2005 London bombings

From Wikispooks
Jump to: navigation, search
Event.png 2005 London bombings (terrorist attack,  deep event,  false flag)  History Commons
Russell square ambulances.jpg
Date 7 July 2005 08:50 - 7 July 2005 09:47
Location London,  UK
Blamed on Hasib Hussain,  Mohammad Sidique Khan,  Germaine Lindsay,  Shehzad Tanweer
Type bombing
Deaths 56
Injured (non-fatal) 700
Interest of Anthony John Hill, Nicholas Kollerstrom, Nick 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 was a set of coordinated explosions in London. On the day after London had won its bid to host the 2012 Olympic Games, at least three bombs exploded within fifty seconds of each other around 08:50 on three London Underground trains, followed by a fourth at 09:47 on a double-decker bus in Tavistock Square.

Official Narrative

Wikipedia is a good primer on the official narrative, which claims that the bombing was conceived and executed by 4 Muslim suicide bombers, armed with homemade organic peroxide–based devices. Although it contains a lot of information, Wikipedia's policies make it structurally incapable of properly addressing deep events. It does not mention Martin McDaid, for example.

Official investigations

As well as the police investigation, the below investigations appeared to have taken it as axiomatic that the guilty parties had already been established beyond doubt:

  1. Home Office Official Account of the Bombings in London on 7th July 2005 - Published 11th May 2006[1]
  2. ISC Report report. - Published May 2006[2]
  3. Review of the Intelligence on the London Terrorist Attacks on 7 July 2005 - Published May 2009[3] - Absolves MI5 & MI6 of any failures.
  4. Independent coroner's inquest - Published 9 May 2011 - Heather Hallett concluded that an official public inquiry was not needed

A stark illustration of the mindset of the BBC and was provided by journalist John Humphreys. To mark the opening of the October 2010 Inquest, BBC Radio 4's Today Program asked Rev. Julie Nicholson, whose daughter was killed in the attacks, "What do you want from this inquest? We know what the verdict will be, that goes without saying, but what do you want?"

Problems

While no single "smoking gun" has emerged, circumstantial evidence has accrued to suggests that the 7/7 attacks are not what they are claimed. Noting several people apparently involved but unindicted, Tom Secker stated in 2015 that he thought the most likely explanation was that 7/7 was a "Gladio-style" betrayal of the 4 accused by their handlers.[4]

Deliberate obfuscation by MI5

Why would someone deliberately so obfuscate a photograph before sending it for identification?

Andrew Parker lead MI5's response to the 7/7 attacks.[5] MI5's legal team argued that by law only "brief, neutral and factual" verdicts can be recorded, leading to charges that they were attempting to gag justice by restricting the verdicts of the inquests into the victims of the 7 July attacks.[6] In 2011, it emerged[7] that at the inquest into the deaths of the 7/7 victims, it emerged that in April 2004 an unnamed senior officer in the security services had sent a photo of Mohammad Sidique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer to USA, supposedly in an effort to identify them. Rather than send the original photo, however, he cropped it, added noise, decreased the contrast, and rendered it in black and white. When asked why, an anonymous 'Agent G.' suggested that the aim might have been to get them identified "as speedily as possible". G insisted that it would be "nonsensical and offensive" to suggest that MI5 had failed to act to prevent an attack that they "supposed or hypothesised" was coming.[7]

The May 2009 Commons intelligence and security committee inquiry into the preventability of 7-7 noted that the (above) butchered black and white photo of Tanweer was observed to be of "poor quality", and that 'Agent G' suggested that it was probably deemed too poor even to forward. The Guardian notes dryly that "The committee appears not to have been aware of the original, very clear, colour photograph of both men."[7]

As the counsel to the inquests marked "I think one of my children could have done a better job of cropping out that photograph."[8]

Drills

Echoing 9-11, when an implausible number of drills were going on, 7-7 repeated the pattern of remarkably similar, simultaneous drills.[9]

Reed Elsevier

Peter Power, a former Anti-Terrorist Branch Metropolitan police officer and "crisis management specialist" volunteered the information that on 7-7 that he was working running a drill "based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning". In an interview he gave to the Manchester Evening News he spoke of "an exercise involving mock broadcasts when it happened for real".[10] Details of this rather obvious lead remain failed to emerge over the next decade and Power has never been called to testify under oath about the matter. While initially not disclosing who had commissioned the exercise, he later stated that it was the publisher (and backer of the UK's largest arms fair), Reed Elsevier.

Operation Hanover

Operation Hanover was London’s police hold a little-known yearly terror-drill, which on 1-2 July involved three ‘simultaneous’ bomb attacks on three underground stations. Peter Clarke, head of the Counter Terrorism Command at Scotland Yard reports that he spent "the weekend before the London bombings of July 7 2005 with my colleagues in the anti-terorism[sic] branch, working through our response to.. multiple simultaneous attacks on the Tube".[11]

Incorrect official narrative

The Home Office Official Account of the Bombings 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.

Investigative reporter Nick Kollerstrom discovered that the 7:40am train, allegedly taken by the bombers, had been canceled on that day. In response Home Secretary John Reid made a statement to the House and revised the official narrative to state that the bombers caught the 7.25 am from Luton. This however was 23 minutes late according to station officials, making it hard to see how the alleged bombers could have reached their different destinations in time.[12]

Explosive

Early reports from commercially-controlled media state that detectives reported traces of the military explosive, RDX (Hexogen).[13][14][15][16]

Missing CCTV

No CCTV footage of the bombers has been released by Verint Systems, the company that took charge of CCTV on the London Underground 10 months before the attacks.[17] They claim that the cameras were not functioning on that day.

