tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-276533052024-03-13T00:23:38.277+00:00J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign BlogThe official blog of the J7: The July 7th Truth CampaignBridgethttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04220942517267393608noreply@blogger.comBlogger80125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-18277314213710206232015-07-07T10:52:00.000+00:002015-07-07T15:04:18.871+00:007/7 Ten Years On - An indictment of the State and the state of investigative journalism <div style="text-align: justify;">
As the tenth anniversary of 7th July 2005 materialises much will be written and broadcast around the official 'narrative' of what happened that fateful day. Ten years on and you might think that there would not be much more that could be learned about what happened. Yet, on 6<sup>th</sup> July 2015, we learn from the <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/11719684/77-anniversary-Why-we-can-never-stop-tackling-extremism.html" target="_blank">former head of the Counter Terrorism Command</a> at Scotland Yard between 2002 and 2008, Peter Clarke, that:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<blockquote>
I spent the weekend before the London bombings of July 7 2005 with my colleagues in the anti-terorism branch, working through our response to the most difficult scenario we could think of. <b>The one we came up with was multiple simultaneous attacks on the Tube. Four days later, our musings became a dreadful reality</b>.</blockquote>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
How prescient a scenario this was, mirroring as it did a Panaroma 'documentary' from 2004, as well as crisis management exercises that were running on the day of 7<sup>th</sup> July 2005 that were also operating around a similar scenario. The idea of a series of explosions across the underground network seems to have been very common currency for quite some time among the anti-terror brigades.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
J7 have received the usual barrage of requests for comment in recent weeks from various media organisations who are forced to care, for a brief time at least, about the events of 7/7 by dint of the fact that an anniversary is on the cards. Some requests have provided questions to which they would like responses from the J7 team of researchers. One such journalist is <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/jack-sommers/" target="_blank">Jack Sommers of the Huffington Post</a>. In response to his questions and those of other journalists asking for comment on similar issues, J7 offers the following.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
<b>Do you regard the official version of events of what happened, on the balance of probabilities, as the most plausible? If not, what version of events do you find most plausible</b><br />
<br />
It's not up to <a href="http://julyseventh.co.uk/">J7</a> to provide plausible explanations of what happened; our job is to <a href="http://julyseventh.co.uk/J7-Inquest-Submission/index.html">ask the right questions</a> and try to elicit truthful or revealing answers from the authorities. There still exists the idea that people are innocent until proven guilty and therefore the burden of proof is on the State to prove its case for the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. Ten years on the State has provided no evidence, other than that which is purely circumstantial, speculative or presumed that would secure a successful conviction of the four accused. It took almost <a href="http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh/index.php?showtopic=3151" target="_blank">4 years for the authorities to fudge a response</a> to a Freedom of Information request submitted 13 days after 7th July 2005 requesting the basis of how the alleged bombers' ID was apparently determined.<br />
<br />
<b>Has the momentum behind J7 grown or shrunk in recent years since the inquest into the 52 people killed? Why?</b>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The same momentum will always be there in a search for the truth of what happened. 7/7 is not unique in this regard. The same momentum and movement for truth as possessed by the <a href="http://www.alicewheeldon.org/">grand-daughter of Alice Wheeldon</a> who is still pursuing justice after <a href="http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh/index.php?showtopic=1781" target="_blank">the setting-up of her grandmother in 1916 by MI5</a>. Records and information was hidden behind official secrecy as part of a concerted State cover-up that ran for over 80 years. The same momentum <a aiotitle="as the relatives of the 21 killed during the 1974 Birmingham pub bombings" href="http://www.justice4the21.co.uk/">as the relatives of the 21 killed during the 1974 Birmingham pub bombings</a>, who have <a href="http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/birmingham-pub-bombings-campaign-group-8758843" target="_blank">never even had an inquest</a> into the deaths of their loved ones, while the state incarcerated <a href="http://www.innocent.org.uk/cases/birmingham6/">innocent people for over 16 years</a>, as <a href="http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/birmingham-pub-bombings-what-hiding-8152172"> a government 75 year ban</a> on disclosure of relevant material to the case continues.<br />
<br />
Truth is a powerful thing and those who seek truth and justice are persistent in their quest and, as history as shown, that quest is passed down through the generations.
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<blockquote>
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;">
- <a href="http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/m/martin_luther_king_jr.html">Martin Luther King, Jr.</a></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>What aspect of the official narrative do you find least convincing and does this make you doubt the narrative overall?</b>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The official narrative is a deeply flawed document and <a href="http://j7truth.blogspot.co.uk/2006/07/john-reid-official-report-into-london.html">has been amended as a result of information uncovered by J7</a>. Secret and <i>in camera</i> hearings during the Inquest by a specially appointed privy councillor judge cast further doubt on the transparency of the process and the veracity of the story told in the 'narrative'. It is worth remembering that the <a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/narrative" target="_blank">definition of a narrative</a> is this: "a story or account of events, experiences, or the like, whether true or fictitious." We believe that a story that might be truthful or fictitious is not sufficient explanation for an event the magnitude of 7/7, nor is it sufficient to convict the accused without trial.
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Why is an inquest into the 4 men accused of carrying out 7/7 important? Why do you think they have they not happened?</b>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It is not only important, it is a requirement of Article 2 of the European Convention of Human Rights. J7 are still waiting for investigative journalists imbued with the tenacity to uncover the facts around quite why the State has failed to conduct an inquest into the deaths of the accused, as well as all the other issues that exist around the truth of what happened on 7/7. J7 <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.co.uk/2011/03/j7-submission-for-resumption-of.html">submitted a request for a resumption of the inquests into the deaths of the 4 accused</a> to Lady Justice Hallett during the 7/7 Inquests proceedings.
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The inquests into 52 of the deaths on 7th July 2005 commenced over five years after the deaths occurred and only after the government tried to implement the power to use ‘suitably trained and cleared coroners and counsel’ to undertake inquests without juries.
André Rebello, Coroner for the City of Liverpool, honorary secretary of the Coroners’ Society and the executive officer of the Coroners’ Society confirmed that there had been no consultation with the coroners themselves and <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmpublic/counter/080424/pm/80424s01.htm" target="_blank">was asked in 2008</a>, "What is your view of the proposal that inquests in some circumstances should be held before suitably trained and cleared coroners appointed by the Secretary of State?" His response is telling:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<blockquote>
<br />
"I am very uncomfortable about that. I think that it drives a coach and horses through the separation of powers. If a suitably qualified or specially ticketed coroner needs to be brought in, it certainly cannot be any part of the Executive that appoints the coroner. <b>Well, it could be, but our rule of law would be going out the window</b>."</blockquote>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The measures incorporating <a href="http://j7truth.blogspot.co.uk/2010/01/they-lie-to-you-jack-straw-and-public.html" target="_blank">secret juries and specially appointed coroners</a> passed through Parliament by a slim majority of only eight votes, on Thursday, 12 November 2009. The process was <a href="http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2009-11-09&number=241" target="_blank">assisted no less by a procedural farce</a> engineered by <a href="https://antagonise.wordpress.com/2012/10/22/jack-straw-confirms-existence-of-the-uk-secret-state-in-league-with-dark-forces-in-the-united-states/" target="_blank">Jack Straw</a>. The procedural farce included a reported number of Labour MPs who apparently voted the wrong way by mistake.
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>How do you respond to those who say the promotion of alternative theories has been upsetting for survivors of the attacks? What about those who have attacked those survivors personally? (Such as this: rachel-north-liar-and-charletane.blogspot.ie/)</b>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
J7 has always walked the fine line between the official doctrine contained in the narrative and those who ostensibly question the official story but posit their own evidence-free pet theories about what happened. J7 research and writings are based on facts that we have established through continued research, endless FOI requests, and information placed into the public domain by the authorities along the way.<br />
<br />
<b>Have you ever received support from either survivors of 7/7 or the relatives of those killed? If so, what was it?</b>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Yes. Overwhelmingly the feedback we have received from those directly affected by 7/7 have been supportive of our quest to get the truth of what actually happened. Further evidence of this can be seen from the many occasions when J7's research was cited or used during the course of the 7/7 Inquests and presented before the court by the representatives of the bereaved. <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/feb/14/al-qaida-supergrass-77-questions">Survivors and relatives also want to know the truth</a> about what happened and their loved ones. If anything, <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.co.uk/2011_05_01_archive.html"> the truth about what happened</a> is vastly more important to them than it is to those of us who do
not accept the official narrative for the reasons we have carefully and painstakingly documented in depth over the last decade.<br />
<br />
Ten years on from the events in London on July 7<sup>th</sup> 2005, what we know about them remains exactly as it was at the conclusion of the 7/7 Inquests back in 2011, which we highlighted again <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/6th-anniversary-of-77.html">on the 6</a><a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/6th-anniversary-of-77.html"><sup>th</sup></a><a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/6th-anniversary-of-77.html">
anniversary</a>. Just some of these are mentioned below for anyone that might think an event of the significance of 7/7 should be
justly and judiciously investigated to uncover the truth about what happened and how it happened.
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Without a full and independent Public Inquiry, held outside of the restrictive remit of the <a href="http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh/index.php?showtopic=315" target="_blank">Inquiries Act 2005</a>, it remains the case that:
</div>
<ul style="text-align: justify;">
<li>The bodies of Tanweer and Khan were not included in the <a aiotarget="false" aiotitle="'LifeExtinct' body counts carried out on 7th July by Dr Morgan Costello" href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/search/label/Dr%20Morgan%20Costello">'LifeExtinct' body counts carried out on 7th July by Dr Morgan Costello</a>
</li>
<li>The police <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/cctv-fuss-about-nothing.html">viewing of the Luton Station CCTV footage</a> was conducted as early as 10th July, despite the official account clearly stating that the men were identified on CCTV at King's Cross Thameslink on 11th July, and that it was this discovery that led the investigation to Luton as a possible site of interest. </li>
<li>There exist no recorded sightings of three of the men, Khan Tanweer and Lindsay, after the footage from King's Cross Thameslink, some way from the Underground tube network. Apparently, a temporary CCTV system was installed at King's Cross underground and <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/final-curtain-cctv-rich-to-cctv-fail.html">malfunctioned for the 20 crucial minutes between 8.30am and 8.50am</a>. Additionally, there is no CCTV footage showing the three from any other cameras. This means that there is absolutely no CCTV evidence places three of the accused anywhere on the London Underground network on the morning of 7 July 2005.
</li>
<li>No CCTV from pre-incidence tube carriages has been released, despite this CCTV apparently existing, and despite it being crucial evidence which could confirm or deny that three of the men boarded the carriages they are alleged to have boarded. Why has it not been released? This CCTV should also have been made available to <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2011/02/colonel-mahoney-in-porton-down-with.html">Colonel Mahoney</a> when the expensive modelling of likely injuries sustained by the deceased was conducted to make up for the fact that no internal <i>post mortems</i> of the victims were conducted; the lack of post mortems itself being a jarring anomaly.</li>
<li>No CCTV exists from McDonald's showing whether Hussain actually used the premises to insert a new 9v battery into his apparently malfunctioning bomb. It was revealed during the inquests that the store manager can be <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.co.uk/2010/10/final-curtain-cctv-rich-to-cctv-fail.html" target="_blank">seen on CCTV footage actually turning off the CCTV</a> system before Hussain entered.</li>
<li>No CCTV exists of <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2011/01/notable-absence-of-hasib-hussain.html">Hasib Hussain</a> on either of the two buses he is alleged to have boarded. There is no footage of Hussain aboard the number 91 bus, nor the number 30 bus he is alleged to have destroyed, nor is there any street or traffic camera footage showing him boarding either of the buses.</li>
<li>There is a huge discrepancy between the explosives allegedly used, as given in sworn evidence to the Jean Charles de Menezes Inquest, and the evidence that Clifford Todd gave to the 7/7 Inquests. Clearly, not everyone is singing from the same hymn sheet about a significant aspect of 7/7.</li>
<li>There is strong evidence in the public domain to suggest that at the heart of the story behind 7/7 <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2011/02/mcdaid-who.html">lay at least three operatives</a> for both British and American Intelligence, <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2011/02/cat-amongst-stool-pigeons-mohammed.html">one of whom</a> served an insanely short period of time in a US prison, before being quietly released, for crimes far greater than the crimes of those his testimonies put behind bars for far longer sentences.</li>
</ul>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
These questions and many, many more can be found on the <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/">7/7 Inquests blog</a>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Without a doubt the State itself will never provide answers to these questions without the dogged persistence of independent researchers in their quests for truth, nor until investigative journalists – if such beings still exist – have the courage to honestly start examining the many unanswered questions that exist and those which are raised by the complete lack of conclusive evidence produced in the story (for that is what a 'narrative' is) so far. Until then we'll all have to put up with the 'churnalism' of official State-dictated 'narratives' that we have all come to know and despise.
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Meanwhile, J7's quest for the truth about what happened on the day of 7th July 2005 continues.<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="blogger-post-footer">--
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
http://julyseventh.co.uk
J7 Blog: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/
J7 Inquests Blog: http://77inquests.blogspot.com/
J7 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581
J7 Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
J7 Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
J7 MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth</div>The Antagonisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01459201402366077472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-67232229682792220212014-07-07T18:42:00.001+00:002014-07-07T18:45:06.936+00:00J7 Statement Condemning the Vandalism of the 7/7 Memorial in Hyde Park<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgGunsQ7vqM8fwZY8dnfLDBVkrjrUf_F8ZLdTXfSBhfT_8HwTsMMK5VEL2mVz1VNNkffhRTFNJx-u3SWuX85OMCP2U6Mhx1XgZjwAs35gUJCAAwCQa6eoLPGFiYfdWduSoXi1gIZg/s1600/july-7-memorial.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: justify;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgGunsQ7vqM8fwZY8dnfLDBVkrjrUf_F8ZLdTXfSBhfT_8HwTsMMK5VEL2mVz1VNNkffhRTFNJx-u3SWuX85OMCP2U6Mhx1XgZjwAs35gUJCAAwCQa6eoLPGFiYfdWduSoXi1gIZg/s1600/july-7-memorial.jpg" height="240" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
<span id="goog_1805775728"></span><span id="goog_1805775729"></span>Since the inception of the July 7th Truth Campaign in 2005 by a dedicated and independent group of researchers, we have been careful to adopt a <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.co.uk/2010/10/7-july-inquests-its-conspiracy-stupid.html" target="_blank">serious approach to our research</a> and conduct all our research through official channels while maintaining the utmost respect for the victims, the injured and the bereaved at all times. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Over the course of the last nine years <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/" target="_blank">J7</a> has ensured that our inquiries to get to the truth about what happened on 7th July 2005 are deliberate, concise and aimed at uncovering specific pieces of information that have not or would not have been available in connection with the story of 7/7. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
J7's research is widely regarded and respected to the extent that our research and publications were cited at <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/J7-Inquest-Submission/J7-Submission-for-Resumption-of-Inquests-into-the-four.html" target="_blank">the opening of the official 7/7 inquests</a> and referenced again at the <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.co.uk/2011/05/77-inquests-7-july-inquest-verdict.html" target="_blank">close of the inquests process</a>. Our factual <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/J7-Inquest-Submission/index.html" target="_blank">submissions to the inquests can be viewed here</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The July 7th Truth Campaign has never supported, encouraged, nor even seen the need for <a href="http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/national/news/9017942.7_7_bombers__were_innocent_patsies_/" target="_blank">mindless publicity stunts</a> (see <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/j-for-justice-77-ripple-effect.html" target="_blank">addendum here</a>) that ostensibly purport to bring attention to the many still unanswered questions about the events of 7th July 2005, and nor will we ever.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
We <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jul/07/july-7-survivors-memorial-defacement-anniversary" target="_blank">categorically condemn</a> the <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/77-memorial-defaced-on-anniversary-of-2005-attacks-with-blair-lied-thousands-died-graffiti-9588326.html" target="_blank">idiotic stunt</a> of defacing of the 7/7 memorial in Hyde Park <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jul/07/july-7-memorial-defaced-graffiti-ninth-anniversary" target="_blank">on the eve</a> of the ninth anniversary of 7/7, the only outcome of which can be to alienate survivors and the bereaved. Such ill-considered and blatantly offensive antics can only serve to cause upset, inflame emotions and further confuse the issue of what happened on 7/7 while smearing the good name and good standing of the July 7th Truth Campaign and our research.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
J7 continue to tread the extremely narrow path between the State's still unproven narrative orthodoxy and the transparently lunatic fringe of the <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/j-for-justice-77-ripple-effect.html" target="_blank">7/7 Ripple Effect</a> disciples, who appear convinced that they know what happened after watching a film by someone who claims to be a <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8124687.stm" target="_blank">messiah and the rightful King of Britain and Israel</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
No supporter of the July 7th Truth Campaign would ever promote such evidence-free films that fabricate their own equally implausible narratives, nor any media or articles that purport to offer the truth about the events of 7/7. Despite 9 years of ongoing research, the July 7th Truth Campaign has repeatedly stated that that there exists insufficient evidence in the public domain for the truth to be known.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As is the way of J7, we will continue to ask the correct, difficult and unanswered questions about the events of 7/7 instead of proposing answers for which there exists as little supporting evidence as there does for the official narrative.<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="blogger-post-footer">--
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
http://julyseventh.co.uk
J7 Blog: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/
J7 Inquests Blog: http://77inquests.blogspot.com/
J7 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581
J7 Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
J7 Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
J7 MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth</div>The Antagonisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01459201402366077472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-49579925153934618762012-10-09T20:52:00.000+00:002012-10-10T12:17:45.858+00:007/7 Conspiracy Road Trip (#77CRT - Complete Retardation Television)<h3 style="padding-top: 20px;">
<b>Conspiracy Road Tripping - A Brief History</b></h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The airing on 1<sup>st</sup> October 2012 of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01n6zt7">7/7 Conspiracy Road Trip</a> on <a href="https://twitter.com/BBCThree">BBC3</a> is the second attempt by the BBC to appear to tackle the thorny subject of the 7/7 narrative, once again through the curious method of <a href="http://j7truth.blogspot.co.uk/2009/07/bbc-conspiracy-files-77-view-from.html" target="_blank">ignoring the allegations contended in the official narrative</a> in favour of lampooning some gullible fools who have nothing to do with the story of 7/7, other than a passing and naive interest in the subject, often for the purposes of self-aggrandisement<sup>1</sup>.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi0mQ3JJpGrnUHOxPWztIzlkfO5MQiJVHvsJCNYAtlWC4jjAeLsZWCFnMSdKW6GRe5G2mI68AXY37vIVntxhqAv564lAQm0vnhzrmP_B1rMkGJEWBLZdae5CziLJI6aYQptbXFw/s1600/roadtrippers.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="178" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi0mQ3JJpGrnUHOxPWztIzlkfO5MQiJVHvsJCNYAtlWC4jjAeLsZWCFnMSdKW6GRe5G2mI68AXY37vIVntxhqAv564lAQm0vnhzrmP_B1rMkGJEWBLZdae5CziLJI6aYQptbXFw/s320/roadtrippers.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The Tripping Conspiracy Bus Set</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<a href="http://j7truth.blogspot.co.uk/2009/06/77-cf-final-draft.html" target="_blank">The first 7/7 Conspiracy Files</a> effort, "<a href="http://j7truth.blogspot.co.uk/2009/07/bbc-conspiracy-files-77-view-from.html" target="_blank">an affront to journalism</a>", was sensitively aired in June 2009, just a few weeks before the 4<sup>th</sup> anniversary of 7/7. The basis of the first production was to lampoon a bunch of nonsense touted on the Internet. The show focused on risible speculation lifted from a YouTube production "<a href="http://julyseventh.co.uk/j-for-justice-77-ripple-effect.html">7/7 Ripple Effect</a>", made no-less by a self-professed messiah and "Rightful King of Britain and Israel". Prior to the show's production, J7 were approached by the BBC and, as is usual with these things, we documented the BBC’s attempts to cajole J7 into the production. Needless to say, <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/j7-refuse-bbc-conspiracy-files-offer.html" target="_blank">J7 declined to participate in round one</a> of the sham 7/7 documentary game. J7's decision not to participate proved to be a wise one as the show followed precisely the format we predicted.
<br />
<br />
Thrilled though we were that some of the many outstanding questions that call into doubt the veracity of the 7/7 narrative were to be aired on a British State Broadcasting Corporation channel, the validity of these questions was soon to receive far greater acknowledgement than any provided by the BBC, this time from the British State's own judicial wing in the form of the proceedings referred to as the 7/7 Inquests. In the opening remarks to the inquest <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/11102010am.htm">Hugo Keith</a>, prized defender of the Queen and State as well as being Counsel to the Inquests, said:
<br />
<blockquote>
<span style="font-family: "Courier New",Courier,monospace;"><span courier="courier" monospace="monospace" new="new" ourier="ourier">
<i>Some of the questions may never fully be answered<br />and some may of
course also fall outside the scope of<br />these inquests, but what we
can say is that a great deal<br />of time, energy and resources has
been devoted to<br />finding out what happened to each deceased. Thus
it is<br />to be hoped that these inquests, however unpleasant
and<br />distressing, as they will be, will assist in answering<br />the
families' questions in allaying some of the rumours<br />and suspicion
generated by conspiracy theorists.<br />I'll return a little later to
the question of<br />whether there is, in truth, any basis for some of
the<br />theories that have been canvassed in the press and on<br />the
internet.</i>
</span></span>
</blockquote>
As anyone bothering to follow the inquest proceedings that followed-on from an event as serious and significant as 7/7 will know, these proceedings gave rise to many more questions than answers. From the outset of the process right through to its conclusion J7 analysed in detail the inquest proceedings on the dedicated <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">J7: 7/7 Inquests Blog</a>.
<br />
<br />
At the very least it should be understood about the 7 July Inquest process that:
<br />
<ul style="text-align: justify;">
<li>The inquest process opened with reference to "conspiracy theories" but without acknowledging that the official British State narrative of 7/7 remains to this day an unproven conspiracy theory; </li>
<li>the inquest process fulfilled none of the functions of a proper and legitimate inquest process;</li>
<li>the inquests provided a semi-legitimate, semi-official run-through and re-iteration of a pre-determined but still unproven conclusion;</li>
<li>limited amounts of evidence were released into the public domain for the first time. </li>
<li>Lady Justice Hallet's refused to re-open the Inquests into the four deceased members of the public who stand accused of being responsible;</li>
<li>the families of the accused were refused the right to legal representation, thereby foreclosing before the Inquests even started on many issues that might otherwise have been examined at the families' request.</li>
<li>The inquest process closed with reference to "conspiracy theories" but without acknowledging – for a second time – that the official British State narrative still remains an unproven conspiracy theory, despite the best of efforts of various arms of the State apparatus including the government, police, judiciary and its propaganda organ known as the British Broadcasting Corporation.</li>
</ul>
Hallett's closing remarks were carefully worded to counter any doubts or questions that the public might hold in respect of 7/7 and, in doing so, highlighted clearly the concerns that lie at the heart of the British establishment, and by extension at the heart of the British State's senior partners in the U.S.:
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"To argue or find to the contrary [i.e. that Khan, Tanweer, Hussein and Lindsay were not
the bombers] would be irrational. It would be to ignore a huge body
of evidence from a vast array of sources. Had there been a conspiracy
falsely to implicate any of the four in the murder plot, as some have
suggested, it would have been of such massive proportions as to be
simply unthinkable in a democratic country. It would have involved
hundreds of ordinary people, members of the bombers’ families,
their friends, their fellow terrorists, independent experts,
scientists, as well as various police forces and the Security
Service. It would have cost millions of pounds to fabricate the
forensic evidence. Independent barristers and solicitors who have had
access to the source material (for example the CCTV footage) during
the criminal trials and these proceedings would have had to be
involved. Just to state the proposition is to reveal its absurdity."
