Islam, a great Abrahamic, monotheistic faith (along with Judaism and Christianity), has undeservedly become vilified by some people.”	Peter Power	6 April 2009

 

Related Documents

Title	Type	Publication date	Author(s)	Description
Document:7/7 Terror and Torture	blog post	7 July 2010	Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed
Document:The 7/7 Inquest Begins	article	12 October 2010	Nicholas Kollerstrom
Document:The struggle against terrorism cannot be won by military means	article	8 July 2005	Robin Cook	Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Inexplicably, and with disastrous consequences, it never appears to have occurred to Washington that once Russia was out of the way, Bin Laden's organisation would turn its attention to the west.
File:Machiavellian-state-terror.pdf	analysis		David MacGregor	A reanalysis of the events of 7/7 as possible 'Machiavellian State Terror'.
File:Theorising Truth.pdf	paper	2009	Rory Ridley-Duff	An investigation into the claims broadcast in two documentaries about the London bombings of 7th July 2005:- 7/7 Ripple Effect and the BBC’s Conspiracy Files: 7/7. It concludes that both documentaries construct truth that supports their contrasting political outlook and agenda.

 

The Official Culprits

Name	Description
Hasib Hussain	Patsy used in the 2005 London bombings
Mohammad Sidique Khan
Germaine Lindsay
Shehzad Tanweer

Rating

6 September 2016 Robin  A rather disorganised overview of this deep event
The 7/7 bombings are comparable to 9/11, but Wikispooks has only a single page on the topic. Although outdated and jumbled, it contains thought provoking information which should assist in understanding this deep event.

Many thanks to our Patrons who cover ~2/3 of our hosting bill. Please join them if you can.