Legal proceedings

As of June 2010, nearly 5 years after the events, there had been 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 [18] 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. Halleet was told that it would be "impossible" to reveal secret MI5 files about the attacks to the bereaved families or their lawyers.[19]

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. [20]

Response

The bombings were used worldwide by those seeking to restrict civil liberties in the name of the "war on terror", just as the Charlie Hebdo shooting was exploited, ironically, to curtail freedom of speech.

UK

Russell square ambulances.jpg

The UK apply community-policing principles to "counter-terrorism" enforcement. [21] The UK's Terrorism Act, passed in 2000, amended in 2001, was amended in 2005, and then again in 2006.[How?][22]

The bombings were cited in 2006 by the UK ambassador to Saudi Arabia, who warned that "British lives on British streets" were at risk if the Serious Fraud Office's investigation into the Al-Yamamah arms deal continued. The memo asked: "If this caused another 7/7, how could we say our investigation is more important?".[23]

US

A week after the attacks, the infamous US Justice Department lawyer John Yoo wrote in an article entitled "Go on the Offensive against Terror", that "renewing the Patriot Act and staying the course at Guantanamo Bay remain important tools for gaining the intelligence that can prevent another Sept. 11". The same article declared that "another tool would have our intelligence agencies create a false terrorist organization. It could have its own websites, recruitment centers, training camps and fundraising operations."[24]

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 [25] 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'. [26] 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. Its 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" 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.

Videos

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

  • 'Mind the Gap' [27] - an early video narrated by David Shayler
  • 'Ludicrous Diversion' [28] - A reference to Tony Blair's expressed opinion about the need for an official Inquiry - very professionally produced
  • 'Ripple Effect' [29] - an amateur production drawn entirely from public domain information. Its plausible hypothesis of SIS orchestration caused quite a stir
  • '7/7 The Big Picture' [30] 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' [31] 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

BBC Conspiracy Files

In 2008 the BBC produced a program as part of its 'Conspiracy Files' series. [32] The July 7 Truth Campaign declined to take part. Skeptics who did take part were rewarded with ad-hominem attacks which skirted round the facts of the July 7 case. The linked video is a small part of the program; the remainder is available from the linked page.

Those so attacked were Nick Kollerstrom[33] for 'Holocaust denial' and Anthony John Hill (aka Muad' dib) for his spiritual beliefs. The program set out to debunk Hill's video 'Ripple Effect' and the Wikipedia article on the Video[34], true to form, claims that it did just that.

See Also

 

Related Documents

TitleTypePublication dateAuthor(s)Description
7/7 Terror and Tortureblog post7 July 2010Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed
File:Machiavellian-state-terror.pdfanalysisDavid MacGregorA reanalysis of the events of 7/7 as possible 'Machiavellian State Terror'.
The 7/7 Inquest Beginsarticle12 October 2010Nicholas Kollerstrom
The struggle against terrorism cannot be won by military meansarticle8 July 2005Robin CookBin 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:Theorising Truth.pdfpaper2009Rory Ridley-DuffAn 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
Hasib Hussain
Mohammad Sidique Khan
Germaine Lindsay
Shehzad Tanweer
== Rating ==
3star.png 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.


References

  1. File:Homeofficeofficialreport.pdf
  2. File:ISC 7 July Report.pdf
  3. File:ISC Report Mat 2007.pdf
  4. http://www.spyculture.com/disinfowars-14-the-ireland-77-connection/
  5. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21970091
  6. http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/feb/17/77-inquiry-mi5-accused-gag
  7. a b c http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/feb/21/mi5-cropped-7-7-bombings
  8. MI5 cropped 7/7 bomber out of picture shown to key informant
  9. http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=118140
  10. Manchester Evening News "King's Cross Man's Crisis Course", 8 July 2005
  11. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/11719684/77-anniversary-Why-we-can-never-stop-tackling-extremism.html
  12. http://truth11.com/2009/07/06/daily-mail-rumours-swell-that-the-government-staged-77/
  13. http://web.archive.org/web/20100412013245/http://www.mirror.co.uk/tm_objectid=15713744&method=full&siteid=115875-name_page.html
  14. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/explosive-used-in-bombs-was-of-military-origin-498495.html
  15. http://www.irishexaminer.com/archives/2005/0714/ireland/explosives-used-in-london-bombings-originated-in-the-balkans-664838892.html
  16. http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/05/front2453563.0402777777.html
  17. https://centurean2.wordpress.com/2011/05/16/israeli-company-verint-behind-77-cover-up/
  18. Pre-inquest hearings into procedural matters
  19. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/8649577.stm
  20. File:Inquest-coroners order.pdf
  21. Klausen, J. (2009). British Counter-Terrorism After 7/7: Adapting Community Policing to the Fight Against Domestic Terrorism. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 35(3), 403-420.
  22. Klausen, J. (2009). British Counter-Terrorism After 7/7: Adapting Community Policing to the Fight Against Domestic Terrorism. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 35(3), 403-420.
  23. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/apr/10/bae.armstrade
  24. https://web.archive.org/web/20111113081618/http://www.aei.org/article/22833
  25. File:July 7th Alternative Hypotheses.doc
  26. File:Machiavellian-state-terror.pdf
  27. Mind the Gap - Early video detailing anomalies and contradictions in the official narrative
  28. Video - 'Ludicrous Diversion' - a good, professionally produced resume of 7/7
  29. Video - 'Ripple Effect'
  30. 7/7 The Big Picture
  31. 7/7:Seeds of Destruction - Released on 3 August 2010.
  32. BBC Conspiracy Files -v- Ripple Effect -part 6 of 6
  33. Dr Nick Kollerstrom - Author of the 2009 book 'Terror on the Tube'
  34. Wikipedia article on the Video 'Ripple Effect'
  35. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pX4nmxJdddU