</blockquote>
<a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.co.uk/2011/05/77-inquests-7-july-inquest-verdict.html" target="_blank">J7 countered the fallacy of this flawed but hugely popular argument</a> on our 7/7 inquest blog. <a href="http://bit.ly/The911Truth">In summary</a>:<br />
The official conspiracy theory holds that unbeknown to friends, family and the security services four young men conspired to manufacture the events of 7/7. Yet, if the flawed logic of official conspiracy theorists is to be believed, a conspiracy involving anyone other than the four accused amateurs would be so massive as to be "simply unthinkable".<br />
<br />
That the British Establishment does cover-up and conspire against the public on a grand scale has been proven true on numerous occasions, including more recently the revelations about the appalling and disgraceful treatment of the Hillsborough disaster victims' families – 23 years for aspects of a truth long known by the families to emerge – and a safe enough length of time to allow anger and emotions to simmer down, while few of those responsible are to be held accountable and face the justice they so richly deserve for their parts in the two-decades long Hillsborough conspiracy.
<br />
<br />
Understandably, but unfortunately, the 52 bereaved families of 7/7 victims seeking a fully independent Public Inquiry <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/01/7-july-bombings-public-inquiry">gave up their fight against the State apparatus</a>, albeit reluctantly, at the close of the 7/7 inquest performance stating, "It would appear that official lines have now, after much resistance, been closed to us."
<br />
<br />
<h3>
<b>The 7/7/ Conspiracy Road Trip Meltdown</b></h3>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj8ggd99BAcgJ7ugp7AWF6lvS_yVGFC4ldR7cWZ-ZFJc9jcLEURfpqzd55B-zAovk5S9BV-xOYUd-8VkNXNys_C3J1edsRY0eexIwzdteHTBPqyca9tpI09ixDWOBW5OdhQZKUKkQ/s1600/vlcsnap-2012-10-09-23h29m02s184.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj8ggd99BAcgJ7ugp7AWF6lvS_yVGFC4ldR7cWZ-ZFJc9jcLEURfpqzd55B-zAovk5S9BV-xOYUd-8VkNXNys_C3J1edsRY0eexIwzdteHTBPqyca9tpI09ixDWOBW5OdhQZKUKkQ/s1600/vlcsnap-2012-10-09-23h29m02s184.png" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">7/7's infamous Mohammed Siddique Khan, according to new (but failed) <br />
research by the BBC 7/7 Conspiracy Road Trip team (edited out for repeat showings)</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
So, with a bit of context for <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01n6zt7/Conspiracy_Road_Trip_7_7_Bombings/" target="_blank">the latest Conspiracy Road Trip</a> laid out, let's all now climb aboard the 7/7 CRT bang-bus for another round of intelligence torture, courtesy of 7/7 Complete Retardation Television, a mockumentary made by the ex-BBC staffers at <a href="https://www.twitter.com/RenegadePic">Renegade Pictures</a>, for the BBC, with and for gullible idiots, all presented by a little-known Irish comedian, <a href="https://twitter.com/andrewismaxwell">Andrew Maxwell</a>.<br />
<br />
Maxwell opens the show with:
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Back in the seventies the cops in Britain did fit up innocent Irish people for terrorist bombings. I mean, to have a giant suspicion of the British establishment, I can understand. But does that all add up to Blair and presumably Brown and... at least a dozen of them would have to be in on it. Did they all conspire, to then blow up loads of other Brits in the city centre? It doesn't add up for me."
</blockquote>
Of course, <a href="http://j7truth.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/j7-vs-bbc-conspiracy-road-trip-renegade.html#update">Andrew Maxwell also said</a>:
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"I assumed he [Abu Hamza] was a spy, or a tout. I mean I'd imagine the actual real dudes that we're meant to be chasing around are, y'know, below the surface, right? Lily-whites? People with absolutely no connection to radical mosques or something like that. Maybe not even obviously be Muslim, maybe have a Celtic accent."
</blockquote>
Credit, as ever, where it's due - Maxwell made this statement on his road-based trip:
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"There is no CCTV evidence after this image in King's Cross train station actually showing them on the tube or the underground platforms."
</blockquote>
Which is true, incredible though it is. There is no CCTV footage that places the accused on the London underground on the morning of 7/7. But let's not worry about trivial details like this, or that there is a 20 minute period during the crucial moments of 7/7 for which all the underground CCTV systems happened to be offline. Now is probably also not the time to forget that, as outlined above, the 'British establishment' of course includes the British State Broadcasting Corporation that funds Mr Maxwell's little flights of conspiracy fancy. This is the same BBC which has repeatedly dedicated much time, effort, expense and airtime to countering and debunking so-called 'conspiracy theories' surrounding the events in London on 7 July 2005, when four explosions on an increasingly
unaffordable public transport system killed 56 people.
<br />
<br />
In the seven years that have passed since 7/7, the BBC has never yet subjected the official narrative to any scrutiny at all, much less the extreme levels of scrutiny it seems to reserve solely for anyone with the temerity to notice the State has failed to meet the burden of proof required to prove its own gap-riven conspiracy theory.
<br />
<br />
Andrew Maxwell concedes at the outset of the programme that, "to have a giant suspicion of the British establishment, I can understand". However, he then says, "But does that all add up to Blair and presumably Brown, at least a dozen of them<i> </i>would have to have been in on it, <i>(see, there's that logic again, "If it wasn't the four we keep saying it is, it must have been an impossible amount of others.") </i>did they all conspire to then blow loads of other Brits up in the city centre? It doesn't add up for me".
<br />
<br />
This line establishes the false hypothesis the show is designed to ridicule, but it is also telling for another reason. Maxwell, whose country of birth has a long history of being at the wrong end of British State interests, also failed to acknowledge the parallel power structures that are openly and routinely acknowledged for anyone that cares to look; that there is a state within the state, a secret state in which the real power-brokers and wire-pullers operate behind the theatrical curtains of parliamentary democracy. Unelected and unaccountable to anyone, hidden from sight. These are the generals, the heads of the intelligence agencies, top Whitehall bureaucrats, the judiciary, privately financed trusts, shell organisations, royalty and other monied and business interests.
<br />
<br />
Furthermore, quite what the qualifications are of a little-known Irish comedian might be for pronouncing definitively on a variety of subjects that include major
terrorist attacks like 9/11 and 7/7 have – like much to do with the story of 7/7 – yet to be revealed. This fairly significant stumbling block aside stands not in the way of the BBC conspiracy documentary MO that continues to be the favoured approach for the production of its mockumentaries in the low-grade style of Conspiracy Road Trip's factually and intellectually challenging format, as well as that of other efforts such as the equally insulting 7/7 Conspiracy Files.
<br />
<br />
<h3 b="b">
BBC Balked at genuine collaboration opportunities</h3>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The BBC and the <a href="http://j7truth.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/j7-vs-bbc-conspiracy-road-trip-renegade.html" target="_blank">Renegade Productions</a> team were certainly given opportunities to engage with us about the subject of their programme. As a campaign group, having already bathed in the muddy waters of BBC promises and programme scopes, we declined to participate. However, one J7 member and supporter, <a href="http://www.investigatingtheterror.com/" target="_blank">Tom Secker</a>, who himself has made two excellent films on the subject, <a href="http://howardbealesnewshour.blogspot.co.uk/2010/10/77-seeds-of-deconstruction.html">7/7: Seeds of Deconstruction</a> and <a href="http://howardbealesnewshour.blogspot.co.uk/2011/09/77-crime-and-prejudice.html">7/7 Crime and Prejudice</a>, attempted to work openly and honestly with the production team, only to have his serious efforts laid to waste after requesting that he be allowed to film independently for his own record any interviews or interactions. Clearly BBC-related crews are careful to avoid being played at their own game, despite the fact that, unlike the BBC itself, Tom Secker has no track record of selectively editing footage to make the case for <i>a priori</i> false conclusions:
</div>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
Hi Oliver,
<br />
<br />
Frankly, being bumped to talking to someone else is not really going to reassure me of anything. As I made clear, I will only agree to beinvolved in this show if I can run my own camera and if I can talk to people who have direct experience of the investigations.
<br />
<br />
When I asked how far you'd got on achieving the co-operation of my very short list your response was "Murphy is a possibility as is Roberts. Todd and Clarke unlikely. We will have similar people at worst. I'm currently waiting to hear back from Blair... (would be a result!)" This does not fill me with confidence. I don't see how we will find with anyone 'similar' to Dr Julie Ann Roberts, because she performed a specific and significant role in the investigation that no one else has any authority to discuss because they did not do what she did. Similarly, it is Clifford Todd who has given vastly contradictory testimony about the nature of the explosive used in the bombings, and there's no point me asking some other random so-called explosives expert why that is because it is only Todd who is in a position to speak on that. As I have said all along, I have no interest in talking to people with second or third hand information,or who are just offering an opinion.
<br />
<br />
Regarding Blair I will say that there's virtually no chance of him agreeing to this, and even if he did it would be very unwise to put me in the same room as him. The man is just starting to try to redeem his reputation in the minds of many of the British public as a compulsive liar and war criminal. There's no way he'll touch this.
<br />
<br />
Likewise,regarding the journey starting in Leeds - who are the group going to talk to there To explore the possibility of the alleged bombers being set up one would have to talk to the likely agents of influence like Martin McDaid, or the people handling him, or at the very least the people running the surveillance operations such as Warlock and Honeysuckle. Have you secured the co-operation of any of these people?
<br />
<br />
Fundamentally, what would reassure me is not talking to another person involved in this production, but you putting in writing that I am allowed to run my own camera and telling me who it is the group (including myself) would be talking to. That's the bottom line here, so until I am given firm answers on those two points, I'm not going to agree to participate no matter who from your company talks to me.
<br />
<br />
So, at this point I'm going to try tomake it easy for you by suggesting further names of people who areactually in positions to speak on the 7/7 investigations rather than simply offer soundbites:
<br />
<br />
- Dr Andrew Reid, the original coroner, and the forensic pathologists working under him who decided not to carry out full post mortems on the victims of London's most lethal terrorist attack
<br />
<br />
- Dr Morgan Costello, who was tasked with pronouncing 'life extinct' at three of the bombing sites, but somehow failed to pronounce dead any of the alleged bombers at the scenes
<br />
<br />
- Colonel Peter Francis Mahoney, who testified at the inquests about the nature of the explosions and the modelling put together in 2010 to asses how the victims had died
<br />
<br />
- Assistant Chief Constable John David Parkinson of the West Yorkshire Police
<br />
<br />
- Detective Constable Richard Reynolds of the SO15 Counter-terrorism Command, forensic management team, on the 'bomb factory' up in Leeds, which is the other part of the Leeds story that requires serious examination
<br />
<br />
If, in the absence of some of the original names I suggested, some of these people can be secured for me to talk to as part of the filming then I am much more likely to agree to this. As to 'an appearance' - I am interested in being as equal a part of the group as anyone else. I do not want to be accorded any kind of special status simply because I probably know more about this than others. This isn't about my ego, it is about furthering the unofficial investigations myself and others have been carrying out for several years. If that aim can be advanced within the confines of this show then great, but I have made my conditions clear so until they are met I do not wish to get any more emails trying to get my personal contact information. You have my email and my Skype.
<br />
<br />
Regards,<br />
Tom
</blockquote>
<div style="align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Tom heard no more and the rest is now BBC broadcasting infamy, thanks to four useful idiots, at least one obvious stooge, an Irish comedian and a few wizz-bang theatrics. Hey presto, here's a documentary for dolts in which the 7/7 narrative is once again unquestioningly delivered verbatim, in spite of all the evidence that directly contradicts its assertions. Tom's response to the BBC can be read <a href="http://www.investigatingtheterror.com/articles/Debunking_7_7_Debunking___The_Conspiracy_Roadtrip_.htm" target="_blank">here</a>.</div>
<br />
<h2 style="text-align: justify;">
<b>7/7 Conspiracy Road Trip – The Take Down</b></h2>
<br />
<h3>
Conspiracy Road Tripping Straw Man #1: Davina - The Personalities Don't Fit</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
A <a href="http://blogs.independent.co.uk/author/russellrazzaque/">Dr. Russell Razzaque</a> is introduced without a name caption nor even a mention in the programme's credits. Dr Russell, the show claims, is, "A Muslim academic who specialises in the psychology of terrorism". He spouts some generic psycho-babble invented to create a profile of the new threat to "our [capitalist] way of life" for a few minutes and then uses this as the basis to construct a false profile of four people he's never met and about whom he probably knows less than any of the core J7 research team.
</div>
<br />
Nice try, must try harder. The methodology though lays out the infantile path along which the rest of the show predictably travels.
<br />
<br />
<h3>
Conspiracy Road Tripping Straw Man #2: Jon Scobie – Train Time Records Changed On Purpose</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/july-7-luton-kings-cross-train-times.html">train time records were changed</a> is not really the issue, the point instead being that the train on which the official Home Office narrative placed the accused on 7/7 was cancelled and did not run, meaning that the accused certainly weren't on it.<br />
<br />
After <a href="http://j7truth.blogspot.co.uk/2006/07/john-reid-official-report-into-london.html" target="_blank">J7 forced the government to acknowledge that the 7.40 train to Luton was a fabrication</a>, the alleged train the accused are alleged to have caught to London was changed to the 7.25am train, which happens to be the only other train that morning which might have arrived in London in time for the accused to be on any of the affected underground trains as they left King's Cross.
</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The aim of this section of the programme was to prove that it is possible to enter Luton station at 7.22am, purchase tickets to London (return tickets in the case of the 7/7 accused, almost as if they had intended to return) and catch a 7.25 train. In the mockumentary, Andrew 'Impartial' Maxwell began "to fret that they're not going to make it" as if he had some vested interest in the official conspiracy theory being the case. In fact, they failed. Having been persuaded to be pretend suicide bombers for a day, setting Tony all aquiver, the task of buying tickets and catching a train inside 3 minutes was a stretch too far, and that was without carrying large rucksacks, much less ones full of highly-volatile home-made explosives!
</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Andrew Maxwell, the comedian and world-renowned international terrorist investigator states confidently, "Mobile phone records show that he [Hasib Hussain] tried unsuccessfully to contact his three fellow bombers." Yet, if all four accused were engaged in a deadly, synchronised suicide mission set for 8.50am and Hasib, as the story would like us to believe, intended to die at that time then <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/murdoch-phone-hacking-and-77.html" target="_blank">calling his co-conspirators some time after the fact seems more than a little odd</a>. Maybe he was planning to meet them in McDonalds, where we now know that <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.co.uk/2010/10/final-curtain-cctv-rich-to-cctv-fail.html" target="_blank">the CCTV recording system can be seen being disabled just before Hasib entered the store</a>. </div>
<br />
This section of the mockumentary features a short clip of footage from Luton station on the morning of 7 July 2005, but <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.co.uk/2010/10/curious-case-of-jag-that-parked-in.html">these clips from Luton station</a> on 28 June and 7 July are far more interesting.
<br />
<br />
<h3>
Conspiracy Road Tripping Straw Man #3: Tony Topping - CCTV Deliberately Missing</h3>
Citing Andrew Maxwell once again:
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"There is no CCTV evidence after this image in King's Cross train station actually showing them on the tube or the underground platforms."
</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.co.uk/2010/10/final-curtain-cctv-rich-to-cctv-fail.html" target="_blank">The last image of the accused on 7/7 was filmed at King's Cross Thameslink</a> which, in 2005, was quite some distance from King's Cross underground station -- in fact, nowhere near where it is now. This means that there is no visual record of the four accused anywhere on the underground network. Whether the CCTV is missing through cock-up or conspiracy is almost irrelevant (but worthy of further investigation) but the fact stands that there is no visual evidence showing the accused on the London underground, much less the platforms and the trains they are accused of attacking.
<br />
<br />
This section of the show features an aspiring but failed London mayoral candidate, Brian Paddick. In 2005 Paddick was the Deputy Assistant Chief Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police and was routinely wheeled out to front 7/7 and 21/7 related press conferences.<br />
<br />
Would-be mayor Paddick's opening words are, "I don't know" in response to a question about where there is a lack of CCTV footage, where he calmly admits that there is no CCTV of the four suspects on the underground or any bus, and that he has no idea why this might have been.<br />
<br />
Sir Ian Blair termed the investigation into the London bombings as the "single biggest criminal inquiry in English history". Obviously the magnitude of the crime and the significance of the investigation wasn't enough for a Deputy Assistant Commissioner to take an interest and avail himself of key aspects of investigation's progress. That aside, Paddick's information reaches the public domain approximately seven years too late, even though it properly belonged in the realms of the Metropolitan Police terror chiefs Andy Hayman (on the <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/mar/21/times-crime-editor-met-andy-hayman" target="_blank">phone-hacking News International payroll</a> immediately he stopped being a police person) and Peter Clarke (who <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/6692741.stm" target="_blank">flatly refused to reveal</a> whether a key player in the 7/7 story, <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1550210/Bomb-plotters-al-Qaeda-link-still-in-Britain.html" target="_blank">Mohammed Quayyum Khan (aka 'Q') was on the police or intelligence payroll</a>).
<br />
<br />
Where was Deputy Assistant Chief Commissioner Brian Paddick in 2005, 2006, 2007 when certain "survivors" (one of whom claimed to have been <a href="http://antagonise.blogspot.com/2006/09/if-links-back-to-uk-or-us-sources-are.html?showComment=1159997820000#c115999784727031470" target="_blank">specifically "asked to take you lot [J7] on"</a>) were categorically stating that their inside police contacts had told them that the CCTV really, really, really did exist?<br />
<br />
Paddick then diverts the discussion on to "other evidence to place the bombers at the scene in terms of DNA <i>and so forth</i> and identity documents, <i>and that sort of thing</i>." Paddick must be referring to the <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1895690/July-7-bombers-left-clues-to-martyrdom.html" target="_blank">identification documents of the accused that were scattered about the carriage</a> some distance from their alleged locations, demonstrating no damage commensurate with having been at the heart of a massive explosion. This unexploded identification documentation conundrum forced even top government scientists testifying at the 7/7 Inquests to admit defeat when it came to explaining the method by which the ID might have been placed where it had.
<br />
<br />
Maxwell insightfully notes that Paddick fails to persuade anyone of anything, so falls back onto a tried, tested but not very successful method of wheeling out a survivor to state, "We know what happened that day, because we were there, we saw it". In 7/7 Conspiracy Road trip the survivor in question is Edgware Road survivor, Jacqui Puttnam. Interestingly, Puttnam is introduced not as a "survivor" of the incident, but instead as someone who "witnessed the Edgware Road tube explosion".
<br />
<br />
Puttnam may well have been there, in a carriage adjacent to the one in which the explosion took place, but in the aftermath, chaos and trauma of an explosion, it's unlikely that Puttnam or anyone else knew anything much about what happened by virtue of having been there. As is usually the case, such details are filled in after the event by a range of methods, not through some divine insight that arises from merely having the misfortune to have been present. Remember that the initial story of 7/7 was a power surge and there are several contemporaneous
survivor accounts which refer to announcements of such, and survivors who describe having felt the sensation of being electrocuted. <br />
<br />
<a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.co.uk/2010/11/identification-of-mohammed-sidique-khan.html" target="_blank">To understand the invalidity of Puttnam's testimony</a>, it is crucial to examine what she says in detail. She opens with, "I walked past Sidique Khan", as if she could possibly know such a thing with any degree of certainty. Given that there is no footage of any of the accused on the underground, this bit of information may equally be true or false, but Puttnam has no way of knowing definitively. She is, however, seemingly convinced that this is absolutely the case. She continues, "We know who caused it... on my train it was Sidique Khan. They made sure they left enough evidence that it was them, plus they were seen." This is a reference to the magically scattered ID mentioned by Paddick, the identification documents that didn't show any signs of damage commensurate with having been involved in a massive explosion and conveniently indicted four young men without a trial or any judicial scrutiny. It is fairly safe to infer however that <i>someone</i> certainly wanted it to be the case that there was "left enough evidence that it was them". Whether or not it was the accused remains to be proven.<br />
<br />
Puttnam's testimony becomes even more diluted when she invokes perhaps the most unreliable witness in the 7/7 story, Danny Biddle. Puttnam says, "I've spoken to Danny Biddle who was the worst injured survivor. || Danny saw Sidique Khan reach down and detonate the bomb." This, of course, is patently untrue but it makes for an attention-grabbing story. You can read all about <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.co.uk/2010/11/77-inquests-danny-biddle-rucksack-on.html">Danny Biddle's many and varied eye-witness accounts here</a>.
<br />
<br />
As if Puttnam's testimony so far wasn't far-fetched enough, she then enters the world of pure fantasy by continuing, "He [Khan] stood on the platform when I walked past him and looked at me and thought 'You might die today'. He didn't care what kind of person I was, he was gonna do that." Jacqui, Jacqui, you didn't know Mohammed Sidique Khan and you can't pretend to possess the ability to read his thoughts any more you could the thoughts of any other complete stranger.
<br />
<br />
<h3>
Conspiracy Road Tripping Straw Man #4: Tony Topping – The Bombers Were Duped</h3>
This is where the 7/7 Ripple Effect alternative false-hypothesis is presented and features the exercise of security darling, <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/j7-exclusive-peter-power-dorset-police-suspension.html">disgraced ex-policeman, Peter Power</a>. <br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/july-7-letter-dr-m-naseem.html" target="_blank">Dr Mohammed Naseem of Birmingham Central Mosque</a> is introduced and, in his usual measured and considered way, intelligently addresses questions directed at him, running rings around presenter Maxwell's devil's advocation techniques.
<br />
<br />
Not much to lampoon with measured and reasoned responses, which is not the stuff BBC conspiracy mockumentaries are made of, so this section was padded out with some footage of the participants eating while Tony and Layla petulantly bickered over nonsense.
<br />
<br />
<h3>
Conspiracy Road Tripping Straw Man #5: Layla – The Bombs Were Planted by Someone Else</h3>
Introduced here is a bomb expert with a made-up name, Chris Hunter (not unlike Tory Chairman <a href="http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/grant-shappss-woes-grow-he-faces-investigation">Grant Shapps' made up name, Michael Green</a>). Hunter is "A former army bomb disposal expert and intelligence officer" and "now a counter-terrorism consultant" and was presented as an unbiased expert without even a hint of irony. He looked straight at the camera and nodded a little too feverishly as he said it was ridiculous that elements of the State could have been involved in any degree with 7/7. Being able to look someone in the eye and lie convincingly is a core skill for most intelligence operatives, yet Hunter wasn't particularly convincing as he fluffed his way through the interview.<br />
<br />
However, on the subject of 7/7, Hunter was much better as he assessed the damage to the Aldgate train while looking at a photo of the inside of the King's Cross/Russell Square Piccadilly line train.
<br />
<br />
Cleverly, presenter Andrew Maxwell invokes the magic bouncing blast theory of 7/7 lore to account for the upwards-twisted metal in carriages, but the bomb expert himself only acknowledged Maxwell's words and didn't peddle that line of nonsense of his own accord. It was Maxwell who made a comment about the explosions being so powerful, "so you could suck some floor back up [into the carriage]".
<br />
<br />
Made-Up-Name Hunter then talks some nonsense about "the fact that there were fragment... there was fragmentation in these devices as well. <i> Basically, you know</i>, bits of metal Sellotaped, or taped to the <i>actual </i>bombs themselves, and those were used to <i>effectively </i>enhance the damage <i>to the, er, the </i>individuals <i>on the, you know,</i> on the carriage itself. || What they do is <i>effectively</i>, if you've just got explosive you get blast damage, as if the blast isn't damaging enough as it is, <i>they </i>actually add nuts and bolts <i>and things</i>, so you get these critical puncture,<i> erm,</i> puncture wounds, <i>effectively</i>." <br />
<br />
Nuts and bolts are not an indicator of the power of explosives as Hunter incorrectly asserts, they are entirely separate and unrelated, but thanks for the drive down the intellectual <i>cul-de-sac</i>.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/11_03/ChapatiBombENP_468x503.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/11_03/ChapatiBombENP_468x503.jpg" width="297" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.channel4.com/news/21-7-bombers-to-appeal-as-doubt-cast-on-trial-evidence" target="_blank">21/7 'bomb', with bolt and washer accessories and <br />NO EXPLOSIVE PROPERTIES so, technically, not a bomb at all</a></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
The description Hunter gives of the 7/7 devices wasn't a description of the devices allegedly used on 7/7 but instead one that accurately describes the so-called 'bomb' found in Wormwood Scrubs and left there by the <a href="http://www.channel4.com/news/21-7-bombers-to-appeal-as-doubt-cast-on-trial-evidence" target="_blank">21/7 no-bombs</a> 'bomber' and British Army
applicant, Manfo Kwaku Asiedu. In fact, the 7/7 Inquests never mentioned any metal taped to the outside of the explosives allegedly used but instead suggested that explosives were wrapped in Mackey's ice-cream bags and surrounded by ice packs to keep them cold.
<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/02/Chris_Hunter_2011.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="261" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/02/Chris_Hunter_2011.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">"Chris (made-up name) Hunter" proudly basking in the
glory of doing <br />security work in the NATO-annihilated Libya, where
the majority <br />of Libyans received no obvious benefit from his 'security'
endeavours</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
In 2012 "Hunter" was selected to be one of 15 Ambassadors for Prime Minister David Cameron’s youth development initiative, the National Citizen Service. As a 'counter-terrorism consultant', and in precisely the same way as the long-time darling of alternative 7/7 narratives, <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/j7-exclusive-peter-power-dorset-police-suspension.html">disgraced Peter Power</a>, "Hunter" stands to profit greatly from fanciful, unproven and evidence-free narratives about suicidal asymmetrical threats which manifest themselves out of the blue, even after Nobel Peace Prize winning Obama done went and got that old CIA assett, Osama.<br />
<br />
That a man who had pledged his life in service of queen and country, and who personally stands to benefit directly from terrorism and terrorist threats real or imaginary, would happily lend credence to the magical bouncing bomb theory comes as little surprise. Even taking this into account his contribution adds nothing to the collective pool of knowledge about the events of 7/7.<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
Conspiracy Road Tripping Straw Man #6: Tony Topping – Homemade Bombs Not Powerful Enough</h3>
For the grand finale the BBC/<a href="http://j7truth.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/j7-vs-bbc-conspiracy-road-trip-renegade.html" target="_blank">Renegade Productions</a> contract the services of Sidney Alford and pull out all the licence-fee stops to blow up a decrepit old bus, allegedly with some sort of home-made explosive conconction.
<br />
<br />
The bus used in the programme is a different type to that affected on 7/7, having a different seating layout, much older and flimsier internal furniture and only a single set of doors at the front end of the bus. There is a 'Space Chimps 2' advertisement on one side. This suggests the bus had its last passenger use in 2010, unless "Space Chimps" was a subtle reference to the show's participants.<br />
<br />
When we first see the bus the lower back-end has been removed. When the bus is blown up this section of the bus is covered over. No mention is made of the preparation undergone by the bus prior to its demise and no explanation for this manipulation of the bus is given either. It appears as though the engine and fuel tank may have been removed, thereby further reducing the overall solidity of the aged bus structure and making for a more spectacular bit of TV viewing. The bus of course as the only above-ground incident on 7/7, thereby providing an iconic visual terror hook that none of the other incidents on the morning could provide.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0imzZhV3ilcIv4T8eO5YHwgks2-6B-J2BhCC_tr5VFvtB1uHvans0sdbGaql1Xybi14wKu0biP7BLSHI-mX7GV9dTkJpE46nNE6Jv95KCNlbxNrsbCvXn2MxYLbeTNxdqcVbd/s1600/Busblackend.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0imzZhV3ilcIv4T8eO5YHwgks2-6B-J2BhCC_tr5VFvtB1uHvans0sdbGaql1Xybi14wKu0biP7BLSHI-mX7GV9dTkJpE46nNE6Jv95KCNlbxNrsbCvXn2MxYLbeTNxdqcVbd/s320/Busblackend.png" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Decrepit, empty and weakened old bus with the lower-back removed</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiW3uX0WwbJ-dH-57ciuOVh-5nvMBvpKpt8GNtNysKexehr2qXK-Mo6iTLrD0_i72qA86MK5UrH7QGOl1DY_VK8oDtWK_H3PLfAEFWcatrjEG30TJtr-hLn0U2PudclDVmtLFzd/s1600/busredend.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiW3uX0WwbJ-dH-57ciuOVh-5nvMBvpKpt8GNtNysKexehr2qXK-Mo6iTLrD0_i72qA86MK5UrH7QGOl1DY_VK8oDtWK_H3PLfAEFWcatrjEG30TJtr-hLn0U2PudclDVmtLFzd/s320/busredend.png" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Decrepit, empty and weakened old bus with the lower-back <br />
opening covered over again as if nothing ever happened.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Sidney Alford is seen with a box of what he refers to as black pepper, saying that a policeman reported smelling pepper at the scene. If this is the case, it's the first time in seven years it has been reported publicly and, furthermore, <a href="http://j7truth.blogspot.co.uk/2009/05/nature-of-explosives-from-c4-to.html" target="_blank">no organic material was found at any of the crime scenes indicating large quantities of blackpepper</a>. Alford states that the hydrogen peroxide is contained within two bottles with black caps, which can be seen behind the cream coloured washing-up bowl.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhrghHIgq3QH0tB4xqmgBchcPE5uPS6LX6AFGa2crOSFDHuJaCJFaugXpZiqn9m95WIp2s6cx3dB4eyIalcoVzt6mWYicbnYYnnrT4nCrRzGh040FIdRpWUrpbqC_XIwcr7EOHX6g/s1600/conspiracy_files_hydrogen_peroxide_water_bottle.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="250" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhrghHIgq3QH0tB4xqmgBchcPE5uPS6LX6AFGa2crOSFDHuJaCJFaugXpZiqn9m95WIp2s6cx3dB4eyIalcoVzt6mWYicbnYYnnrT4nCrRzGh040FIdRpWUrpbqC_XIwcr7EOHX6g/s1600/conspiracy_files_hydrogen_peroxide_water_bottle.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Black pepper and water bombs?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
We then see Sidney unscrewing the cap off of a bottle with a blue cap and red ring around the neck with what looks like the word 'Water' written on it (the 'W' isn't clear). Due to the editing of the programme it is not clear from which bottle the liquid is poured in with the black pepper, although the red ring around the neck would appear to indicate the water bottle. If hydrogen peroxide was being poured from a bottle marked 'Water' then this would be a dangerous practise. If water is contained in the bottle and is being added to the black pepper then there is no explanation as to what its purpose is. If the liquid is neither hydrogen peroxide nor water, the programme does not indicate what else it might be. No explanation is given for how hydrogen peroxide could be 'boiled' as a method to concentrate it, as is the suggestion for both 7/7 and 21/7. Alford gives no explanation for the detonator that was used in his experiment.
<br />
<br />
As with 7/7, the nature of the explosives used to blow up the bus are not revealed.
<br />
<br />
In the closing minutes of 7/7 Conspiracy Road Trip, a last-ditch attempt is made to imbue the programme with some credibility through interviewing a family member of the bereaved. For this, Graham Foulkes is interviewed alongside the 7/7 memorial in Hyde Park. No mention is made of the fact that Graham Foulkes was also <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/jul/06/phone-hacking-77-victims-fathers-horror" target="_blank">a victim of News International phone hacking scandal</a> and that he has also been <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/video/2011/feb/14/july-7-victim-father-mohammed-junaid-babar-video" target="_blank">very vocal in challenging the government and security services</a> for a number of years; with dignity, courage and conviction Foulkes challenges the State again in the programme.
<br />
<br />
<h3>
<b>Conclusion</b></h3>
The 7/7 Conspiracy Road Trip finishes with a final interview of Jon Scobie, who says:
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Of course it does not mean, Andrew, that those guys did do it, that does not prosecute those four men. So I do maintain that 7/7 is a justification to continue these wars in the middle-east and continue empire building and to continue British imperialism spreading across the world."
</blockquote>
<br />
Credit to Mr Scobie for his closing comment as it constitutes the first vaguely political analysis on TV of 7/7 in over 7 years, not just as an isolated incident but as an event that occured not in a vacuum but in a much broader geo-political context. It also acts as an indication of what the programme might have been had the ex-BBC crew at <a href="http://j7truth.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/j7-vs-bbc-conspiracy-road-trip-renegade.html" target="_blank">Renegade Pictures</a> actually fulfilled any of the promises they made when soliciting J7's involvement in the programme, instead of shooting fish in a barrell. Here's how Renegade Productions lied to recruit participants:
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
This episode we will also aim to address the following greater issues concerning the British government:
<br />
<ul style="text-align: justify;">
<li>The need for an independent public inquiry.</li>
<li>The public distrust for the British government - especially Blair.</li>
<li>Inquiries Act implications.</li>
<li>Greater point that government suppression of information, feeds conspiracy theories, with potentially dangerous consequences.</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
While general public distrust of the government featured minorly in the programme, it failed to address the lack of government transparency on the issue of 7/7, or the need for a fully independent public inquiry or the limitations that the Inquiries Act 2005 would impose upon such an inquiry.
<br />
<br />
In recent times, not long before Francis Fukuyama's now-recanted end of history and the much-vaunted apparent end of ideology, the hidden facets of the State were well known by the common people. It is time now for once common knowledge to become common once again and time for the people to hold to account the State apparatuses; for it is these State apparatuses that exist as the barrier between the criminality and crimes of those operating under cover of the Faustian nexus between State, Secret State and private corporate interests and the meting out of appropriate levels of justice to them by the people who have suffered and continue to suffer the consequences of their actions.
<br />
<br />
<div style="border-top: 1px solid #ccc; font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm; padding-bottom: 20px; padding-top: 30px; text-align: justify;">
<div id="sdfootnote1">
<div class="sdfootnote-western">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><a class="sdfootnotesym" href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=27653305#sdfootnote1anc" name="sdfootnote1sym">1</a>The only notable exception to this blanket statement being <a aiotitle="John Scobie who, in" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxrQdZSP6FU">Jon Scobie who, in </a><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxrQdZSP6FU">an</a><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxrQdZSP6FU"> interview recorded subsequent to the broadcast</a>, redresses a little the balance of the carefully edited statements of his that made it into the programme. Tony Topping, a "lecturer and researcher" and former "top secret security industry worker", about which he "can't go into too many details of what that was all about" – if the brain meltdown he is shown having during the course of the programme, as if it was the first occasion on which he's encountered notions of time or that train journeys may well consist of finite and measurable proportions there-of – should probably stick to his chosen profession of chasing the lights of distant cars on country lanes and the odd UFO. Davina, a law student and recent convert to Islam would do well to develop the powers of reason and contextualisation prior to entering the law-peddling trade. As for <a href="http://horrornews.net/29066/film-review-cam-girl-2010/" target="_blank">Layla the doe-eyed, eye-lash fluttering, alternative model, actress</a> and article proof-reader, watch the show and make your own minds up about her</span>.
<br />
<br />
Props: Special thanks to Bridget, Muncher and cmain and the rest of the <a href="http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh/" target="_blank">J7 research team</a> for their invaluable contributions to the content of this article<a a="a" href="http://julyseventh.co.uk/" j7="j7" research="research" team="team">.</a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="blogger-post-footer">--
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
http://julyseventh.co.uk
J7 Blog: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/
J7 Inquests Blog: http://77inquests.blogspot.com/
J7 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581
J7 Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
J7 Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
J7 MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth</div>The Antagonisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01459201402366077472noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-22976089693402272312012-07-03T19:48:00.001+00:002012-07-03T19:48:32.066+00:007/7 in 7 minutes: Unanswered Questions<b></b><br />
by <a href="http://www.investigatingtheterror.com/Videos/7_7_in_7_minutes.htm" target="_blank">Tom Secker</a><br />
<br />
At the time of the 7th anniversary of the bombings in London, this video reflects on the attacks, the outstanding questions, the efforts to get to the truth and the ongoing cover-up.
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/6VTGskq21tM" width="480"></iframe></div>
<br />
<b>Transcript</b>:
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
On the 7th of July 2005, four bombings in London killed 56 people and wounded several hundred. Three explosions took place on underground trains shortly before 9 a.m. A fourth explosion destroyed a bus about an hour later.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The media’s reporting of the event was extremely confused, speaking of as many as 8 explosions on the underground, which were blamed on electrical power surges. They also reported explosions on three different buses. This somehow evolved into a story of four explosions caused by suicide bombers.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
On the evening of the attacks, the major media had already decided who was responsible.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>John Gibson</b>: The bombings in London. This is why I thought the Brits should have let the French have the Olympics. Let somebody else worry about guys with backpack bombs for a while.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>VO</b>: Weeks, months and even years later the most basic details of what happened are unclear, a mess of contradiction, misreporting and conjecture.We have been told that the four alleged bombers acted alone, but also that there were others who knew what was going to happen.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>DAC Peter Clarke</b>: I firmly believe that there are other people who have knowledge of what lay behind the attacks in July 2005 - knowledge that they have not shared with us. In fact, I don't only believe it. I know it for a fact.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>VO</b>: The official inquiries by the Intelligence and Security Committee, or ISC, have been a farce. During their first inquiry, they were not shown photos and video surveillance footage of the alleged bombers taken before 7/7. During the second inquiry MI5 gave an inaccurate timeline of what they knew and when. The fact is that MI5 knew a lot more about the alleged bombers than they told the ISC.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Tim Marshall</b>: The ISC concludes that MI5 and the police can’t be criticised for the actions and decisions they took in 2004 and 5 even if there were with hindsight quote ‘missed opportunities’. The victims families say the report is a whitewash. Some sensitive material is censored. The breakdown in communication
between MI5 and the police is not properly dealt with, and the claim that the Saudis warned the UK in advance of 7/7 is completely redacted.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>VO</b>: These ‘missed opportunities’ had the effect of concealing the relationships between the alleged bombers and several other significant people. The likelihood is that some of these other men were agents or assets of the security services.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Mark Hargreaves</b>: McDaid definitely wanted hardness training, some sort of, with a military bent to it. Pushing people to their limits, making them work really hard, making them suffer. Basically, those were his words, he wanted them suffer… I wondered if it was about converting people to Islam, if they had a different agenda completely. Taking vulnerable young men, exposing them to literature, to extremist views, testing them, seeing how far they were prepared to
go and them grooming them.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>VO</b>: The most basic questions have not yet been answered. What caused the explosions? Who carried them out and how?
Why did these terrorists attack the British public? Why has the government been so resistant to releasing the evidence that could prove whether their story is true? What are they hiding? </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Tony Blair: The purpose of terrorism is just that – it is to terrorise people.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>‘Queen’ Elizabeth II</b>: Atrocities such as these simply reinforce our sense of community.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>VO</b>: Despite the diligent efforts of independent researchers and campaigners, we may never get the answers to these questions. J7 Freedom of information requests have been blocked or delayed, and successive governments have refused to re-open the police investigation or hold an independent inquiry. But the only way we can get answers is to press for further investigation and inquiry, and to do it ourselves. The 7/7 Inquests did not even answer the questions they were legally obliged to answer, let alone those submitted by July 7th truth campaigners. Even after the July 7 inquests into the deaths of the 52 victims, many of the bereaved families feel their questions have been avoided and ignored.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>John Taylor</b>: They’ve had five years to prepare for this. They must have known that something like this was going to happen. They had five years to look at their documentation, get it in order, and produce it when required. It appears to me that they stalled on it. I wasn’t happy with the performance of the security services.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Marie Fatayi-Williams</b>: The security services don’t want to have any blame, they don’t want to say, if they made an apology, it meant that they were guilty of something, and if they are guilty of something then it meant that somebody is to blame, and nobody wants to
be blamed, and so 7/7 is to be forgotten.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Graham Foulkes</b>: The evidence that we’ve got today, in this report, I think really causes a lot more questions to be asked than it answers.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>VO</b>: For others, to continue fighting for the truth is too painful.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Grahame Russell</b>: I mean everybody’s got issue with various areas. I think there are people with issues with the intelligence services, there are people with issues with the emergency services, my own particular issue with Transport for London, so I think there are still issues. The problem we have, no, the problem I have is that if I continue to hold concerns about issues that went on, my life would become very bitter.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>VO</b>: So do what you can to spread information, to investigate 7/7, and to ask these questions of the people who should have the answers, but have so far refused to give them.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For more information about 7/7 please visit:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/" title="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk">http://www.julyseventh.co.uk</a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://www.investigatingtheterror.com/" title="http://www.investigatingtheterror.com">http://www.investigatingtheterror.com</a></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Download a podcast version and the transcript of this video at:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://www.investigatingtheterror.com/Videos/7_7_in_7_minutes.htm" title="http://www.investigatingtheterror.com/Videos/7_7_in_7_minutes.htm">http://www.investigatingtheterror.com/Videos/7_7_in_7_minutes.htm</a><br />
<br />
</div><div class="blogger-post-footer">--
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
http://julyseventh.co.uk
J7 Blog: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/
J7 Inquests Blog: http://77inquests.blogspot.com/
J7 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581
J7 Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
J7 Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
J7 MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth</div>Bridgethttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04220942517267393608noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-44818445650046105712012-04-02T16:40:00.000+00:002012-10-01T21:06:14.680+00:00J7 Vs BBC 7/7 Conspiracy Road Trip / Renegade Pictures / Andrew Maxwell - Updated 30-09-2012<div style="font-family: inherit; text-align: justify;">
<br />
This year sees the 7th anniversary of the events known as 7/7. Seven years on and there has been no public inquiry into the single largest loss of life in London since the second world war, nor is there any official suggestion that an inquiry might take place.
<br />
<br />
Inquests were held, but not into the deaths of the four accused, and the Inquest failed in its primary function of establishing the basic facts about who died, where they died and how they came about their deaths. If anything, the limited evidence released during the Inquests merely called into question ever more aspects of the official account. J7 attended the Inquest proceedings and documented our findings on the dedicated <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">J7: 7/7 Inquests Blog.</a>
<br />
<br />
If you've been following the J7 story for sufficiently long enough, you'll know that we have been approached by the media several times to solicit our participation in one 'documentary' or another. For example, we were contacted by the BBC Conspiracy Files series and <a href="http://julyseventh.co.uk/j7-refuse-bbc-conspiracy-files-offer.html" target="_blank">we wrote this piece</a> in response to them. You will learn more about 7/7 from reading our refusal to participate in the BBC Conspiracy Files than you will from watching the <a href="http://j7truth.blogspot.co.uk/2009/07/bbc-conspiracy-files-77-view-from.html" target="_blank">7/7 Conspiracy Files</a>.
<br />
<br />
Last week, following a voicemail that had been left with J7 earlier in the day, we <a href="http://js-kit.com/api/static/pop_comments?ref=http%3A%2F%2Fjulyseventh.co.uk%2F&title=J7%3A%20The%20July%207th%20Truth%20Campaign%20-%20Home&path=%2FJ7Homepage&standalone=no&scoring=yes&backwards=no&sort=date&thread=yes&permalink=http%3A%2F%2Fjs-kit.com%2Fapi%2Fstatic%2Fpop_comments%3Fref%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fjulyseventh.co.uk%252F%26path%3D%252FJ7Homepage&skin=echo&smiles=no&editable=yes&thread-title=Echo&popup-title=Echo&page-title=J7%3A%20The%20July%207th%20Truth%20Campaign%20-%20Home" target="_blank">received a comment</a> on <a href="http://julyseventh.co.uk/" target="_blank">the July 7th Truth Campaign web site</a>, again from people working on behalf of the BBC. The comment was as follows:
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b>
<span style="font-weight: bold;">Do you think the July 7/7 bombings is a conspiracy?</span>
</b>
<br />
<br />
BBC3 documentary wants to hear from people who doubt the official version of events.
<br />
<br />
If you think that the 7/7 bombings was not a terrorist attack, and was in fact orchestrated by the British government, then we want to hear from you.
<br />
<br />
Do you think it’s strange that no public inquiry was held after the bombings?
<br />
<br />
Or perhaps you think that the video footage of the bombers was doctored? <br />
<br />
Or do you find it hard to believe that just four men were able to carry it out alone?
<br />
<br />
If this sounds like you, we are offering you the chance to put your views to the test in a new exciting documentary.
<br />
<br />
Email <a href="mailto:conspiracy@renegadepictures.co.uk">conspiracy@r<wbr></wbr>enegadepictures.co.uk</a> for more information, or call 0207 449 3253. All contact will be confidential and will not commit you to the programme.
<br />
<br />
<b>
<span style="font-weight: bold;">Applicants must be between the ages of 18-35</span>
</b>
</blockquote>
For those unfamiliar with the Conspiracy Road Trip programme its opening gambit was a production called <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b014gpjx" target="_blank">9/11: Conspiracy Road Trip</a>, first aired on BBC3 the day before the tenth anniversary of 9/11. For anyone that missed it <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVnQPGE36P4" target="_blank">it's on YouTube</a> and involves using a singularly unfunny comedian taking five doubters of the official 9/11 conspiracy theory on a bus ride around America in an attempt to <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPOebwXI0gA" target="_blank">help them get their minds right</a>.<br />
<br />
<br />
Out of five participants in the Conspiracy Road Trip only one appeared to recant on their disbelief of the official narrative, the already highly suspect ex-banker and Territorial Army man, Charlie Veitch, and much has been written about him by many people elsewhere. The remaining four participants were unchanged in their views, much to the chagrin of the 'comedian' in charge of setting everyone straight and one participant even went as far as to <a aiotitle="complain about the manner in which she was portrayed" href="http://911truthnews.com/911-conspiracy-roadtrip-a-participants-perspective/" target="_blank">complain about the manner in which she was portrayed</a> in the broadcast cut of the documentary.
<br />
<br />
Initially the production company, Renegade Pictures, was asking "<a href="https://twitter.com/#%21/ConspiracyRT/status/186783716952117249" target="_blank">to hear from people who think the 7/7 bombings was a conspiracy</a>" when <i>any</i> theory that involves more than one person making 7/7 happen being, by legal definition, a 'conspiracy theory'. Note that the official account, the 'narrative', is itself a 'conspiracy theory' as it has yet to be proven or supported by anything other than circumstantial and speculative evidence. When <a href="https://twitter.com/#%21/antagonise/status/185792077471297536" target="_blank">asked to provide a definition</a> of what was meant by the use of the term 'conspiracy' in their request for participants, Renegade explained, "<a href="https://twitter.com/#%21/ConspiracyRT/status/186746156678782976" target="_blank">We mean do you think that it was orchestrated by the Government?</a>". Which is, of course, an entirely different question to whether or not 7/7 was a conspiracy, to the point that the original question is <a href="https://twitter.com/#%21/antagonise/status/186749480907968512" target="_blank">rendered disingenuous and misleading</a>. Ignoring for now the standard "Was it Muslims or the Government" <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma" target="_blank">false dichotomy</a> set-up, and giving credit where it's due, after <a href="https://twitter.com/#%21/antagonise/status/186798942309187584" target="_blank">some further prompting</a> the recruitment drive was <a href="https://twitter.com/#%21/ConspiracyRT/status/186804970807504896" target="_blank">rephrased to say</a>, "BBC3 doc is looking for people who doubt the official account of 7/7 bombings." While Renegade have amended the content of their Tweets, their Twitter Bio still reads: "The Conspiracy Road Trip team is looking for people that think that the July 7/7 bombings was a conspiracy."
<br />
<br />
Undeterred by all this and by our previous experiences with the BBC and mainstream media generally, the dialogue that was opened with the production company <a href="https://twitter.com/#%21/conspiracyrt" target="_blank">@ConspiracyRT</a> on Twitter by <a href="https://twitter.com/#%21/antagonise" target="_blank">a member of J7</a> resulted in Renegade Pictures, which is <a href="http://www.renegadepictures.co.uk/renegade_people.php" target="_blank">comprised of several ex-BBC staff</a>, agreeing to <a href="https://twitter.com/#%21/antagonise/status/186813331900874753" target="_blank">enter into</a> an <a href="https://twitter.com/#%21/ConspiracyRT/status/186813934714617856" target="_blank">open and public debate</a> as part of their <a href="https://twitter.com/#%21/conspiracyrt" target="_blank">endeavours to recruit candidates</a> for the forthcoming show.
<br />
<br />
The comment thread for this post is designed to provide the open and public platform for J7 and Renegade Pictures to have the dialogue that would otherwise have taken place by phone or email rather than in a public forum.
<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=27653305" name="update"></a>The floor is yours, Renegade Pictures....
<br />
<br />
<hr align="center" width="33%" />
<br />
<br />
<div style="font-size: large; font-weight: bold; text-align: center;">
******* UPDATE 30-09-2012 *******</div>
<br />
<br />
<hr align="center" width="33%" />
<br />
<br />
BBC3's <a href="http://renegadepictures.co.uk/program/Conspiracy-Road-Trip_745.aspx" target="_blank">7/7 Conspiracy Road Trip</a> airs tomorrow night, so its worth re-iterating the point made in the comments about the strange dichotomy that arises from the two opposing views seemingly simultaneously maintained by the Irish comedian and presenter of Conspiracy Road Trip, <a href="https://twitter.com/andrewismaxwell" target="_blank">Andrew Maxwell</a>.
<br />
<br />
Andrew Maxwell appeared on the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b01fjz3h">BBC Radio 4 News Quiz</a> in April 2012 during the production of 7/7 Conspiracy Road Trip.<br />
<br />
When discussing the topic of the European Court of Human Rights ruling on the extradition of Abu Hamza, and four others including Babar Ahmad to the U.S. (<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19706404" target="_blank">since sanctioned</a>), he said the following:
<br />
<blockquote>
<span style="font-size: large;">"I assumed he [Abu Hamza] was a spy, or a tout. I mean I'd imagine the actual real dudes that we're meant to be chasing around are, y'know, below the surface, right? Lilywhites? People with absolutely no connection to radical mosques or something like that. Maybe not even obviously be Muslim, maybe have a Celtic accent."</span></blockquote>
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwjEuh9q_sY5VrO9YPVrX5MdzRau3SsWPd47dlUX2lFx6CG6ywRRJ_aDckHwIdCO26yr41DZ2GOD3cMKuUGlHf9Cqit4-N1ZCgbuaM4abfc1erALSHjOXBjkkevdl6Eru8n_Mm1A/s1600/The_Hillsborough_Conspiracy-Independent_on_Sunday_Front_Page.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwjEuh9q_sY5VrO9YPVrX5MdzRau3SsWPd47dlUX2lFx6CG6ywRRJ_aDckHwIdCO26yr41DZ2GOD3cMKuUGlHf9Cqit4-N1ZCgbuaM4abfc1erALSHjOXBjkkevdl6Eru8n_Mm1A/s320/The_Hillsborough_Conspiracy-Independent_on_Sunday_Front_Page.jpg" width="256" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Independent on Sunday Front Page: <br />
The Hillsborough Conspiracy</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
But 9/11 though, and 7/7 too, happened exactly as we've been told, without any "<i><b>below the surface</b></i>" "<i><b>real dudes</b></i>" "<i><b>that we're meant to be chasing around</b></i>" and definitely none of those "<i><b>Lilywhites</b></i>", those "<i><b>people with absolutely no connection to radical mosques</b></i>" and who are "<i><b>maybe not even obviously Muslim</b></i>", no siree, and definitely not with "<i><b>celtic accents</b></i>" that people with names like <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.co.uk/2011/02/mcdaid-who.html">Martin McDaid</a> and <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.co.uk/2011/02/mcdaid-who.html">James McLintock</a> might have.
<br />
<br />
The story of 7/7 is, of course, just as we've been told. In much the same way as the official stories, or 'narratives' if you prefer, regarding the Guildford 4, Birmingham 6, Danny McNamee, Judith Ward, the Maguire 7, and the State's execution of Human Rights lawyer <a href="http://www.independent.ie/national-news/pat-finucane-murder-a-terrible-crime-and-british-government-deeply-sorry-2903228.html" target="_blank">Pat Finucane</a> were true, all of whom happen to be from Andrew Maxwell's home country.<br />
<br />
Remember too, that 7/7 Conspiracy Road Trip airs in the wake of new revelations about the <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9576926/BBC-denies-cover-up-over-Sir-Jimmy-Savile-sex-allegations.html" target="_blank">BBC's complicity in the cover-up of sex crimes commited by Jimmy Saville</a>; the media, police and government corruption scandal that runs right up to the office of the Prime Minister courtesy of one <a href="http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/" target="_blank">Andrew Coulson</a>, and the <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/hillsborough-families-fury-at-spin-operation-8191043.html" target="_blank">revelations about the black propaganda operations</a> conducted by the police, media and state against the victims and families of those who died at the Hillsborough disaster.
<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="blogger-post-footer">--
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
http://julyseventh.co.uk
J7 Blog: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/
J7 Inquests Blog: http://77inquests.blogspot.com/
J7 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581
J7 Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
J7 Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
J7 MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth</div>The Antagonisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01459201402366077472noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-86790747383154472182011-10-03T11:13:00.001+00:002011-10-03T11:13:22.947+00:00New 7/7 Video by Tom Secker, 7/7: Crime and Prejudice<div style="text-align: justify;">
A recently released film about the subject of 7/7, based on the researches and investigations of <a href="http://julyseventh.co.uk/">J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign</a>, which includes details of the British State's history of collusion and complicity in previous terrorist attacks, coverage of related news and stories, as well as information about the proceedings that took place at the 7/7 Inquests:</div>
<blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
A brand new investigative and analytical documentary from the maker of <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6Vfnn3YZXw">7/7: Seeds of Deconstruction</a>. It explores the 7/7 cold case via new
evidence from the recent inquests and discusses the war on terror in the context of numerous miscarriages of justice and acts of violence
committed by the state.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The first section of the film examines the history of the British state's use of double agents, from the Victorian Anarchists through WW2 to the war in Northern Ireland. It concludes by examining contemporary cases of injustice and violence carried out as part of the war of terror against Muslims. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The second section of the film is a multi-dimensional study of the new evidence made available at the recent inquests. It looks at the evidence of a wider conspiracy and the fundamental flaws in the official narrative and the police investigation. It also discusses why the dialogue about 'intelligence failures' itself fails to address the very real possibility of state involvement in the attacks. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The final section of the film returns to the Anarchists and the case of Martial Bourdin, Britain's first suicide bomber, in 1894. The mythology
surrounding Bourdin is used as a foundation for examining the numerous films, tv shows training exercises and real life events that either
predicted 7/7 or were influenced by the attacks. The question of conspiracy theories is addressed through an original analysis unique to
this film. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFllLvhgYm8">7/7 Crime and Prejudice</a> combines a presentation of the cutting edge of July 7th research with a deeply contextual analysis
that casts light on largely unexamined aspects of the war on terror. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For further information about 7/7 please visit the website of the <a href="http://julyseventh.co.uk/">July 7th Truth Campaign</a> and <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/">their dedicated 7/7 Inquests blog</a>:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<a href="http://julyseventh.co.uk/" target="_blank" title="J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign">http://julyseventh.co.uk/</a><br />
<a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/" target="_blank" title="J7: 7/7 Inquests blog">http://77inquests.blogspot.com/</a><br />
<br />
<div align="center">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/wFllLvhgYm8" width="420"></iframe></div>
</blockquote>
<div class="blogger-post-footer">--
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
http://julyseventh.co.uk
J7 Blog: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/
J7 Inquests Blog: http://77inquests.blogspot.com/
J7 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581
J7 Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
J7 Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
J7 MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth</div>The Antagonisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01459201402366077472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-27153173325435130702011-07-07T23:37:00.004+00:002011-07-11T00:30:15.563+00:006th Anniversary of 7/7<div dir="ltr" style="font-family: Arial; font-size: medium;"><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
<div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; text-align: justify;"><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">On the 6<sup>th</sup> anniversary of 7/7, J7 are once again forced to reiterate our demand for a fully Independent Public Inquiry held outside of the constraints of the Inquiries Act 2005.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">At the <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2011/05/77-inquests-7-july-inquest-verdict.html">conclusion of the 7/7 Inquests</a>, Lady Justice Hallett named the 4 accused, Khan, Tanweer, Hussain and Lindsay as the perpetrators of the events of 7/7, despite the clear legal constraints that apply to Coroners and their ability to apportion guilt. Hallett concluded the inquest proceedings by refusing to resume the Inquests into the deaths of the 4. As part of our efforts to get to the truth of 7/7, J7 submitted a clear, detailed and reasoned submission to the inquests outlining why the resumption of these Inquests was imperative. <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/J7-Inquest-Submission/J7-Submission-for-Resumption-of-Inquests-into-the-four.html">J7's submission for resumption can be read here</a></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">As we stated in our submission:</div></div><ul style="font-family: 'Times New Roman';"><li style="text-align: justify;">The lack of representation of the families of the 4 men allowed any and all of the evidence presented to go unchallenged, meaning no witnesses called to the inquests were cross examined on behalf of the families of the accused.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">The Inquests sat without a jury.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">The Metropolitan Police investigation, Operation Theseus, was deemed to be outside the scope of the Inquests and thus the entire investigation behind Ian Blair's "largest criminal inquiry in English history" remains unexamined and unquestioned.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">The Inquests for the 4 accused, in which a verdict of suicide would require a criminal standard of proof, were not resumed.</li>
</ul><div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">There are many glaring holes in the evidence that was presented to the Inquests, as detailed on the <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/">J7: 7/7 Inquests Blog</a> which we set-up specially to report on the inquests, yet these potential showstoppers for the official narrative of events went unreported in the mainstream media. The absolute pressing necessity for a fully independent Public Inquiry is now greater than ever in order to enable anyone to have any confidence in the evidence by which the guilt or innocence of the four accused might be established. To date there has been no proper legal scrutiny of this evidence. Furthermore, in cases of alleged suicide, the intent to commit suicide must be proven and this burden of proof has not yet been met.</div><div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">Without a full Public Inquiry, it remains the case that:</div><ul style="font-family: 'Times New Roman';"><li style="text-align: justify;">The bodies of Tanweer and Khan were not included in the <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/search/label/Dr%20Morgan%20Costello">'Life Extinct' body counts carried out on 7th July by Dr Morgan Costello</a>.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">The police <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/cctv-fuss-about-nothing.html">viewing of the Luton Station CCTV footage</a> was conducted as early as 10th July, despite the official account clearly stating that the men were identified on CCTV at King's Cross Thameslink on 11th July, and that it was this discovery that led the investigation to Luton as a possible site of interest.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">There exist no sightings of three of the men, Khan Tanweer and Lindsay, after the footage from King's Cross Thameslink, some way from the Underground tube network. Apparently the temporary CCTV system that was installed at King's Cross underground <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/final-curtain-cctv-rich-to-cctv-fail.html">malfunctioned for the 20 crucial minutes between 8.30 and 8.50</a>. Additionally, there are no recordings of the three from any other cameras. This means that there is absolutely no CCTV evidence that shows three of the accused anywhere on the London Underground network on the morning of 7 July 2005.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">No CCTV from the pre-explosion tube carriages has been released, despite this CCTV apparently existing, and despite it being crucial evidence which could confirm or deny that three of the men boarded the carrriages they are alleged to have boarded. This CCTV should also have been made available to <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2011/02/colonel-mahoney-in-porton-down-with.html">Colonel Mahoney</a> when the expensive modelling of likely injuries sustained by the deceased was conducted to make up for the lack of any internal post mortems on the victims.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">No CCTV exists from McDonald's showing whether Hussain actually used the premises to insert a new 9v battery into his apparently malfunctioning bomb, as it was revealed during the inquests that the store manager can be seen on CCTV (oh the irony) turning off the CCTV system before Hussain entered.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">No CCTV exists of <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2011/01/notable-absence-of-hasib-hussain.html">Hasib Hussain</a> on either of the buses he is alleged to have boarded. There is no footage of Hussain aboard the number 91 bus, nor the number 30 bus he is alleged to have destroyed, nor is there any street or traffic camera footage showing him boarding either bus.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">There is a huge discrepancy between the explosives allegedly used, as given in sworn evidence to the Jean Charles de Menezes Inquest, and the evidence that Clifford Todd gave to the 7/7 Inquests.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">There is strong evidence in the public domain to suggest that at the heart of the story behind 7/7 <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2011/02/mcdaid-who.html">lay at least three operatives</a> for both the British and American Intelligence services, <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2011/02/cat-amongst-stool-pigeons-mohammed.html">one of which</a> served an insanely short period in a US prison, for greater crimes than those his testimony put behind bars for far longer terms, before being quietly released.</li>
</ul><div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">These questions and many more can be found on the <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/">7/7 Inquests blog</a>.</div><div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">Six years on from an event with the largest single loss of life in London since the blitz can the Metropolitan Police, with it's long track record of complicity in facilitating Miscarriages of Justice -- and given the recent revelations that it is implicated in the Murdoch News of the World phone hacking scandal -- be allowed to offer a '<a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/7-july-inquests-its-conspiracy-stupid.html">narrative</a>' which is so deeply flawed and suspect? How about a '<a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/7-july-inquests-its-conspiracy-stupid.html">narrative</a>' which has remained unexamined and unchallenged except by J7? A '<a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/7-july-inquests-its-conspiracy-stupid.html">narrative</a>' that has ascribed guilt to four men without their families having the opportunity and legal representation to question, particularly when the four accused have been denied their own Inquest proceedings? Or a '<a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/7-july-inquests-its-conspiracy-stupid.html">narrative</a>' deemed outside the scope of inquiry by the 7/7 Inquests, and a '<a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/7-july-inquests-its-conspiracy-stupid.html">narrative</a>' which has led to the demonisation of the Muslim population? This is the same flawed and unproven narrative that has been the basis for the questioning of multi-culturalism and a '<a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/7-july-inquests-its-conspiracy-stupid.html">narrative</a>' which has done much to fuel the race-hate and bigotry of the far-right neo-fascist organisation, the EDL.</div><div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">Current Prime Minister, David Cameron, has announced not one but two inquiries into the ongoing criminal exploits and activities of the press and police, just as news was breaking that the families of 7/7 victims were also victims of phone hacking at the hands of Murdoch media. This means that, as if we woke to find outselves in the midst of a Kafka novel, it is apparently right and proper to investigate whether or not the families of 7/7 victims had their mobile phones hacked, but it is not right and proper to have a full, in-depth, independent public investigation into how those same families of the 7/7 victims lost their loved ones.</div><div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/">J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign</a> continue to say NO! This will not stand! Only a fully Independent Public Inquiry held outside of the constraints of the Inquiries Act 2005 has the vaguest chance of getting to the truth behind the 'narrative' of 7/7.</div><div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">J7 will be writing again in the near future to ask for your continued support in our joint campaign for the truth about 7/7, and we will provide a few suggestions for ways you can help us pressure the government into commissioning an independent public inquiry.</div><div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">For truth and justice,</div><div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign</div></div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">--
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
http://julyseventh.co.uk
J7 Blog: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/
J7 Inquests Blog: http://77inquests.blogspot.com/
J7 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581
J7 Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
J7 Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
J7 MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth</div>Bridgethttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04220942517267393608noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-78867765471451375992011-06-05T10:45:00.009+00:002011-06-05T11:13:23.500+00:007/7 Researcher Tom Secker - On The Edge<div style="text-align: center;"><br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ql59RPRL4v0" width="425"></iframe></div><a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/j7-films-ludicrous-diversion-seeds-of-deconstruction.html"><br />
</a><div style="text-align: justify;"><a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/j7-films-ludicrous-diversion-seeds-of-deconstruction.html">7/7 Seeds of Deconstruction</a> documentary maker, <a href="http://howardbealesnewshour.blogspot.com/">Tom Secker</a>, discussing many of the anomalies from the <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/">7/7 Inquests</a> on <a href="http://www.emtvonline.co.uk/main/news.php">The Edge</a>.</div><p> </p><div class="blogger-post-footer">--
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
http://julyseventh.co.uk
J7 Blog: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/
J7 Inquests Blog: http://77inquests.blogspot.com/
J7 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581
J7 Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
J7 Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
J7 MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth</div>Bridgethttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04220942517267393608noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-77158763221368507932011-02-14T17:09:00.001+00:002011-02-14T17:11:20.381+00:00A cat amongst the [stool] pigeons - Mohammed Junaid Babar [Re-post]<div style="text-align: justify;">An article in <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/feb/14/al-qaida-supergrass-77-questions">today's Guardian</a> asks some of the questions that J7 posed to the 7/7 Inquests when we sent <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/J7-Inquest-Submission/13.Preventability-Issues.pdf">our submission on Preventability</a> to the coroner and counsel in July 2010.<br /><br />In light of the Guardian series of articles regarding this issue, we reproduce below our submission listing the serious issues that arise from the role that Mohammed Junaid Babar has played in the events of not only 7th July 2005 but also the so-called 'fertilizer bomb plot', apparently scuppered by Operation Crevice, and also the incarceration of Fahad Hashmi:<br /><br /><b>CREVICE TRIAL</b><br /><br />Without the testimony of 'Supergrass' Mohammed Junaid Babar at the Crevice trial, would there have been enough evidence against these men to merit the 40 year life sentences they received? Especially given the statement read on behalf of these men at the end of the Crevice trial explicitly denied that there was any plot to attack the UK:<br /><blockquote>This was a prosecution driven by the security services, able to hide behind a cloak of secrecy, and eager to obtain ever greater resources and power to encroach on individual rights.<br />There was no limit to the money, resources and underhand strategies that were used to secure convictions in this case.<br />This case was brought in an atmosphere of hostility against Muslims, at home, and abroad. One stoked by this government throughout the course of this case.<br />This prosecution involved extensive intrusion upon personal lives, not only ours, but our families and friends.<br />Coached witnesses were brought forward. Forced confessions were gained through illegal detention, and torture abroad. Threats and intimidation was used to hamper the truth. All with the trial judge seemingly intent to assist the prosecution almost every step of the way.<br />These were just some of the means used in the desperate effort to convict. Anyone looking impartially at the evidence would realise that there was no conspiracy to cause explosions in the UK, and that we did not pose any threat to the security of this country.<br />It is not an offence to be young, Muslim and angry at the global injustices against Muslims."<sup>9</sup></blockquote><b><span class="Apple-style-span">WIDER CONNECTIONS</span></b><br /><br />The section in the <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/docs/provisional-index-of-factual-issues-update-230610.pdf">Provisional Index of Factual Issues entitled “Preventability”</a> comprises by far the bulk of the index. Further, the bulk of areas outlined in points 13-23 relate directly to just two of the accused, Khan and Tanweer, and their interactions with others connected to Operation Crevice, notably, and mostly, Omar Khyam. There are wider connections over and above those between Khan (now deceased) and Khyam (serving a life sentence, received in no small part due to the testimony of the prosecution's 'star witness'<sup>14 </sup>Junaid Babar), featuring individuals that appear to create and facilitate links between disparate individuals and groups across continents, and we outline these for informational purposes below. Many of these individuals appear to have protected status in that they have either never been arrested or have miraculously evaded prosecution over a period of time when many lesser figures were rendered to the torture chambers of Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo Bay.<br /><br />Much is made of the failings of West Yorkshire police and the security services to properly investigate and/or assess Khan and Tanweer, particularly in the two years prior to 7th July 2005. However, there is an important question to be asked here:<br /><br /><span>How would Khan and Tanweer have known that they were not under investigation given the following facts:</span><br /><br />29 March 2004: Momin Khawaja was arrested in Canada in the culmination of what was reported as a “a month long sting operation”<br /><br />30 March 2004: Eight arrests were made of men who were known to Khan and Tanweer as part of Operation Crevice.<br /><br />June 2004: news broke that the FBI had been holding Mohammed Junaid Babar in custody in New York since April 2004. It was reported that he was negotiating a plea bargain with the authorities.<br /><br />Junaid Babar, a US citizen had being widely reported since November 2001, declaring support for the 9/11 attacks and announcing he was recruiting fighters to fight against US forces in Afghanistan:<br /><blockquote><a href="http://gu.com/p/2n42z">As the TV camera rolled</a> Mohammed Junaid Babar’s eyes shone indignantly behind nerdish glasses: “There is no negotiation with the Americans. I will kill every American that I see in Afghanistan, and every American I see in Pakistan.”<sup>15</sup></blockquote>Jon Gilbert, who conducted interviews with Junaid Babar, later mused:<br /><blockquote>“The conundrum still remains, though. Why did Babar talk to me so willingly in the first place? It’s a question that I’ve been asking myself for more than six years. Some suggest that he may have already been an FBI agent.“<sup>16</sup></blockquote><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhwmO-MOnZcslJCe4jV6aoVWOJFlUQXUp2rXmqyz0hksOPlUBwqx0Rz-UUgHwl65kg3JBq6RXK-gPinx3bSukg0KDf7g5ukCClC1eTifx4zGOEjnbCcKTH85omrYP_RMeJM7wsPDA/s1600/MJB.jpg"><img style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 320px; height: 238px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhwmO-MOnZcslJCe4jV6aoVWOJFlUQXUp2rXmqyz0hksOPlUBwqx0Rz-UUgHwl65kg3JBq6RXK-gPinx3bSukg0KDf7g5ukCClC1eTifx4zGOEjnbCcKTH85omrYP_RMeJM7wsPDA/s320/MJB.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5573528845730913650" border="0" /></a><br />Despite making inflammatory and widely publicised pronouncements about being an Islamic warrior, despite seemingly declaring war on Americans, and despite his being a key facilitator in the alleged “terror training camps” in Pakistan (akin to the U.K equivalent of '<a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1550210/Bomb-plotters-al-Qaeda-link-still-in-Britain.html">Q', Mohammed Quayyum Khan</a>, also a part-time taxi driver), Junaid Babar appears to have been allowed to travel freely between Pakistan and the UK, as shown by the Operation Crevice timeline compiled by the Metropolitan Police<sup>17</sup>.<br /><blockquote>2001-2004<br />· Pakistani-born Mohammed Junaid Babar leaves his home in the USA, just days after 9/11 and travels to Pakistan to live<br /><br />Spring 2003<br />· Mohammed Junaid Babar meets Omar Khyam and Waheed Mahmood in England.<br /><br />January 2004<br />· Mohammed Junaid Babar travels to England and subsequently meets Omar Khyam, Waheed Mahmood, Jawad Akbar and Anthony Garcia</blockquote>The results of a joint BBC Radio 4 File on 4 and Newsnight investigation also revealed that, “We understand that Siddique Khan was also seen with this man [Junaid Babar] in Leeds in 2003.”<sup>18</sup><br /><br />Hassan Butt, who first facilitated Junaid Babar's stay in Pakistan<sup>19</sup>, describes a meeting between Babar and Khan in Leeds, held after attending a barbecue to raise money for 'training camps' which is attended by a number of prolific propagandists and provocateurs for 'extremist' 'Islam'.<br /><blockquote>Butt reveals that after the jihadist barbecue he drove to Khan’s home near Leeds with another guest, Mohammed Junaid Babar, who would shortly become a supergrass. Babar’s testimony helped to secure the conviction last week of five members of the Crevice gang, who had planned to blow up — among other targets — the Bluewater shopping mall in Kent and the Ministry of Sound nightclub in London.<br /><br />Although Babar describes the barbecue in his testimony, he does not refer to the drive north, nor to some of the guests named by Butt.<br />...<br />The host was a long-standing activist of Al-Muhajiroun, the group set up by Sheikh Omar Bakri in 1996<br />...<br />The guest list included men who were later to become notorious. Among them, claims Butt, was Mohammed Quayyum Khan, a part-time taxi driver from Luton who is alleged to have sent Mohammad Sidique Khan to the Malakand training camp on behalf of Al-Qaeda.<br />…<br />Butt, who had borrowed his brother’s navy blue Audi TT to get to the party from his home in Manchester, decided it was time to head back north. Babar asked to be dropped off near Leeds. ..<br /><br />As the sun rose, Babar directed Butt to a terrace house in Batley, West Yorkshire, 15 minutes from the M1. A man in pyjamas came out to greet them. It was Mohammad Sidique Khan.<br /><br />Butt had met Khan before. Babar had introduced them in 2002 at a gathering at Butt’s flat in Islamabad. Khan now recognised Butt and asked him if he wanted to come in.<sup>20</sup></blockquote><span>How likely is it that the joint intelligence services of the US and UK were not tracking Babar or Butt in the UK, particularly given Babar's high profile? Which of these two individuals was being tracked and to what extent? How was it possible that Junaid Babar was allowed to travel so freely between Pakistan and the UK?</span><br /><br /><a href="http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh/index.php?showtopic=2389&view=findpost&p=14990637">FOI requests to the Foreign & Commonwealth Office</a> submitted by J7 have been refused in respect of attempts by independent researchers to assess this information.<br /><br />On Babar's second visit to Britain, he stayed with Fahad Hashmi in London and left behind some waterproof socks and a pair of night vision goggles. Junaid Babar went on to become the State's star-witness for the prosecution in the Crevice and Khawaja trials, and his testimony also resulted in a 15 year sentence for <a href="http://freefahad.com/">Syed Fahad Hashmi</a>, who had previously been extradited to the US from the UK on the basis of the “glorified camping equipment”<sup>21</sup> that Babar had left at Hashmi's residence. This was then reported as:<br /><blockquote>Hashmi, who moved to Britain from Queens in 2003, allegedly allowed his London flat to be used to store supplies and money that Babar was shipping to Abdul al-Hadi al-Iraqi, then head of al Qaeda operations in Afghanistan.<sup>22</sup><br /></blockquote>Hashmi spent over 3 years under SAMS, extreme measures which included total isolation whilst facing a life sentence for this 'crime'.<br /><br />Babar was also the source for the aluminium powder which featured in the Crevice trial.<br /><blockquote>The government would further prove that the defendant purchased and attempted to purchase the aluminum powder and ammonium nitrate that he knew would be used in explosive devices in the bombing plot in the United Kingdom, and that he did this throughout from December 2002 through March of 2004<sup>23</sup>.<br /></blockquote>On 6th April 2004, <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2004/LAW/06/16/fbi.ny.arrest/">Babar returned to the US</a> but was not arrested or detained until 10th April 2004 when he was picked up by the FBI whilst on his way to a 'taxi school' in Queens, NY.<br /><br /><span>This is just a week after the Operative Crevice arrests; was his work now done? How did he manage to escape the 'no-fly list' to re-enter the US, given his well-publicised running and facilitating of 'terror training' in Pakistan?</span><br /><br /><span><b>Footnotes</b></span><br /><span><br /><div style="text-align: left;">9 J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign - The People's Independent Public Inquiry into 7/7 - <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/crevice/crevice-imran-khan-statement-for-defendants.html">http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/crevice/crevice-imran-khan-statement-for-defendants.html</a></div><div style="text-align: left;">13 THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA v MOHAMMAD MOMIN KHAWAJA [2007 FC 490] Ottawa, Ontario, May 7, 2007 [PDF]- <a href="http://www.icj.org/IMG/Khawaja-Evidence.pdf">http://www.icj.org/IMG/Khawaja-Evidence.pdf</a></div><div style="text-align: left;">14 Canada's anti-terror legislation vs. Ottawa's Momin Khawaja - <a href="http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/observer/story.html?id=1bc4587f-748c-45be-8668-116fdb57619b">http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/observer/story.html?id=1bc4587f-748c-45be-8668-116fdb57619b</a></div><div style="text-align: left;">15 The supergrass I helped to create - Times Online - <a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article1737411.ece">http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article1737411.ece</a></div><div style="text-align: left;">16 Ibid.</div><div style="text-align: left;">17 OPERATION CREVICE, Timeline and facts and figures - Metropolitan Police Service - <a href="http://nefafoundation.org/miscellaneous/FeaturedDocs/MPS_OpCreviceTimeline.pdf">http://nefafoundation.org/miscellaneous/FeaturedDocs/MPS_OpCreviceTimeline.pdf</a></div><div style="text-align: left;">18 BBC - Press Office - Newsnight/File on 4 investigation - <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2005/10_october/25/khan.shtml">http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2005/10_october/25/khan.shtml</a></div><div style="text-align: left;">19 Was CBS Duped by Radical Islamist? - <a href="http://www.aim.org/guest-column/was-cbs-duped-by-radical-islamist/">http://www.aim.org/guest-column/was-cbs-duped-by-radical-islamist/</a></div><div style="text-align: left;">20 The jihadi house parties of hate - Times Online -<a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1752338.ece"> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1752338.ece</a></div><div style="text-align: left;">21 U.S. student pleads not guilty in terrorism case - World news - Terrorism - msnbc.com - <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18923836/38180585">http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18923836/38180585</a></div><div style="text-align: left;">22 Focus: Is the Islamist group al-Muhajiroun waiting to strike again? | World news | The Observer - <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/may/06/terrorism.jamiedoward">http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/may/06/terrorism.jamiedoward </a></div><div style="text-align: left;">23 <a href="http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/case_docs/853.pdf">http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/case_docs/853.pdf</a></div></span><br /><br />To reiterate some of the questions that J7 posed to the Coroner that now require urgent answers if we are to understand what truly happened on 7 July 2005, how it happened, why it happened, and who made it happen:<br /></div><ul style="text-align: justify;"><li style="font-weight: bold;">How likely is it that the joint intelligence services of the US and UK were not tracking Babar or Butt in the UK, particularly given Babar's high profile?</li><li style="font-weight: bold;">Which of these two individuals was being tracked and to what extent?</li><li style="font-weight: bold;">How was it possible that Junaid Babar was allowed to travel so freely between Pakistan and the UK?</li><li style="font-weight: bold;">[Babar entered the US] This is just a week after the Operative Crevice arrests; was his work now done?<br /></li><li><span style="font-weight: bold;">How did he manage to escape the 'no-fly list' to re-enter the US, given his well-publicised running and facilitating of 'terror training' in Pakistan?</span><br /></li></ul><div style="text-align: justify;">Ms Gallagher has raised some of the issues presented in the Guardian articles during this morning's Inquests hearings. She spoke on behalf of Mr Foulkes, father of David Foulkes, who was <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/video/2011/feb/14/july-7-victim-father-mohammed-junaid-babar-video">interviewed by the Guardian</a> and <a href="http://www.blogger.com/that%20the%20terms%20of%20reference%20of%20the%20inquest%20are%20too%20narrow%20to%20deal%20with%20such%20questions%20and%20thinks%20that%20it%20should%20be%20suspended%20while%20they%20are%20re-evaluated.">quoted as saying</a> "the terms of reference of the inquest are too narrow to deal with such questions and thinks that it should be suspended while they are re-evaluated":<br /><blockquote>.. He's asked me to make clear that his concern is not that scope is too narrow and, indeed, the scope ruling fully encompasses the issue of preventability and it's going to be explored next week, but what he does want to ensure is that the inquest has all relevant information and is in a position to fully explore this issue, <span style="font-weight: bold;">including the potentially new information referred to in the article</span> and the material that he's seen. Mr Foulkes is, of course, aware that there are PII materials which we haven't seen. It may be that this wasn't a new issue to the Inquest team and to you, my Lady. It may be that this is covered in bundle A and bundle B, which the legal teams and the families haven't seen. But Mr Foulkes' concern is this: he wishes to ensure that the Security Services give a clear statement to the inquest: <span style="font-weight: bold;">(a) that they're not aware of any basis for the suggestion that Babar had been an informant for the authorities for any country prior to his detention in New York City in April 2004; and (b) that they've provided to the Inquest team and the coroner all information which they have in respect of Babar and US/UK communications in respect of him,</span> and Mr Foulkes' comment to the press --<br />LADY JUSTICE HALLETT: As relevant to these proceedings.<br />MS GALLAGHER: Precisely. Mr Foulkes' comment to the press was intended to suggest that, <span style="font-weight: bold;">if the Inquest team didn't have those assurances, then suspension might be required,</span> and it's an understandable and defensible comment which he made at the time in those circumstances.<br /><br /><div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/14022011am.htm">Hearing Transcripts 14 February 2011 morning page 50 lines 22 on</a><br /></div></blockquote><br /></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">--
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
http://julyseventh.co.uk
J7 Blog: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/
J7 Inquests Blog: http://77inquests.blogspot.com/
J7 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581
J7 Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
J7 Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
J7 MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth</div>The Antagonisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01459201402366077472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-9143270852956407902011-02-07T20:39:00.004+00:002011-02-07T20:47:04.746+00:00The Conspirators and the "Conspiracy Phones"<div align="justify"><br />Originally posted on the <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/conspirators-and-conspiracy-phones.html">J7 Inquests Blog: The Conspirators and the "Conspiracy Phones"</a></div><br /><hr align="left" width="30%"><div style="text-align: justify;"><blockquote><br /><div style="text-align: justify;"><a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/curious-case-of-jag-that-parked-in.html"><span style="text-decoration: underline;">This previous post</span></a> raises an interesting question regarding quite how the four accused men had avoided detection to such an extent that the security services had no idea of their alleged plans. What with travel tickets, handwritten documents laying their plans bare and receipts recovered both from the homes of the accused and the Alexandra Grove 'bomb factory', their behaviour suggests that these men were not in the least bit concerned about their alleged plans being discovered yet the narrative tells us '<b>Khan was worried about being under surveillance during this time</b>.</div><div face="verdana" style="margin-bottom: 0cm; text-align: justify;"><br /></div>'This time' plainly refers to the supposed planning of the events of 7/7, since just above this statement, it is also written,<br /><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">Other things suggest discipline and meticulous planning with good security awareness including <b>careful use of mobile phones</b> and use of hire cars for sensitive activities associated with the planning of the attacks.<br /></div><br /><div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"> </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"><a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/34643218/2006-05-11-HC1087-Report-of-the-Official-Account-of-the-Bombings-in-London-on-7th-July-2005">Report of the Official Account of the Bombings<br />in London on 7<sup>th</sup> July 2005</a></span></span></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">The 'careful use of the mobile phones' was explored on the 4<sup>th</sup> day of the inquests during the testimony of DS Mark Stuart of Counter-terrorism command. DS Stuart confirmed that 'a certain number' of phones were recovered. What we also discover from DS Stuart, is that the police referred to the phones the accused men were using that day as 'operational phones' (as opposed to their personal phones) - which Mr. Hugo Keith QC later interchanges with the intriguing term 'conspiracy phones'.<br /><br /></div>These phones are claimed by DS Stuart to have been a way to 'avoid detection' by being changed on several occasions:<br /><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">A. [DS Stuart] There were a series of operational phones. The earliest operational phones began in May, the middle of May, 2005, sir.<br />Q. [Hugo Keith QC] How many times were the phones switched or how many times were a new set of operational phones introduced into their usage?<br />A. For three of the subjects, four times, you're looking at data for the last, fourth, operational phone. For Lindsay, there were three, sir. </div></blockquote><blockquote><div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/j7-inquest-transcripts/2010-10-11-14-week-01/7_july_inquests_2010-10-14_am-session.pdf">Transcripts, 14 October 2010<br />Morning Session, page 7, line 7 on</a></div></blockquote><div align="justify">DS Stuart confirms later in the proceedings that the total number of 'conspiracy' phones used by the men was 15. One could argue that if a phone is changed four times, as three of the men are alleged to have done, this equates to five phones in total each - meaning that with Lindsay's four phones, the total amount of changes stated equates to 19 phones. This may seem a trivial point, but it is indicative of the confusing nature of DS Stuart's testimony. Another example of this is his account of the recovery of Khan's 'conspiracy' phone:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><blockquote>Q. In particular, investigators found in the wreckage a phone subsequently determined to belong to Khan?<br />A. That's correct, sir, yes.<br />Q. When that phone was examined, did it have any readable data on it?<br />A. No, sir, it was damaged beyond --<br />Q. Officer, could I ask you to keep your voice up a bit?<br />A. Sorry. No, it was too damaged to recover data from.<br />Q. So when that phone was examined, it wasn't possible to extract any relevant information from it?<br />A. No, sir.<br />Q. Was there also recovered from the Russell Square tunnel a phone subsequently determined to belong to Lindsay?<br />A. Yes, sir.<br />Q. When that phone was recovered, was it found to have information on it?<br />A. It was, sir, yes.<br /><br /><div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/j7-inquest-transcripts/2010-10-11-14-week-01/7_july_inquests_2010-10-14_am-session.pdf">Transcripts, 14 October 2010<br />Morning Session, page 2, line 2 on</a></div></blockquote></div><div style="text-align: justify;">So very early on, we find that no data could be extracted from Khan's phone, which was recovered from the Edgware Road site, due to the damage it sustained. The implication thereafter is that the only way any data relating to Khan can be examined is through looking at incoming calls or texts on the other phones recovered from the day, in particular, the phone attributed to Lindsay, from which information had been extracted. However, a little later in his testimony, DS Stuart seems to contradict his earlier statement:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. Could I just run very briefly through why you are so sure that these phones relate to these people? In relation to Khan and his operational phone ending 254, were there a number of pieces of evidence which demonstrated that that phone was indeed his?<br />A. Yes, sir.<br />Q. Could you very briefly, please, summarise why that conclusion was reached?<br />A. The handset for that phone was discovered at the Edgware Road scene where Mohammed Sidique Khan's body was recovered. DNA from Mohammed Sidique Khan was recovered from the handset as well. The phone was routinely cell-sited in and around his home address. It was cell-sited in Luton on the 7th where we know from CCTV Mohammed Sidique Khan was. It only ever rang the other three. It was never rung by another number attributed to Mohammed Sidique Khan. That was the principal evidence, sir.<br /><br /><div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/j7-inquest-transcripts/2010-10-11-14-week-01/7_july_inquests_2010-10-14_am-session.pdf">Transcripts, 14 October 2010<br />Morning Session, page 10, lines 23 on</a></div></div></blockquote><div face="verdana" style="margin-bottom: 0cm; text-align: justify;">How could this data regarding Khan's phone be known if it wasn't extracted from the phone which DS Stuart had earlier stated 'was too damaged to extract data from'? DS Stuart does not enlighten us to any alternative method used to gain access to the phone's data.</div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">Curiously, DS Stuart never states whether or not Shehzad Tanweer's phone was also recovered in the same way as the other three, at the scene of the explosion at Aldgate. We should note claims by both the narrative and Hugo Keith QC in his opening speech to the Inquests, that Tanweer had lost his mobile phone on the evening of 6<sup>th</sup> July, during a game of cricket. </div><br /><div align="justify">However, DS Stuart confirms that a call was made at 00.03.59 on July 7<sup>th</sup> 2005, from Khan to Tanweer. If Khan's phone is too damaged, then we must assume that this particular data came from Tanweer's phone. But Tanweer lost his phone on the evening of July 6<sup>th</sup> ; we cannot know if it was his personal or 'conspiracy' phone, we cannot know if he or someone else - found it, and cannot know if a phone attributed to him was found at Aldgate. We further cannot know from which phone this information was extracted as we are not privy to the contact schedule cited by DS Stuart.<br /><br /></div><div align="justify">When explaining how the 'operational' number for Tanweer was attributed to him, DS Stuart tells Mr. Keith:</div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">This was a number which was provided by Shehzad Tanweer on the rental agreement for the Nissan Micra subsequently left at Luton train station. Again, it was only rung by the other three and not by Tanweer himself. Generally cell-sited in the area of his home address.<br /></div><br /><div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"> </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"><a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/j7-inquest-transcripts/2010-10-11-14-week-01/7_july_inquests_2010-10-14_am-session.pdf">Transcripts, 14 October 2010<br />Morning Session, page 12, lines 20-24</a></span></span></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">So in contrast to the identification of the other three phones, which occurred due to their being recovered from the respective blast sites, Tanweer's 'conspiracy' phone number is identified because he provided it to the car hire company which supplied the Nissan Micra. Why should this be?<br /><br /></div><div align="justify">The car hire company provides another example of contradicting the idea that attempts were made by the men to avoid detection; Tanweer provided the First 24-Hour Car Rentals Limited with his family home address, confirmed in the statement of an employee of the company who called round to the Tanweer home when the car had not been returned as agreed.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">By today, Tuesday, 12th, I was very concerned at the whereabouts. I decided to visit his home address and I went to the vicinity of the address and I saw a police cordon. Having explained why I was there I then provided the rental agreement.<br /><br /><div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source</span>: <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/j7-inquest-transcripts/2010-10-11-14-week-01/7_july_inquests_2010-10-14_am-session.pdf">Transcripts, 14 October 2010,<br />Morning Session, page 48, lines 11-15</a></div></div></blockquote><div style="" align="justify">In another statement, it is revealed to the Inquests that another First 24-Hour Car Rentals employee had attempted to contact Tanweer on 7<sup>th</sup> July, despite the fact that his rental agreement was until 8<sup>th</sup> July. Why would the car hire company attempt to contact Tanweer the day before he was due to return the car? Again, this is not revealed. The statement from the car hire company contradicts Hugo Keith's claim that they rang Tanweer's phone on 7 July, although the unreleased schedule showed this call:<br /><div style="text-align: justify;"><blockquote>[First 24-Hour Car Rentals] "Following 8 July, when the vehicle had not been returned as agreed, I rang the mobile number given by him on at least two occasions. However, the phone was off. I can only say, if I saw the man again, I would definitely recognise him."<br />[Hugo Keith] My Lady, we know that the last entry on the schedule prepared by Mr Stuart at your direction is that there was a call on 7 July, in fact, two minutes to 3 from First 24-hour Car Rentals to Tanweer's number.<br /><br /><div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/j7-inquest-transcripts/2010-10-11-14-week-01/7_july_inquests_2010-10-14_am-session.pdf">ibid page 46 lines 16-24</a><br /></div></blockquote></div>Neither was the cell siting for Tanweer's mobile phone disclosed, which would have identified whether this phone was at Aldgate or, if lost, at least identified the location.<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">DS Stuart had also disclosed that the contact schedule only relates to calls made from 27 June 2005 onwards:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. Notwithstanding the fact that there were many thousands of calls made to and from any number of potentially relevant phone numbers, you prepared a schedule showing all the calls between the four men from 27 June onwards?<br />A. That's correct, sir, yes.<br />Q. In essence, the most relevant days leading up to the events of 7 July?<br />A. Yes, sir.<br /><br /><div style="text-align: right;">Source: <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/j7-inquest-transcripts/2010-10-11-14-week-01/7_july_inquests_2010-10-14_am-session.pdf">Transcripts, 14 October 2010<br />Morning Session, page 6, lines 12 - 19</a></div></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">It isn't stated at which point the accused are supposed to have switched to their final set of 'conspiracy phones'; only that this occurred in the last few days before 7/7. Later in the proceedings, Ms. Caoilfhionn Gallagher, representing bereaved families, pushes for analysis of <b>all</b> the 'conspiracy' phones. DS Stuart may yet be called back to give further testimony on these, and we may yet receive clarification regarding how (or even <i>if</i>) Tanweer's phone was recovered.<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Germaine Lindsay was said to have purchased and originally registered the phones, then transferred them to each of the others at a later time. DS Stuart makes it clear in his answers that although there was 'some slight mixing' in the use of the 'operational' phones, in that personal phones may have been used to ring an 'operational' phone number, by the time the accused were using their final set of phones, they were used solely for 'operational' purposes or calls to service providers. </div><br /><div face="verdana" style="margin-bottom: 0cm; text-align: justify;">Again, the implication is that this, along with clarification by DS Stuart that the use of the phones showed that the men were taking care over communications by buying prepaid unregistered phones and changing them regularly. Yet strangely, the behaviour of Hasib Hussain regarding his phone contradicts this assertion. Having earlier described how the top-up card for his 'operational phone' was found at his home address and the SIM card holder in a bag upon which Hussain's fingerprints were found, under questioning by Max Hill QC, DS Stuart details how the police knew about Hussain's personal phone:</div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. Secondly, in relation to Hasib Hussain, you analysed data relating to mobile number ********805, and two points again in relation to that. Firstly, that number was not used by Hussain on 7 July?<br />A. No, sir.<br />Q. But, secondly, through analysis of items recovered, including a SIM card, a mobile phone SIM card, found at Tavistock Square where Hussain's body was found, a download -- in other words, interrogation of the information held within that SIM card -- showed the 805 number saved within the SIM card under the title "My number"?<br />A. Yes, I believe that's the case.<br />Q. That goes towards attribution of that as a personal phone for Hussain, but one that you can say was not used on 7 July?<br />A. Correct, sir, yes.<br /><br /><div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/j7-inquest-transcripts/2010-10-11-14-week-01/7_july_inquests_2010-10-14_am-session.pdf">Transcripts, 14 October 2010<br />Morning Session, page 32, line 9 on</a></div></div></blockquote><div align="justify">If Hasib Hussain was only using this phone in the 'last few days' leading up to 7<sup>th</sup> July, then why take the trouble to program in his own personal number? Why would someone trying to 'avoid detection' do this anyway? Moreover, Hussain's personal phone was found by his brother, Imran, to contain <a href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/tm_objectid=15806384&method=full&siteid=115875-name_page.html#ixzz12bfOc3d3">not only Lindsay's number,</a> but that of the <a href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=15733472&method=full&siteid=115875&headline=where-is-the-fifth-man--name_page.html#ixzz12dlTajrZ">keyholder for 18 Alexandra Grove</a>, Dr Shakir Al Ani. Why program these numbers into his personal phone, if he was also in possession, at various times, of four (or more) 'conspiracy' phones. When asked by Lady Justice Hallet how the police were able to distinguish between the personal phones belonging to each men and the 'conspiracy' phones, in terms of usage, DS Stuart responds:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><blockquote>There was a distinct difference between the usage of the two types of phone. The personal phones all appeared to be unrelated, a lot of different people rung by them, but the enquiry showed that they were people that were known, historical friends and family. So that's why I can't remember there being anything which jumps out as being operational from a non-operational phone, my Lady.<br /><br /><div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/j7-inquest-transcripts/2010-10-11-14-week-01/7_july_inquests_2010-10-14_am-session.pdf">Transcripts, 14 October 2010, Morning Session, page 23, lines 3-10</a></div></blockquote></div><div justify="" align=""><div style="text-align: justify;">If this is the case, why did Hussain have the 'operational' numbers found on his 'non-operational' phone by his brother, which in turn, according to <a href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/tm_objectid=15806384&method=full&siteid=115875-name_page.html#ixzz12bfOc3d3%E2%80%9D">the Daily Mirror</a>, led him straight to the Alexandra Grove 'bomb factory' If Hussain was seriously trying to cover his tracks, he had made a pretty poor fist of it.</div></div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">In summary, we've learned the following from DS Stuart's testimony regarding what Hugo Keith prefers to call the 'conspiracy' phones:</div><ul><li style="text-align: justify;">Khan's 'conspiracy' phone was too damaged to extract data from, yet counter-terrorism investigators appeared to have managed to do just that.</li><li style="text-align: justify;">We do not know whether Tanweer had a 'conspiracy' phone with him on July 7<sup>th</sup>, because although DS Stuart mentioned calls being made from other phones to the phone attributed to Tanweer, he never mentions calls being made from that phone, nor does he mention that his phone was found at the Aldgate scene in the same way that the phones attributed to the three other men were found at the other blast sites.</li><li style="text-align: justify;">We know that Tanweer lost his phone on 6 July but we do not know whether this was his personal phone or 'conspiracy' phone, or whether he found it before the next day. The cell siting of the car hire company call on either the 7 July according to the schedule or the 8 July according to the car hire company, would reveal the location of this phone but was not disclosed to the Inquest.<br /></li><li style="text-align: justify;">The four accused were trying to avoid detection to such an extent that they routinely left incriminating evidence, either in their own homes or the Alexandra Grove flat, provided a genuine address even when using a 'conspiracy' phone to arrange car hire and Hussain in particular, found a way of leading detectives straight to his personal number from his 'conspiracy' phone.</li><li style="text-align: justify;">There may have been 15 or 19 'conspiracy' phones in total, but we have only been provided with testimony with the final 4 phones used. We were not allowed to see the contact schedule; this was "not for publication".</li><li style="text-align: justify;">DS Stuart defines the "trade craft" use of the "conspiracy phones" thus: "Taking care over your communications, buying prepaid unregistered phones, changing them regularly to avoid detection ultimately" yet later states that Tanweer's phone, at least, was purchased, and registered, by Lindsay using a false name. Why would Lindsay go to the trouble of registering the phone at all, when an unregistered phone could so easily be purchased with a pre-paid SIM?<br /></li></ul></blockquote><br /><hr align="left" width="30%"><br />If you wish to comment on this article, <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/conspirators-and-conspiracy-phones.html#comments">please join the discussion on the J7: 7/7 Inquests blog</a>.<br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"> <br /></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">--
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
http://julyseventh.co.uk
J7 Blog: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/
J7 Inquests Blog: http://77inquests.blogspot.com/
J7 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581
J7 Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
J7 Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
J7 MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth</div>The Antagonisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01459201402366077472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-80553633196916821142011-01-29T16:17:00.004+00:002011-01-29T16:26:55.016+00:007/7 Inquests: Open Justice or No Justice?<div align="justify"><br />Originally posted on the <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/11/77-inquests-open-justice-or-no-justice.html">7/7 Inquests: Open Justice or No Justice?</a>:</div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;"><blockquote><blockquote>"I thought this was about open justice but now it seems to be more about getting any sort of justice."</blockquote><blockquote style="text-align: right;">- <a href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5gGFc8JwBKLoe6si-xxiVAeBk3XLg?docId=B2921011289572723A00"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color:black;">Clifford Tibber, legal representative for six bereaved families</span></a></blockquote><div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:medium;"></span></div><br />On Thursday 18 November, the 7/7 Inquests will be delayed while the Appeal Court hears Home Secretary Theresa May's challenge, on behalf of the Intelligence Services, to Lady Justice Hallett's decision to hear evidence in open court. Hallett's decision to sit without a jury has already pre-empted any opportunity for 'ordinary members of the public' to see the evidence.<br /><br />Her apparent 'concession' to view the evidence with the families of the bereaved and their legal representatives, without the public or press present at the hearings, appears to be the issue. The state, it would appear -- which itself could require the signing of the Official Secrets Act (or non-disclosure agreements similar to that undertaken by survivors when viewing the site reports, or those with access to the Lextranet evidence base [<a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/25022010pm.htm">p17: 6</a>] ) - by any witnesses to the evidence -- has no desire for anyone to see any of the evidence, not even those who suffered the pain of bereavement on 7 July 2005 and have had to also bear the injustice of waiting five years for the inquests while the state pursued one <a href="http://j7truth.blogspot.com/2008/12/release-evidence-petition-update.html">tenuous prosecution</a> after <a href="http://j7truth.blogspot.com/2009/04/another-miscarriage-of-justice-averted.html">another</a>:<br /><blockquote>Most, if not all, of the relevant material can and will be put before me in such a way that national security is not threatened.<br /><br />"I am all too aware, given the events of the weekend, of the unenviable task facing the Security Services. I repeat, sources may be withheld, redactions made.<br /><br />"I do not intend to endanger the lives of anyone. I do not intend to allow questions which might do so. I do not intend to allow questions which I know to be based on a false premise or which I know to be misleading. There may be times when the parties will simply have to accept my ruling without demur. I may have to forbid certain questions. I may have to rephrase them.<br /><br />"Finally, I wish to emphasise I do not intend to make findings adverse to the Security Services which I know to be false."<br /><br /><div style="text-align: right;"><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11721640">BBC News - Government to fight 7 July inquests ruling</a></div></blockquote></blockquote></div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">Justice Hallett appears to have already decided the parameters of the questions that will be allowed and what the outcome should be. Despite this, the Home Secretary obviously knows that there is evidence which cannot be allowed into even a very limited 'public domain'.</div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">This raises the issue, and the <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/story/0,,1667079,00.html">spectre of Tony Blair's promise</a> to "<i>bring together all the evidence that we have and we will publish it so that people, the victims and others, can see exactly what happened</i>". Wasn't all the evidence already presented to the Intelligence and Security Committee? Wasn't all the evidence contained within its final report, completed in July 2008 and eventually published in May 2009? Hallett is content to have names redacted - redactions which already exist within the ISC report - so what could the Intelligence Services possibly have known prior to the events of 7 July 2005 which cannot be presented to the public even in redacted form?</div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">The Review addresses the many unanswered questions which arose following the conviction of the 2004 fertiliser bomb (CREVICE) plotters. In making our judgements about whether anything was missed or overlooked, we have focused on the information available at the time.<br /><br />The Review contains some highly sensitive intelligence and an unprecedented level of operational detail. As a result, there are some instances where we have agreed that information must be redacted from the published version of the Review in order that individuals are not put in danger, that current operations are not compromised and that our enemies do not learn of the capabilities of the UKâ??s intelligence and security Agencies. There are also some instances where the courts have ruled that information cannot be published. These redactions have been agreed with the Agencies, the police, the Crown Prosecution Service and government departments. We wish to note that the Security Service, the Metropolitan Police Service and West Yorkshire Police not only co-operated fully with our inquiries, but were helpful in seeking to ensure that we could publish as much material as possible and thereby provide the public with as full an account of these matters as possible.<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/media/210852/20090519_77review.pdf">Intelligence and Security Committee</a><br /><a href="http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/media/210852/20090519_77review.pdf">Could 7/7 Have Been Prevented?</a><br /><a href="http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/media/210852/20090519_77review.pdf">Review of the Intelligence on the London Terrorist Attacks on 7 July 2005</a></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">It became clear that West Yorkshire Police hadn't 'co-operated fully' with the ISC when it was revealed at a pre-Inquest hearing in April 2010 that they had two set of Khan's fingerprints on file:</div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">POLICE have only just discovered that they held the fingerprints of the ringleader of the July 7 bombings on file before the attacks, it was revealed today.<br /><br />West Yorkshire Police said it "recently" found two sets of Mohammad Sidique Khan's prints in its archives - one of which dates from when he was arrested aged just 11.<br /><br />The force has launched an inquiry into the records as it prepares for the upcoming inquests for those killed in the 2005 London atrocities.<br /><br />West Yorkshire Police took Khan's prints for the first time when he was arrested in April 1986, aged 11, for being involved in receiving stolen goods.<br /><br />The second set of prints was taken by the force in February 1993, when Khan was arrested for assault.<br /><br />The records came to light after Scotland Yard contacted West Yorkshire Police last month to check whether they had the July 7 bomber's fingerprints on file.<br /><br />Details of the discovery emerged at a hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice in London to decide what form the inquests should take.<br />----------<br />West Yorkshire Police said in a statement: "In preparation for the inquests into the events of July 7 2005, West Yorkshire Police recently found two sets of fingerprints in its archives belonging to Mohammad Sidique Khan, of which it was previously unaware.<br /><br />Max Hill QC, counsel for the Metropolitan Police, <span style="font-weight: bold;">stressed that this was not the first time that Scotland Yard asked West Yorkshire Police for detailed information about Khan.</span></div></blockquote><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: right;"><b>Source</b>: <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1269860/July-7-ringleaders-fingerprints-held-years-attacks-just-discovered-police.html">Daily Mail</a></div></div></blockquote><span style="font-weight: bold;"><span class="Apple-style-span">"What Have They Got To Hide"</span></span><br /><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">Clifford Tibber, one of the lawyers representing families, said the decision was "outrageous".<br /><br />"The coroner has already said that there are no circumstances in which she will allow the personal safety of any member of the Security Service or the interests of national security to be put at risk," said Mr Tibber.<br /><br />"The prime minister and the deputy prime minister are both on record as supporting a public inquiry. The Government have twice failed to introduce legislation to hold inquests in secret and now they are trying to introduce it through the back door. <span style="font-weight: bold;">What have they got to hide?</span>"</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11721640">BBC, 9 November 2010</a></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">The families of the bereaved have been refused legal aid to be represented at this hearing despite being awarded exceptional funding by the Legal Services Commission to be represented at the 7/7 Inquests.<br /><br />Exceptional funding was denied to the families of the four accused men, and they now have to sit in silence while accusations of the accused's involvement go unchallenged and unquestioned. Despite Inquest law forbidding the apportioning of guilt or blame, the four accused men should rightly have remained the 'alleged' or 'apparent' bombers rather than being described as the <i>de facto</i> bombers. Only when or, more realistically, if the Inquests reopen into the death of the four accused - Khan, Hussain, Tanweer and Lindsay - is there likely to be an opportunity for their families to question witnesses or examine the evidence. And, even if the inquests were to be opened into the four accused, based on its decisions regarding the inquests to date, it is unlikely that the Legal Services Commission will make the same 'exceptional funding' available for them to have legal representation.<br /><br />Do there exist any lawyers, many of whom have made a pretty penny on the back of so many trials of supposed 'terrorists', who would be prepared to represent the families of the accused men on a pro-bono basis or better still, for free?<br /><br />Meanwhile, the families of the bereaved, all of whom have waited over five years for these Inquests to commence, rightly feel outraged at the machinations of the State in its endless attempts, cloaked beneath the all pervasive banner of 'national security', to prevent them from knowing the truth.<br /><blockquote>"The Security Service have this 'get out of jail' card to trump all others when they say it's a matter of national security. They have tried this so many times it's like crying wolf." </blockquote><blockquote style="text-align: right;">- <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/8107791/July-7-inquest-MI5-forced-to-answer-questions-in-front-of-families.html">Graham Foulkes, father of David Foulkes</a></blockquote></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;"><blockquote style="text-align: right;"><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/8107791/July-7-inquest-MI5-forced-to-answer-questions-in-front-of-families.html"></a></blockquote><hr align="left" width="30%">If you wish to comment on this article, please <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/11/77-inquests-open-justice-or-no-justice.html#comments">join the discussion on the J7: 7/7 Inquests blog</a>.<p> </p><br /></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">--
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
http://julyseventh.co.uk
J7 Blog: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/
J7 Inquests Blog: http://77inquests.blogspot.com/
J7 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581
J7 Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
J7 Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
J7 MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth</div>The Antagonisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01459201402366077472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-90274698984452245062011-01-24T13:40:00.008+00:002011-01-25T00:36:47.821+00:00J7 7/7 Inquest Blog: July 7th Inquests - 'Life Extinct'?<br />Originally posted on the <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/11/july-7th-inquests-life-extinct.html">7/7 Inquests Blog: July 7th Inquests - 'Life Extinct'?</a><br /><hr width="30%" align="left"><br /><blockquote><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">On the afternoon of November 3rd, at the 7/7 Inquests, a Dr. Morgan Costello gave evidence via a videolink from Ireland. In his testimony, Dr Morgan Costello confirmed that, <span style="FONT-STYLE: italic">as a result</span> of his work for the Metropolitan Police Service 'providing medical services and medical assistance'...' <span style="FONT-STYLE: italic">in relation to deaths in custody</span>', in July 2005, he was asked to attend two scenes, Edgware Road and Aldgate, for the 'purposes of certifying the extinction of life'.<br /><br />Dr. Costello confirmed (<a href="http://julyseventh.co.uk/j7-inquest-transcripts/2010-11-01-05-week-04/7_july_inquests_2010-11-03_pm-session.pdf">page 3, lines 9-11</a>) that <i>'It was very clearly described to me by the officers on the scene that they didn't want anything other than for me to pronounce life extinct on the victims'.</i><br /><br />Dr. Costello confimed that, in July 2005, he was <b>a consultant psychiatrist</b>, who specialised in a <i>specialty of psychiatry</i>, who <b>then went on to</b> <i>work full-time for the police <b>undertaking extra qualifications in forensic and legal medicine.</b></i><br /><br />Why a <span style="FONT-STYLE: italic">consultant psychiatrist</span> was asked to pronounce on the extinction of life is not<b> </b>clear. Dr Costello's previous work as a <span style="FONT-STYLE: italic">consultant </span>for the MPS, in relation to '<a style="FONT-STYLE: italic" href="http://inquest.gn.apc.org/website/statistics/deaths-in-police-custody">deaths in custody</a>' would seem to have little bearing on the identification of numerous victims in the aftermath of an explosion, particularly in such extreme circumstances. Dr. Costello appears to have missed the '<a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/11/77-inquests-disintegration-of-shehzad.html"><span style="FONT-STYLE: italic">part of a body...In fact a human spine</span></a>' noticed by one of the first on the scene at Aldgate on 7th July, off-duty/plainclothes Police Sergeant Neil Kemp (<a href="http://julyseventh.co.uk/j7-inquest-transcripts/2010-10-25-29-week-03/7_july_inquests_2010-10-27_pm-session.pdf">transcripts Page 46, lines 7-15, 27th October pm</a>) . The '<span style="FONT-STYLE: italic">piece of spine</span>' found at Aldgate was not insignificant according to the statement of Mr Nathaniel Carey read on 3 November 2010 (afternoon session, <a href="http://julyseventh.co.uk/j7-inquest-transcripts/2010-11-01-05-week-04/7_july_inquests_2010-11-03_pm-session.pdf">Page 16, lines 9-25</a>).<br /><br />Dr Costello confirmed that he visited the Edgware Road scene at 00.59 on Friday 8th July, and then the Aldgate scene at 08.40 on 8th July. Dr Costello also confirmed that 'there were difficult considerations to be taken into account at the time and I was very much led by the crime scene manager, and there was difficulty accessing some of the bodies or even seeing them clearly'. The crime scene manager was DC Andrew Meneely, who in his testimony given on the morning of 3rd November (<a href="http://julyseventh.co.uk/j7-inquest-transcripts/2010-11-01-05-week-04/7_july_inquests_2010-11-03_am-session.pdf">Page 66</a>) stated that he was 'attached to the Counter-terrorism Command and New Scotland Yard' as a 'forensic scene examiner' but who now works in the [Australian] Bomb Data Centre.<br /><br />Dr Costello then goes on to confirm, being prompted and led by Hugo Keith through the list, that he identified (by code numbers of the bodies involved) <span style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">six </span>bodies at Edgware Road and <span style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">seven </span>bodies at Aldgate scenes as 'life extinct'.<br /><br />The numbers identified by Dr. Costello should have been <span style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">seven </span>bodies at Edgware Road and <span style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">eight</span> bodies at Aldgate, if the alleged 'bombers' bodies were included. It seems incredible that Dr. Morgan Costello should miss a 30cm x 14cm x 10cm piece of spine weighing 1.852kg, particularly if this is the 'piece of spine' to which Neil Kemp makes reference to seeing on the morning of 7th July. Further, Hugo Keith is directing Dr. Costello to his two statements dated 27 September 2005<b>, </b>rather than to any contemporaneous records that Dr Costello may have kept on two days in July.<br /><br />Despite the numbers of lives extinct pronounced at Edgware Road and Aldgate missing the alleged perpetrators in their totals, the Metropolitan Police appeared to be one step ahead of the medical professionals, or a couple of steps behind. In a period of thirteen minutes at around 6pm on the day of 7 July 2005, the Metropolitan Police issued two <a href="http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh/index.php?showtopic=123&view=findpost&p=12400546">bulletins citing the number of deceased</a> at each of the incident locations. The timings here, as with the entire story of 7/7, are important to note. An 18.03 bulletin claimed "there five [sic] fatalities" at Edgware Road. Yet, an update issued at 18.13 (just ten minutes later) but claiming to be based on "Latest from New Scotland Yard at 18:00" (three minutes prior the previous Metropolitan Police update) was claiming the number of victims as "7 at Edgware Road".<br /><br />Also worth noting is that there is no evidence/testimony provided by Hugo Keith as he links the 'life extinct' bodies with the Edgware Road/Aldgate victims names/identities. There is no mention of the 'Identification Commission' nor any mention of any death registration particulars/rulingsby the presiding coroner, Dr Andrew Reid, in July 2005.<br /><br />In fact the issue of the victims identifications are going to be 'outside the scope of the proceedings':<br /><blockquote>("<a href="http://julyseventh.co.uk/j7-inquest-transcripts/2010-11-01-05-week-04/7_july_inquests_2010-11-03_am-session.pdf"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color:black;">3/11/10 am transcripts, Page 67</span></a>")</blockquote><blockquote>15 Q. The issue of the bodies and their recovery and their </blockquote><blockquote>16 treatment is outside the scope of these proceedings by</blockquote><blockquote>17 order of my Lady earlier in these proceedings</blockquote>This means that there will never be scrutiny of the identification issues, relating to any and all of the victims, including the alleged bombers.<br /><br />Given that one of the tenets of the <a href="http://www.surreycoroner.info/workofcoroners.html#purpose">purposes and functions</a> of an inquest is to establish '<span style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">who has died</span>', we must ask:<br /><br />What sort of an inquest is this?</blockquote><br /><hr width="30%" align="left">If you wish to comment on this article, please <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/11/july-7th-inquests-life-extinct.html#comments">join the discussion on the J7: 7/7 Inquests blog</a>.<br /><br /></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">--
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
http://julyseventh.co.uk
J7 Blog: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/
J7 Inquests Blog: http://77inquests.blogspot.com/
J7 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581
J7 Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
J7 Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
J7 MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth</div>The Antagonisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01459201402366077472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-47115337549704437592011-01-12T23:59:00.004+00:002011-01-13T00:10:57.559+00:007/7 Inquests: The Alleged Identification of Shehzad Tanweer<p> </p>Originally posted on the <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/11/77-inquests-alleged-identification-of.html">7/7 Inquests Blog: The Alleged Identification of Shehzad Tanweer</a><br /></p><hr width="30%" align="left"><br /><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">In a previous post we examined the alleged <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/11/77-inquests-disintegration-of-shehzad.html">'disintegration' of Shehzad Tanweer</a> in the explosion on Circle Line train 204 at <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/7-7-liverpool-street-aldgate.html">Aldgate/Liverpool Street</a>, and the way in which the number of deceased at the location was consistently numbered as 7, a figure that didn't include the alleged perpetrator as one of the deceased.<br /><br />It is also worth noting the following information in relation to the identification and naming of Tanweer as the alleged perpetrator of this explosion.<br /></div><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size:85%;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi7KRTZjaLflddABSbY0jUkiLFZI6P-OPeTMVWQxOxHh_GBVVNI3rl3Nlr_MfDDHKlSKKvYgjeF5W60Sjj-8hDCWXPfpjKvwmBZyXOVirRMcjbjChukVbMKRYLAtVQz51cE8JEw4g/s1600/iscid.jpg">Enlarge</a><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: right;"><div style="text-align: center;"><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi7KRTZjaLflddABSbY0jUkiLFZI6P-OPeTMVWQxOxHh_GBVVNI3rl3Nlr_MfDDHKlSKKvYgjeF5W60Sjj-8hDCWXPfpjKvwmBZyXOVirRMcjbjChukVbMKRYLAtVQz51cE8JEw4g/s1600/iscid.jpg"><img style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 364px; height: 400px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi7KRTZjaLflddABSbY0jUkiLFZI6P-OPeTMVWQxOxHh_GBVVNI3rl3Nlr_MfDDHKlSKKvYgjeF5W60Sjj-8hDCWXPfpjKvwmBZyXOVirRMcjbjChukVbMKRYLAtVQz51cE8JEw4g/s400/iscid.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5537887575367845906" border="0" /></a> <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhE5lYpQJpXQ7UWNbnqtaexXYfTukYtVFwonygGUREBrx7FqsFytYH02zaPRB8KqYH2GlBvlwAG9BaA4YJmtVuIaFzfFzayDcHsqv6p7W_oGhXeTkxUVDj4kmx_SeedqjNQEbJeCg/s1600/iscid2.jpg"><span style="font-weight: bold;font-size:85%;">Enlarge</span></a><br /></div><span style="font-weight: bold;"><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhE5lYpQJpXQ7UWNbnqtaexXYfTukYtVFwonygGUREBrx7FqsFytYH02zaPRB8KqYH2GlBvlwAG9BaA4YJmtVuIaFzfFzayDcHsqv6p7W_oGhXeTkxUVDj4kmx_SeedqjNQEbJeCg/s1600/iscid2.jpg"><img style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 162px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhE5lYpQJpXQ7UWNbnqtaexXYfTukYtVFwonygGUREBrx7FqsFytYH02zaPRB8KqYH2GlBvlwAG9BaA4YJmtVuIaFzfFzayDcHsqv6p7W_oGhXeTkxUVDj4kmx_SeedqjNQEbJeCg/s400/iscid2.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5537906744730510386" border="0" /></a><br />Source:</span> <a href="http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/media/210852/20090519_77review.pdf">p15-16 Intelligence and Security Committee<br />Could 7/7 Have Been Prevented?<br />Review of the Intelligence on the London Terrorist Attacks on 7 July 2005<br /></a></div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">As we can see from the timeline above, the Pathologist report into the 'spine' was carried out on 11 July 2005. This was mentioned by pathologist Nathaniel Cary in his testimony, although during this testimony to the inquest no date was given for this examination. [<a href="http://julyseventh.co.uk/j7-inquest-transcripts/2010-11-01-04-week-04/7_july_inquests_2010-11-03_pm-session.pdf">Transcripts p16 lines 8</a>]<br /><br />Forensic scientist Andrew McDonald did give a date for his examination of the alleged remains of Tanweer when he noted that he had received:<br /><blockquote>"<span style="font-weight: bold;">Between 13 July 2005</span> and 28 July 2005, 80 recovered body part samples associated with the bombings of a London Underground Tube train at Aldgate on 7 July 2005 together with 20 reference control samples from individuals known to have been present at the time of the explosion were received at the laboratory. All items were received in sealed packages.<br /><br />"I was asked to carry out STR profiling tests to determine whether any of the recovered body part samples received in this case could have originated from Shehzad Tanweer. STR profiling is a sensitive DNA analysis technique. An STR profile obtained from a human body fluid, such as blood or saliva, or human body tissue can be compared with an STR profile of a given person. If the profiles are different, then the body fluid or body tissues cannot have originated from the person in question.<br /><br /><div style="text-align: right;"> <span style="font-weight: bold;">Source: </span><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/03112010pm.htm">Transcripts 3 November 2010<br />Afternoon session, page 12 line 1 on</a><br /></div></blockquote></div><div style="text-align: justify;">This ties in with the timeline given in the ISC report above -- although we now know that the viewing of the accused on CCTV at Luton station <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/cctv-fuss-about-nothing.html">occurred some time before 12 July 2005</a> -- which states that the DNA analysis confirmed all four accused on 13th, 15th & 16th July.<br /><br />So, let's presume that the person identified by DNA on <span style="font-weight: bold;">13 July 2005</span> was Shehzad Tanweer, although we cannot be certain of this, and ask ourselves how the following statement given at a press conference by Assistant Commissioner Specialist Operations, Andy Hayman of the Metropolitan Police, could have been made a day earlier:<br /></div><span style="font-weight: bold;"></span><blockquote><span style="font-weight: bold;">Tuesday July 12, 2005</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">17.47</span><br /><br />'As regards the man who was reported missing, some of his property was found on the Route 30 bus in Tavistock Square.<br /><br />'Property in the name of a second man was found at the scene of the Aldgate bomb. And in relation to a third man property in his name was found at the scene of both the Aldgate and the Edgware Road bombs.<br /><br />'<span style="font-weight: bold;">We also have very strong forensic</span> and other evidence, that it is very likely one of the men from West Yorkshire <span style="font-weight: bold;">died in the explosion at Aldgate</span>. This, of course, is subject to formal confirmation by the Coroner.<br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"></span></blockquote><span style="font-weight: bold;"><br /></span><div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sources:</span> <a href="http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh/index.php?showtopic=123&view=findpost&p=13253613">Timed press release shown above</a><br /><a href="http://cms.met.police.uk/news/major_operational_announcements/terrorist_attacks/one_week_anniversary_bombings_appeal">'One week anniversary' bombings appeal - Metropolitan Police Service</a><br /></div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">What forensic evidence did the Metropolitan Police Service obtain to confirm the presence of Shehzad Tanweer by 15.47 on 12 July if, as demonstrated above, the forensics were only just beginning to be carried out a day later on 13 July 2005?</div><br /><br /><hr width="30%" align="left"><br />If you wish to comment on this article, please <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/11/77-inquests-alleged-identification-of.html#comments">join the discussion on the J7: 7/7 Inquests blog</a>.<br /><p> </p><div class="blogger-post-footer">--
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
http://julyseventh.co.uk
J7 Blog: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/
J7 Inquests Blog: http://77inquests.blogspot.com/
J7 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581
J7 Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
J7 Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
J7 MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth</div>The Antagonisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01459201402366077472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-59275191371857425362010-12-22T19:17:00.007+00:002010-12-22T19:24:34.117+00:007/7 Inquests Blog: Danny Biddle, the Rucksack on the Lap - and the Explosion on the Floor<p align="justify">Originally posted on the <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/11/77-inquests-danny-biddle-rucksack-on.html">J7: 7/7 Inquests blog: Danny Biddle, the Rucksack on the Lap - and the Explosion on the Floor</a><br /><hr width="30%" align="left"></p><br /><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">Yesterday, 8 November, saw Danny Biddle as the opening witness at the 7/7 Inquest with regard to the Edgware Road incident (<a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/J7-Inquest-Submission/provisional-index-of-factual-issues-update-230610.pdf">Factual Issue 3: Circumstances at each of the four scenes immediately following the explosions</a>).<br /><br />As the only witness to ever publicly claim to have actually seen Mohammed Sidique Khan on Circle Line train 216 at Edgware Road the media paid close attention to his testimony. Today's headlines scream out:<br /><ul><li><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(153, 51, 153);">"Daniel Biddle: I was just 6ft from 7/7 bomb as it maimed me"</span></li><li><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(153, 51, 153);">"7/7 survivor describes moment he saw terrorist leader detonate bomb on London tube"</span></li><li><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(153, 51, 153);">"London bombings survivor saw bomb detonated"</span></li></ul></div><div style="text-align: justify;">However, there is more to the headlines than meets the eye, and more than might be gleaned from the media reports of Mr Biddle's testimony.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">J7 have previously highlighted the many inconsistencies in Mr Biddle's accounts in our <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/7-7-edgware-road-paddington.html#dannybiddle">Edgware Road analysis</a> on the <a href="http://julyseventh.co.uk/">July 7th Truth Campaign website</a>. We also included this information in our submissions to the Inquests in the <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/J7-Inquest-Submission/index.html">J7 response to factual issue 2</a>. The many and varied accounts of Danny Biddle, as reported in the media, were referenced by Hugo Keith as Danny Biddle gave his testimony:<br /><blockquote style="">A.[DANIEL PAUL BIDDLE] No, I mean, there was nothing about him that made me think he was dangerous in any way or anything like that. If there would have been, I would have got off the train and got help. I mean, he was just a -- he looked like a normal guy going to work within London, whatever he did, and there was nothing that he did that made him stand out different to anybody else at that particular moment in time.<br />Q. [MR KEITH] Do you recollect him carrying anything?<br />A. He had a rucksack, like a small, black camping rucksack.<br />Q. Was he holding it or carrying it in a particular way that you can recall?<br />A. I remember it being on his lap.<br />Q. Mr Biddle, not unsurprisingly, the story of how you survived the bomb at Edgware Road has been widely reported in the press and around the world <span style="font-weight: bold;">and a number of reports have purported to give accounts of your experience and memories of that day, and in those accounts there are repeated references to the possibility that the man might have been wearing a rucksack on his back, and that is what you recollect.</span><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">A. I've said all the way along from the very first statement I gave to the police he had it on his lap.</span><br />Q. Did he have one rucksack or two, or one or two bags? Was there anything else that he was carrying?<br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">A. No, I just saw one rucksack.</span><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. Can you tell us a little bit more, if you can, about the size of it?<br />A. I would say it would be about so big. It wasn't -- it was one of those sort of small camping rucksacks that you often see people that are going hiking would carry, so it wasn't like a full-sized camping rucksack, it was just a small to medium-sized camping rucksack. As I say, so big. [<a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/08112010am.htm">p31, 18 on</a>]</div></blockquote></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Mr Biddle then continues with his testimony which, as noted above, has been widely and unquestioningly reported as an apparent confirmed witness account of Mohammed Sidique Khan allegedly detonating a suicide bomb at Edgware Road:</div><blockquote>[MR BIDDLE] The train entered the Tube tunnel, I looked round, as I looked round, he looked up, I just saw a quick movement, then there was just a big, white flash, the kind of noise that you get when you tune a radio in, that kind of white sound, and it just felt like the carriage I was standing in filled -- just expanded at such a vast rate and contracted quickly and, with that, it blew me off my feet and through the carriage doors into the tunnel.<br />Q.[MR KEITH] When you say you saw a quick movement, what do you think was the movement that you saw? Was it some part of his body, or was it a movement in the bag?<br />A. It was his arm, he did that with his hand in the rucksack and the next thing --<br />Q. Because these proceedings can't record what you've shown us, did you just demonstrate that you saw an arm move somewhere near the rucksack?<br />A. That's correct.<br />Q. Did you see what precisely moved or whether there was any movement in the rucksack itself?<br />A. Literally, as soon as his arm moved, I was outside the carriage.<br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Q. Do we take it from what you've said that the rucksack was still on his lap, or was it on the ground?</span><br />A. When he made the arm movement,<span style="font-weight: bold;"> the rucksack was still on his lap.</span><br />Q. Were you able to discern any sort of expression or any sort of look on him at that moment?<br />A. I mean, before he set device off, he looked up and along the carriage and then he just looked down. He didn't say anything, he didn't shout anything that I can<br />remember hearing. He just put his head down, moved his arm and, the next thing, I'm outside the train.<br />Q. What was your first conscious thought after that?<br />A. I'd fallen out the train. [<a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/08112010am.htm">p33, 8 on</a>]<br /></blockquote> <div style="text-align: justify;">Later in the proceedings Mr Biddle is questioned by Mr Saunders, representing some of the bereaved:<br /><blockquote>MR SAUNDERS: Mr Biddle, I will be equally short. You have described to Mr Keith seeing Khan's arm moving quickly. In your statement in December I think you gave a little more detail <span style="font-weight: bold;">where you thought you'd seen him with a white cord at the rucksack? </span><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">A. That's correct.</span><br />Q. That's what you thought was being pulled?<br />A. That's what it looked like. As he pulled his arm, that's what it looked like he was holding, but I couldn't ascertain if that was from inside the bag or part of the bag. <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/08112010am.htm">[p44, 21</a>]<br /><br /><div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/08112010am.htm">Hearing Transcripts 8 November 2010, Morning session</a><br /></div></blockquote></div><div style="text-align: justify;">As J7 noted some time ago <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/7-7-edgware-road-paddington.html#dannybiddle">in our analysis of the various statements of Danny Biddle</a> reported in the media, the Metropolitan Police have always maintained that the explosions occurred on the floors of the train carriages. This means that, according to the Metropolitan Police, the explosion at Edgware Road also occurred on the floor of the carriage:<br /><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">At this stage, we do believe, however, that each device that was put onto the tube trains was likely to be on the floor of the carriage. [<a href="http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0507/08/se.01.html">DC Andy Hayman, 8 July 2005</a>]<br /></div><br /><div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/7-7-kings-cross-russell-square.html#suicidebomber">J7 'The suicide-bomber theory gestates'</a></div></blockquote>That the explosions occurred on the floors of the trains was further confirmed during the trial of <a href="http://j7truth.blogspot.com/2009/04/another-miscarriage-of-justice-averted.html">Waheed Ali, Mohammed Shakil and Sadeer Saleem</a> when the testimony of Fort Halstead Forensics expert, Clifford Todd, was reported:<br /><blockquote>The bombers scattered identity and bank cards around the Tube carriages they targeted <span style="font-weight: bold;">before placing their rucksacks on the floor and setting off the explosives inside them,</span> jurors heard.<br /><br />The details emerged for the first time as a forensics expert's evidence was read at the trial of three men accused of helping to plan the atrocity.<br /><br />Jurors were told the "<b>unique</b>" bomb mixture was made up of black pepper and hydrogen peroxide, which was put into ordinary plastic bags alongside ice-packs to cool the volatile material.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">The bombers were not wearing the rucksacks at the time of the explosions, but had instead put them down on the floor of the bus and Tube trains, it was claimed.</span><br /><br />Neil Flewitt, QC, prosecuting, said that expert Clifford Todd had examined the wreckage of the bomb sites.<br /><br />He said: "It is, in the opinion of Mr Todd, noteworthy that at each scene, some personal materials and documents, such as ID cards, were found relating to the bombers.<br /><br />"Although they were damaged to some extent, they did not show the damage that would be expected if they were on the body of the bomber or in the rucksack, suggesting that in each case they had been deliberately separated by some distance from the actual explosion."<br /><br /><div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1895690/July-7-bombers-left-clues-to-martyrdom.html">The Telegraph</a><br /></div></blockquote>The problem that the Inquest now has is that of squaring the testimony of Mr Biddle -- an eye-witness sighting of a detonation by pulling "a white cord" on "a small, black camping rucksack", of which Mr Biddle remembers "it being on his lap" -- with the official version of the story that states the explosion occurred on the floor of the carriage. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">On the floor of the carriage some distance from where this diagram and Biddle have placed Khan in a seat:<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><span><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-29CFKJtJDCqgyKl4Itfdu0x_ttlnwcGXOZ1saMTWss7hv48HW5aU6En8EmECmtnGNH72tw3qTT9z8dPInx7UW5tiU1KVYWPPdgA8QG51S-aZ7BicnlAwxxDAMm33NXLah8Ckng/s1600/ERpassengers.jpg">Enlarge</a></span><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-29CFKJtJDCqgyKl4Itfdu0x_ttlnwcGXOZ1saMTWss7hv48HW5aU6En8EmECmtnGNH72tw3qTT9z8dPInx7UW5tiU1KVYWPPdgA8QG51S-aZ7BicnlAwxxDAMm33NXLah8Ckng/s1600/ERpassengers.jpg"><img style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 286px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-29CFKJtJDCqgyKl4Itfdu0x_ttlnwcGXOZ1saMTWss7hv48HW5aU6En8EmECmtnGNH72tw3qTT9z8dPInx7UW5tiU1KVYWPPdgA8QG51S-aZ7BicnlAwxxDAMm33NXLah8Ckng/s400/ERpassengers.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5537601482575338018" border="0" /></a><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/evidence/docs/INQ10282-8.pdf"><span>Probable position of passengers</span></a><br /><br /></div>This graphic shows that Khan was allegedly in the seat marked 28 and the blast site at a position to the right of seat 27:<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><span><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgulFJ81pMO32r2UNV_JWl8Nn2urbGcO2tPhjrGM31O6I7C5llvGX6c07GVRNpR4K-1-r-sbkedP-SKmvDhgh2qXmexomcfzkezTHawhhnj__wZG0PWGss6l9xApU-n3q36I_Ci_A/s1600/erdeceased.jpg">Enlarge</a></span><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgulFJ81pMO32r2UNV_JWl8Nn2urbGcO2tPhjrGM31O6I7C5llvGX6c07GVRNpR4K-1-r-sbkedP-SKmvDhgh2qXmexomcfzkezTHawhhnj__wZG0PWGss6l9xApU-n3q36I_Ci_A/s1600/erdeceased.jpg"><img style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 288px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgulFJ81pMO32r2UNV_JWl8Nn2urbGcO2tPhjrGM31O6I7C5llvGX6c07GVRNpR4K-1-r-sbkedP-SKmvDhgh2qXmexomcfzkezTHawhhnj__wZG0PWGss6l9xApU-n3q36I_Ci_A/s400/erdeceased.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5537602309813242674" border="0" /></a><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/evidence/docs/INQ10282-9.pdf"><span>Position of Deceased<br /></span></a></div><br />No doubt Mr Biddle's testimony will be forgotten by the media once the Inquests move on to discussing matters pertaining to the forensics at the scenes, the types of explosives used, and the method of detonation. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Until then, caution should be exercised with regard to any evidence that attempts to prove that the damage to the Edgware Road train, seen in the image below, was caused by mixing <a href="http://j7truth.blogspot.com/2009/12/217-devices-not-capable-of-exploding.html">Hydrogen Peroxide</a> with <a href="http://j7truth.blogspot.com/2009/05/nature-of-explosives-from-c4-to.html">black pepper/masala spice</a>.</div><br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><a aiotarget="false" aiotitle="" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/images/abc_lontrain6x510px.jpg"><img style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 510px; height: 336px;" src="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/images/abc_lontrain6x510px.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><span>A comment on this image can be read <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/11/77-inquests-disintegration-of-shehzad.html?showComment=1289262012881#c7507067615321612190">here</a>.</span></div></blockquote><br /><hr width="30%" align="left"><p style="text-align: justify;">If you wish to comment on this article, please <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/11/77-inquests-danny-biddle-rucksack-on.html#comments">join the discussion on the J7: 7/7 Inquests blog</a>.</p><div class="blogger-post-footer">--
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
http://julyseventh.co.uk
J7 Blog: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/
J7 Inquests Blog: http://77inquests.blogspot.com/
J7 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581
J7 Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
J7 Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
J7 MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth</div>The Antagonisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01459201402366077472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-56861022831568063372010-12-04T19:08:00.001+00:002010-12-04T19:11:07.077+00:007/7 Inquests: The Disintegration of Shehzad Tanweer<div align="justify"><br />
</div><div align="justify">Originally posted on the <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/11/77-inquests-disintegration-of-shehzad.html">7/7 Inquests Blog: The Disintegration of Shehzad Tanweer</a>:</div><hr align="left" width="30%" /><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">As the Inquest approached the end of the third and final week of testimony and evidence into the Aldgate scene, as outlined in <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/docs/provisional-index-of-factual-issues-update-230610.pdf">'Factual Issue 3: Circumstances at the scene immediately following the explosions'</a>, the first evidence for the presence of Shehzad Tanweer at the site of this explosion emerged.<br />
<br />
The evidence didn't come in the form of CCTV footage, as we now know it was claimed that <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/final-curtain-cctv-rich-to-cctv-fail.html">the last sighting of Tanweer</a> was made at around 08.26.32 at the King's Cross Thameslink end of the entrance tunnel to the London Underground.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-weight: bold;">Nor did the evidence come in the form of witness testimony. Not one witness</span> on carriage two claimed to have seen Tanweer on the carriage. <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/7-7-liverpool-street-aldgate.html#eyewitnesses">Bruce Lait</a>, for example, who had given interviews to the press in the days after July 7th 2005, and who had claimed he hadn't seen anyone where the hole in the floor of the carriage was, was not asked whether he had seen Tanweer on the carriage before the explosion.</div><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">Michael Henning, who entered the train on carriage 3, <span style="font-style: italic;">was</span> asked this question by Hugo Keith QC:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><blockquote>Q. Did you, in fact, tell the police that you did recollect -- and you had an image in your mind to this effect -- a male standing inside the rear set of doors in that second carriage?<br />
A. I do indeed, and it puts a shiver through me to remember that. However, I couldn't say with great detail his features, etcetera. It's more those soft focus of the people that you normally see on the Tube and haven't paid attention to.<br />
Q. Could we have, please, on the screen <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/evidence/docs/INQ8352-2.pdf">INQ00008352</a>, page 2? Did you prepare, in fact, a sketch map for the police showing the rear of the second carriage towards the top of the page, towards the front of the train,towards the front, and the platform side which you boarded, and then the third carriage, and you went on,and do the two crosses indicate respectively the person whom you thought you might have seen as being significant in the second carriage and then your place in the third carriage?<br />
A. Indeed. The cross circled is obviously where I perceived Tanweer to be.<br />
Q. You obviously didn't know him to be Tanweer then. Did you tell the police that you saw a man you described as an Asian man wearing some sort of white or cream light-coloured clothing in any event?<br />
A. That's what I recall, yes.<br />
Q. Can you recall any more about the person that you saw in outline as you boarded the train?<br />
A. I would be hesitant to say more because of all the subsequent information I've seen.<br />
Q. Of course. Do you recall whether he was carrying anything, the person that you recall seeing?<br />
A. I remember him holding something, but how he was carrying it, again, it would be wrong of me to try and put detail on that.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/18102010am.htm">Hearing Transcripts 18th October 2010<br />
Morning Sesion, p 47 Lines 9 on</a></div></blockquote></div>Whether Tanweer was wearing what could be described as "some sort of white or cream light-coloured clothing" is questionable as CCTV shows his clothing to be predominantly dark:<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
<a href="http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o7/Muncher77/Tanweer2a.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o7/Muncher77/Tanweer2a.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 270px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 120px;" /></a><br />
Of course the 'suicide-bomber' meme has always tacitly implied that explosives are carried on the body. Although, uniquely it appears, as the story of the London bombings evolved, rucksacks <i>on</i> the body became solely the mode of transportation of the explosives, not the method of delivery. At the time of the attacks the Metropolitan Police were clearly stating that the explosions happened on the floors of the carriages, with early reports claiming the explosions came from under the trains, yet this did not dispel the 'suicide-bomber' meme once the four accused were identified. This is important to bear in mind when examining any witness statements or evidence which originate from the period immediately after the events of 7 July 2005.<br />
<br />
On the penultimate day of the Aldgate scene evidence, a witness statement was read to the Inquest by Hugo Keith, detailing evidence that apparently linked Shehzad Tanweer to the site of the explosion:<br />
<blockquote>My Lady, the final statement is that of Richard Hall, dated 6 June 2006, again with the usual declaration of truth. Statement of DC RICHARD HALL read:<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">"I am a detective constable attached to the Anti-terrorist Branch at New Scotland Yard where I performed the role of Terrorist Forensic Scene Examiner and Exhibit Officer.<br />
"On Thursday, 7 July 2005, I was on duty when a series of incidents took place in London. I was aware that initially there had been explosions on London Underground trains at Russell Square,Edgware Road and Aldgate Underground station. A further explosion had occurred on a London Transport bus at Tavistock Square.<br />
"I was tasked by DS Michael Jolly to act as the Deputy Scene Examiner to DC Andrew Meneely, who had been tasked earlier in the day to attend the scene at Aldgate London Underground station.<br />
"I went to the scene where I was met by DC Meneely,who was carrying out tasks in relation to the initial survey of the scene. DC Meneely had devised a zone plan which had been used to structure the search. This was later drawn by DC Neil Fretwell of the<br />
Anti-terrorist Branch Bomb Data Centre and exhibited at NF/7."<br />
"During the course of DC Meneely's initial examination of the scene, he seized exhibit AM/11, selected debris from zone 5, the open area to the left of carriages 1, 2 and 3 of the train.<br />
"The exhibit contained part of a wallet which appeared to have been close to an explosion. I examined the contents of this wallet and found that it contained fragments of plastic cards, fragments of Bank of England notes, business cards, and other correspondence.<br />
"I recorded the following details in the 'Remarks' column of the exhibit book and passed them to the control vehicle for transmission to the ATBIU.<br />
"On <span style="font-weight: bold;">Monday, 11 July 2005</span>, I conducted a closer examination of exhibit AM/11. A decision had been taken to submit the wallet to the Forensic Explosives Laboratory for explosive trace work to be done. I therefore opened the exhibit and removed all of the fragmented parts from it. I then resealed the exhibit.<br />
As a result of this examination, I created the following eleven exhibits:<br />
<br />
"RABH/1. Fragmented HSBC credit card in the name of Mr Sidique Khan ...<br />
"RABH/2. Fragments of a £10 and £5 note split from AM/11 ...<br />
"RABH/3. One Excelsior Snooker Club membership card in the name of S Tanweer<br />
"RABH/4. 1. Two receipts ... One PC World receipt for plantronic audio 15 microph 12.99. "2. B&Q receipt. Print has faded but can be read in part. (H)Eeston Ring Road, Leeds ...<br />
"RABH/5. One Northern Snooker Centre membership card in the name of S Tanweer ...<br />
"RABH/5A. One Nasim Property Investor business card...<br />
"RABH/7. One Halifax Current Account Switch Card in the name of Mr S Khan ...<br />
"RABH/8. One Optimum Fitness card in the name of Yasser HALEED ...<br />
"RABH/9. One business card ... "Dr GREENTHUMBS Hydroponics Store ... Wakefield ...<br />
"RABH/10. One business card in the name of James Squires ...<br />
"I also produced exhibit RABH/11 - one nylon bag - for control purposes for the Forensic Explosives Laboratory."<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/03112010pm.htm">Transcripts 3 November 2010<br />
Afternoon Session, page 17 Lines 25 on</a></div></div></blockquote></div><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLLOdRvnOsouiHRmaZsWZSzdjzcSa1RVkSEBm6bz8PHgc_KvFGHrMN7MTdjy5u1ZOBIavXs3BdGfEMOcpwXIAYH7SxqVqRjOkI2slD6rWvASXX7ef2JB5uMIJocCH5hBhKIs2BIA/s1600/hsbc_card-sidique-khan-j7.png" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5536816064498282978" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLLOdRvnOsouiHRmaZsWZSzdjzcSa1RVkSEBm6bz8PHgc_KvFGHrMN7MTdjy5u1ZOBIavXs3BdGfEMOcpwXIAYH7SxqVqRjOkI2slD6rWvASXX7ef2JB5uMIJocCH5hBhKIs2BIA/s400/hsbc_card-sidique-khan-j7.png" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 250px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 242px;" /></a>RABH/1. Fragmented HSBC credit card in the name of Mr Sidique Khan</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
As stated in Mr Hall's testimony this wallet was seized from 'selected debris from zone 5, the open area to the left of carriages 1, 2 and 3 of the train.'<br />
<br />
This exhibit shows Zone 5 - the area in and around carriages 1 2 & 3:<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiFCa48qFHIkZF9SKZCZQHLZL4KPe4eTwTcnEagflsS_l67W1rbsS0FFM3TqWCRJOuC00bOnpFLmhnuF-el0zNlOoqajp2gvLKn0z3ccu_ZbKxHWT_FqCk6znMK0FkgGTEDY_L4XQ/s1600/j7-aldgate-zone-map.png">Enlarge</a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiFCa48qFHIkZF9SKZCZQHLZL4KPe4eTwTcnEagflsS_l67W1rbsS0FFM3TqWCRJOuC00bOnpFLmhnuF-el0zNlOoqajp2gvLKn0z3ccu_ZbKxHWT_FqCk6znMK0FkgGTEDY_L4XQ/s1600/j7-aldgate-zone-map.png" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5536858437157419490" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiFCa48qFHIkZF9SKZCZQHLZL4KPe4eTwTcnEagflsS_l67W1rbsS0FFM3TqWCRJOuC00bOnpFLmhnuF-el0zNlOoqajp2gvLKn0z3ccu_ZbKxHWT_FqCk6znMK0FkgGTEDY_L4XQ/s400/j7-aldgate-zone-map.png" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 297px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 400px;" /></a><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/evidence/docs/INQ10280-9.pdf">Zone sketch plan Aldgate station, junctions and tunnel<br />
</a></div><br />
Zone 5, where it is claimed the wallet was found, does not include the actual area where the initial explosion is said to have occurred and where the Inquest were told persons were thrown from the train by the blast. This area was described as being where carriage 4 eventually came to a halt, as shown in this Inquest exhibit, which would place it in Zone 6:<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKg-wHWw1G9R1azR92sjKKHYTeVpZSo1lB7d72rkPaN79HZ-gpi1i7czB1xsK2tVtWuoxRd4V28kRZlHH4RswDZqD5tGLN7HGMXTJEgB61Qice8HyNy7lxHGmVfnIgbBUU9WRMEA/s1600/j7-aldgate-train-position-map.png"><br />
</a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKg-wHWw1G9R1azR92sjKKHYTeVpZSo1lB7d72rkPaN79HZ-gpi1i7czB1xsK2tVtWuoxRd4V28kRZlHH4RswDZqD5tGLN7HGMXTJEgB61Qice8HyNy7lxHGmVfnIgbBUU9WRMEA/s1600/j7-aldgate-train-position-map.png">Enlarge</a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKg-wHWw1G9R1azR92sjKKHYTeVpZSo1lB7d72rkPaN79HZ-gpi1i7czB1xsK2tVtWuoxRd4V28kRZlHH4RswDZqD5tGLN7HGMXTJEgB61Qice8HyNy7lxHGmVfnIgbBUU9WRMEA/s1600/j7-aldgate-train-position-map.png" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5536858710201316994" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKg-wHWw1G9R1azR92sjKKHYTeVpZSo1lB7d72rkPaN79HZ-gpi1i7czB1xsK2tVtWuoxRd4V28kRZlHH4RswDZqD5tGLN7HGMXTJEgB61Qice8HyNy7lxHGmVfnIgbBUU9WRMEA/s400/j7-aldgate-train-position-map.png" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 267px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 400px;" /></a> <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/evidence/docs/INQ10280-9.pdf">Aldgate station plan of incident site</a></div><br />
The graphic above had been described by Hugo Keith in his opening statement to the Inquest [<a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/11102010pm.htm">p35 13-23</a>] as follows:<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;"><blockquote>Richard Gray was tragically blown out of the right-hand side of the second carriage, that's to say the right-hand side of the carriage if you were standing in that carriage looking forward in the direction of travel on the side away from the bomb and on to the track, so from this diagram away from the location of the bomb down towards the bottom of the page and through double door D8. Because the train carried on moving for a short while, as I've said, <span style="font-weight: bold;">his body was found adjacent to carriages 3 and 4 when the train finally stopped</span>.</blockquote><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQjC0jUGeRkvhVteCxcw9rYDy4X-owsdOwOmYPOz4Xy41o7DNQTYPEb_8jchehNdm_G0Hiy6Zxl3LT70Z4MgkMcIR_ubr0AR88CPNPi3La_w3CA5kAhZbOptJkBTK-5MGh-lpBNQ/s1600/richardgray.jpg">Enlarge</a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQjC0jUGeRkvhVteCxcw9rYDy4X-owsdOwOmYPOz4Xy41o7DNQTYPEb_8jchehNdm_G0Hiy6Zxl3LT70Z4MgkMcIR_ubr0AR88CPNPi3La_w3CA5kAhZbOptJkBTK-5MGh-lpBNQ/s1600/richardgray.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5536985238056962530" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQjC0jUGeRkvhVteCxcw9rYDy4X-owsdOwOmYPOz4Xy41o7DNQTYPEb_8jchehNdm_G0Hiy6Zxl3LT70Z4MgkMcIR_ubr0AR88CPNPi3La_w3CA5kAhZbOptJkBTK-5MGh-lpBNQ/s400/richardgray.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 261px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 400px;" /></a><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/evidence/docs/INQ10280-10.pdf">Graphic showing the position of Richard Gray<br />
</a></div><br />
Rather strange then that Zone 5 didn't include at least part of carriage 4.</div><span style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-weight: bold;"> </span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span">Only 7 bodies recovered</span></span><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">The total number of deceased from Circle Line train 204, according to <span style="font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">all</span> witness testimony and evidence was seven - a figure which does not allow for the presence of Shehzad Tanweer. We also know that no victims of the Liverpool Street/Aldgate incident had died in hospital.</div><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">As the Aldgate scene evidence neared its conclusion, it became apparent that Shehzad Tanweer's body was not identified as being amongst the dead. The official "narrative" of the explosion on Circle Line train 204 at Aldgate holds that eight people died, with Richard Gray's body recovered from the track:</div><br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCUnwxzVXQ99gGLUejY8qSauJxS1wzw2VpK2OYRBeGPjd0wmGze2MxR3vO2ryIRj9Cy5KJPdPcYnM21h-WWRL0GmggCvUwhNWoVoekEjml7g62gejqp95sjclfb43njNAPE7jnLw/s1600/j7_aldgate_carriage-2_positions-of-deceased.png">Enlarge</a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCUnwxzVXQ99gGLUejY8qSauJxS1wzw2VpK2OYRBeGPjd0wmGze2MxR3vO2ryIRj9Cy5KJPdPcYnM21h-WWRL0GmggCvUwhNWoVoekEjml7g62gejqp95sjclfb43njNAPE7jnLw/s1600/j7_aldgate_carriage-2_positions-of-deceased.png" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5536861486110503314" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCUnwxzVXQ99gGLUejY8qSauJxS1wzw2VpK2OYRBeGPjd0wmGze2MxR3vO2ryIRj9Cy5KJPdPcYnM21h-WWRL0GmggCvUwhNWoVoekEjml7g62gejqp95sjclfb43njNAPE7jnLw/s400/j7_aldgate_carriage-2_positions-of-deceased.png" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 286px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 400px;" /></a><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/evidence/docs/INQ10280-9.pdf">Positions of deceased in 2nd carriage post explosion </a></div><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">BTP Inspector Robert Munn was the last person to leave the site before investigators took over. In this exchange with Hugo Keith, Munn confirms the total number of dead as seven:</div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. [Hugo Keith] At 10.18, you made your final call, for these purposes -- you updated BX, in fact, for the rest of the morning, but for our purposes, you made your final call at 18.47, [<a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/evidence/docs/BTP170-55.pdf">BTP170-55</a>]: "BQ10 ... for your information, Aldgate, I'm the last police officer to leave and I've got the last Fire Brigade with me ... the station's now evacuated to the front gate. <span style="font-weight: bold;">I can confirm 7</span> ... dead bodies left on the train, over. "Sorry, say again? "Have you got any persons trapped, over? "None that's still alive, over." That was at 10.18. Before you left, had a doctor appeared trackside?<br />
A.[Inspector Robert Munn] Yes, I think it was the -- I think it was the HEMS doctor that I referred to earlier, I think.<br />
Q. Dr Lockey?<br />
A. I didn't -- I can't recall his name, sir.<br />
Q. You didn't catch his name. <span style="font-weight: bold;">Did he formally confirm to you that there were seven dead?</span><br />
A. Before we left, sir, I waited by the doctor and the lead fire officer, while the doctor checked all the remaining bodies that had been left behind, and confirmed the number of dead.<br />
<br />
</div><div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/27102010am.htm">Transcripts, 27 October 2010<br />
Morning Session, page 88 lines 12 on</a></div></div></blockquote>LAS paramedic Steven Jones:<br />
<blockquote>"When all known live patients were removed,the HEMS doctor <span style="font-weight: bold;">pronounced life extinct the seven patients left</span>..."<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/02112010am.htm">Transcripts, 2 November 2010 am, page 131 lines 14-16</a></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">The HEMS doctor described by Steven Jones. Dr David Lockey, gave his evidence on 2 November and featured this interesting if somewhat leading, exchange with counsel representing the family of victim Lee Baisden, which could have possibly been describing Tanweer:<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;"><blockquote>Q. [MS SHEFF] Can I just repeat that? I just want to clarify that, when you describe seeing a body under the doors near X, that's the one that you've marked on as C on your plan.<br />
A. [DR LOCKEY] Yes, I think so.<br />
Q. In your witness statement, you described that body as a black or dark-skinned male of Somali appearance.<br />
A. That is not the statement that I wrote. That was a statement that a police officer wrote for me, although I obviously agreed it afterwards, and I wouldn't describe anyone as coming from a particular country. However, in the discussion, he asked me about the colour of the man's skin <span style="font-weight: bold;">and whether I thought he was Asian</span> or whatever, and that's how we got to someone of slightly more North African appearance than perhaps Asian appearance. But it was not something that I would have stated myself, if I'd written the statement.<br />
Q. Okay, so thinking about that now, can I ask you this: have you previously seen victims of explosions with blast injuries?<br />
A. Yes.<br />
Q. You are aware, are you, that those close to the site of the explosion can very often suffer very severe burns and even charring of the skin --<br />
A. Yes.<br />
Q. -- which can turn the skin black.<br />
A. I work in a Burns Unit as well.<br />
Q. Yes, indeed. So you might not have been aware, then,that this particular male who<br />
A. Was white?<br />
Q. -- was white, he was, in fact, Lee Baisden, whose family I represent, and at his post-mortem he was found to have flash and deep burn injuries over his body. Would that have been consistent, therefore, with the<br />
appearance of somebody with black skin?<br />
A. I believe not.<br />
Q. So are you suggesting that this could have been somebody who was of black skinned appearance, originally black --<br />
A. Yes, I felt that that was the case, and I recall seeing a head underneath the window of a door, the door had been blown on to it, and I may have been mistaken, but I didn't feel that that patient was white and I am used to seeing patients with blast injuries.<br />
Q. So that was the impression that you had?<br />
A. Yes.<br />
Q. I suggest that you were mistaken about that. The X actually does mark the site of the explosion and the fact that the body was so close to that explosion does indicate, we believe, that the body received those juries from the charring of the skin as a result and that Lee Baisden was that man who was close to the original site of the injury. You don't take that view, I suspect?<br />
A. I can't be certain either way. I have thought about it since and I came back to my original conclusion.<br />
Q. It was, however, a scene of total carnage and body parts were all over the place, and it must have been quite traumatic just taking in the scene when you first saw it. So is there a possibility that you are mistaken about that?<br />
A. There is a possibility.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/02112010pm.htm">Transcripts 2 November 2010<br />
Afternoon session, page 186 Lines 12 on</a></div></blockquote></div>Dr Lockey then continues in his testimony to state that he certified five dead on the train and that there were two deceased on the tracks.<br />
<br />
Forensic medical examiner, Dr Morgan Costello, giving his witness testimony via video link from Eire on the afternoon of 3rd November, stated that he had been asked by the MPS to pronounce life extinct at two sites, Edgware Road and Aldgate, and attended Aldgate on 8 July 2005 at 08.40:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>A. <span style="font-weight: bold;">You could tell how many bodies were there</span>, but it was quite difficult to tell exact, you know, body parts from each other due to clothes being on the area, blast matter, and the positioning of the bodies. <span style="font-weight: bold;">It was quite easy to assign how many individuals were there,</span> but just picking out exact details was difficult.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh/index.php?showtopic=3639&view=findpost&p=15057331">Transcripts 3 November 2010<br />
Afternoon session, page 8 lines 18 -23</a></div></blockquote>Dr Costello is then taken through the names of the seven victims, minus Shehzad Tanweer.<br />
<br />
DC Andrew Meneely, bomb scene examiner at Aldgate, gave his testimony on the morning of the 3rd November describing his role as "to do the forensic recovery of any evidence at the scene and to deal with any body recovery of bodies that may be there" (<a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/03112010am.htm">p67, 12-14</a>). <span style="font-style: italic;">[NB. At this point Hugo Keith reminds the Inquest that "the issue of the bodies and their recovery and their treatment is outside the scope of these proceedings by order of my Lady earlier in these proceedings" (ibid. 15-17)]</span>.<br />
<br />
Presumably the DC in charge of body recovery would identify the body of Shehzad Tanweer? Questioned by Mr Saunders, after a warning by Lady Hallett on whether it would touch on matters she had deemed were not issues, only seven bodies were identified for removal from the scene:<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;"><blockquote>Q.[MR SAUNDERS] I think there was also a problem with the obtaining of a correct vehicle that had sufficient refrigeration to ensure the proper removal of the bodies?<br />
A. [DC MENEELY] Refrigeration units were called for.<br />
Q. I think there was a difficulty -- it may be somebody else deals with that, but there were difficulties as to when they could be provided on the scene.<br />
A. I understand that the vehicles arrived some time on the Saturday.<br />
Q. I think the formal removal of Fiona Stevenson was --<br />
A. Some time on the Friday, actually.<br />
Q. -- on the Friday, I think.<br />
A. Yes.<br />
Q. So I think there were those two that were outside, Carrie and Richard Gray were removed initially, and then Fiona Stevenson on the Saturday.<br />
A. Yes, that's correct. Ms Stevenson -- there was four bodies removed on the Friday, two on the trackside and two males in the rear carriage part and then the three other women on the Saturday.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/03112010am.htm">Transcripts 3 November 2010<br />
Morning session, page 81 Lines 2 - 21<br />
</a></div></blockquote></div>It doesn't appear to be the case, even by 8th July 2005, that any discernible body parts from Shehzad Tanweer had been identified. A wallet, some damaged plastic, paper receipts, and membership cards all remained, but nothing identifiable as the head, torso, or limbs of Shehzad Tanweer, appear to have been present, resulting in several confirmations of the total number of dead as 7. <i>Note: 'Suicide bombers' do not generally vapourise themselves (Warning: <a href="http://images56.fotki.com/v1600/photos/5/1222605/7982088/victimiraqburnedcrisp01500x347-vi.jpg">Graphic image</a> of the remains of a 'suicide-bomber' with explosives strapped to the body, not in a rucksack on the floor).</i></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
<span style="font-weight: bold;"><span class="Apple-style-span">Tanweer's Spine</span></span><br />
<br />
So how did Shehzad Tanweer come to be identified given this total lack of discernible body parts? Over to DC Meneely for an answer to this one:<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;"><blockquote>Q.[HUGO KEITH] The process continued, as you've told us, for, in your case, some ten days, but it wasn't until, I think, <span style="font-weight: bold;">Saturday, 9 July</span> that a significant piece of bone, a piece of a backbone, was discovered in the front of a rear bench seat in carriage 2?<br />
A.[DC MENEELY] That's correct. Officers were searching that part of carriage 2 and, about 9.30 at night, I was told that a piece of backbone had been recovered.<br />
Q. Why was that significant?<br />
A. Because all of the bodies I'd seen so far had no real upper body trauma to that degree. Obviously there was a lot of injuries, but everybody was relatively intact<br />
in relation to the upper body.<br />
Q. No doubt, the discovery of that piece of bone was relevant to the investigation of the crime and information about it was passed to your colleagues?<br />
A. Yes, it was.</blockquote></div>Presumably an upper body trauma would be significant if the explosion had occurred on the body, as is understood to be the case with 'suicide-bombers', but not if the explosion had occurred on the floor of the carriage, as no other victim had this type of injury. As we can see from this graphic, Lee Baisden whose severely burned body was described above by Ms Sheff, was very close to the centre of the explosion, as were both <a href="http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh/index.php?showtopic=54&view=findpost&p=15057653">William Walsh</a> (second degree burns and lacerations from climbing out of the window) and Greg Shannon (a total unknown - no press reports), neither of whom were called as witnesses or had their testimony read. (At this stage we cannot discount the possibility that Hugo Keith will summon them when <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/J7-Inquest-Submission/09.Accused-Presence-Proximity.pdf">'factual issue 9:</a> The presence at the scenes of MSK, Tanweer, Hussain and Lindsay, and their proximity to the explosions' are covered in early 2011. J7 will of course further examine the detail of these issues in due course).</div><br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEheRldX1AktU8mDVfscOOp1MU3v25rDpvGAdSHqRzXyVVLqBehnQH24p4QX5jX_Kgzl_wqhfsyrns1knLxOee2tVufdoCOIRZ4BIURNcwx43gqbVi5Gf8YeIPAHfkRFnUR1bEao1g/s1600/j7_aldgate_carriage-2_probable-passenger-positions-prior.png">Enlarge</a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEheRldX1AktU8mDVfscOOp1MU3v25rDpvGAdSHqRzXyVVLqBehnQH24p4QX5jX_Kgzl_wqhfsyrns1knLxOee2tVufdoCOIRZ4BIURNcwx43gqbVi5Gf8YeIPAHfkRFnUR1bEao1g/s1600/j7_aldgate_carriage-2_probable-passenger-positions-prior.png" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5536907137822051442" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEheRldX1AktU8mDVfscOOp1MU3v25rDpvGAdSHqRzXyVVLqBehnQH24p4QX5jX_Kgzl_wqhfsyrns1knLxOee2tVufdoCOIRZ4BIURNcwx43gqbVi5Gf8YeIPAHfkRFnUR1bEao1g/s400/j7_aldgate_carriage-2_probable-passenger-positions-prior.png" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 286px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 400px;" /></a><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/evidence/docs/INQ10280-9.pdf">Probable position of passengers in carriage 2, Aldgate train 204 at time of explosion </a></div><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">It would appear from evidence to the Inquest that the DNA extracted from Shehzad Tanweer by West Yorkshire Police on his arrest for a Public Order offence in April 2004 was used to identify this spine along with some other tissue samples taken from undisclosed body parts. [<a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/03112010pm.htm">Transcripts 3/11/10 pm, page 11 lines 3 on</a>]</div><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">It is also a mystery how this 'spine' had only been found on the 9th July, given that it was first mentioned in the witness testimony of DI Kemp, one of the first responders to the scene, on 27 October:</div><blockquote>Q.[HUGO KEITH] I think also in that area you noticed what seemed to you to be a part of a body. In fact a human spine?<br />
A.[DI KEMP] That's what it looked like, yes.<br />
Q. From all that, because there was devastation, destruction, debris, a hole, a piece of spine, as well as a body that you realised was dead, and another severely injured person, you knew you were in the immediate vicinity of the bomb?<br />
A. I believed that, yes.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/27102010pm.htm">Transcripts 27 October 2010<br />
Afternoon Session, page 46 line 7-15</a></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">DI Kemp had previously described the scene as dark and that he had only the use of a bicycle lamp which he had acquired from a passing passenger [ibid. page 37, lines 18-129].</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">The forensics report into Shehzad Tanweer was read to the Inquest by Hugo Keith, no evidence was published and neither are the actual body parts that tissue for DNA sampling were taken from, named. (Again, these issues may be examined when the forensics evidence is adduced in early 2011).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><blockquote>Statements of MR ANDREW McDONALD read<br />
"I hold degrees of Bachelor of Science in Zoology and Master of Science in Forensic Science ... I have been a forensic scientist since 1992. During the course of my career, I have examined many cases using DNA analysis techniques.<br />
<br />
"Between 13 July 2005 and 28 July 2005, 80 recovered body part samples associated with the bombings of a London Underground Tube train at Aldgate on 7 July 2005 together with 20 reference control samples from individuals known to have been present at the time of the explosion were received at the laboratory. All items were received in sealed packages.<br />
<br />
"I was asked to carry out STR profiling tests to determine whether any of the recovered body part samples received in this case could have originated from Shehzad Tanweer. STR profiling is a sensitive DNA analysis technique. An STR profile obtained from a human body fluid, such as blood or saliva, or human body tissue can be compared with an STR profile of a given person. If the profiles are different, then the body fluid or body tissues cannot have originated from the person in question.<br />
<br />
"If, on the other hand, the STR profiles are the same, then that individual, and anyone else who shares the same STR profile, can be considered as a possible source of the body fluid or body part. The significance of finding such a match can then be assessed."Reference control sample. The tissue sample taken from Shehzad Tanweer was used to determine his STR profile.<br />
<br />
"Recovered body part samples:<br />
"Tissue analysed from the following recovered body part samples generated full STR profiles which matched at of Shehzad Tanweer."</blockquote><blockquote>And, my Lady, Mr McDonald then goes on to list 48 tissues which were analysed from recovered body part samples:<br />
<br />
"This means that the body parts could have originated from him. I estimate that the probability of obtaining this profile, if the tissue tested from the body parts did not originate from Shehzad Tanweer, but came from another unrelated person who, by coincidence,had the same profile, is less than 1:1 billion. In addition to these body part samples, the following recovered body part samples generated incomplete STR<br />
profiles which matched that of Shehzad Tanweer."<br />
<br />
My Lady, four are listed.<br />
"This means that these body part samples could also have originated from him. I estimate that the probability of obtaining these profiles, if the tissue tested from the body parts did not originate from Shehzad Tanweer but came from another unrelated person who, by coincidence, has the same profile, is less than 1:1 billion ..."<br />
<br />
My Lady, he lists three of the body part samples.<br />
"... and approximately 1:9 million", in respect of the final body part sample:<br />
"These body part tissue samples could not have originated from any of the other individuals for whom reference control samples were analysed. None of the other recovered body part samples that were analysed could have originated from Shehzad Tanweer. In my opinion, the STR profile results provide extremely strong scientific support for the assertion that all of the recovered body part samples listed above originated from Shehzad Tanweer."<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/03112010pm.htm">Transcripts 3 November 2010<br />
Afternoon session, page 12 line 1 on</a></div></blockquote></div><div style="text-align: justify;">This piece of spine alleged to be the remains of Tanweer was examined by pathologist, Mr Nathaniel Cary, and in a statement dated 29 April 2007, again read by Hugo Keith, he claimed:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><blockquote>Statement of MR NATHANIEL CARY read "Recovered body fragment: Operation Theseus URN60021972 (Shehzad TANWEER).<br />
"Date of death: 7 July 2005 ...<br />
"This body part was recovered from the Aldgate scene. This is a fragment consisting of the lower part of the thoracic spine and the upper lumbar spine weighing 1.852 kilograms. There are some signs of decomposition and charring. The specimen is contaminated with glass. It is associated with a piece of cloth.<br />
<br />
"Measurements: 30 centimetres longitudinally. "Up to 14 centimetres wide. "Up to 10 centimetres deep.<br />
<br />
"There are attached pieces of posterior rib associated with posterior spinal muscles. It consists of part of the sixth thoracic vertebrae, the seventh thoracic to the second lumbar vertebrae in continuity and part of the third thoracic vertebrae ...<br />
<br />
"Clinicopathological correlation:<br />
"I have subsequently seen a copy of a form entitled 'Matched body parts'. This relates to scene 1 Aldgate.<br />
<br />
Through DNA analysis, this body part, URN 60021972, has been matched to multiple other body parts identified as having come from Shehzad Tanweer.<br />
<br />
"The nature of this body part and the extreme level of disruption implied by the nature of the other matched body parts <span style="font-weight: bold;">is typical of a deceased person having been either in direct contact or very close to an explosive device. </span><br />
<br />
"The level of exposive disruption associated with this deceased, when compared with other bodies, both from this scene and other scenes of explosions also occurring on July 7, is entirely in keeping <span style="font-weight: bold;">with this deceased having been in possession of the explosive device at the time it exploded.</span><br />
<br />
"Cause of death: "A cause of death for this deceased person may be recoded as 1A injuries due to an explosion."<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://julyseventh.co.uk/j7-inquest-transcripts/2010-11-01-05-week-04/7_july_inquests_2010-11-03_pm-session.pdf">Transcripts 3 November pm, page 16 lines 8 on</a></div></blockquote></div><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">How Tanweer could possibly have been 'in possession" of an explosive device that exploded on the floor of the carriage, and how he managed to virtually disintegrate to the point where no discernible body was identified, only adds to the many questions which existed before the 7 July Inquest resumed. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Questions which this Inquest is failing to answer.</div><br />
<hr align="left" width="30%" />If you wish to comment on this article, please <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/11/77-inquests-disintegration-of-shehzad.html">join the discussion on the J7: 7/7 Inquests blog</a>.<div class="blogger-post-footer">--
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
http://julyseventh.co.uk
J7 Blog: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/
J7 Inquests Blog: http://77inquests.blogspot.com/
J7 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581
J7 Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
J7 Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
J7 MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth</div>The Antagonisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01459201402366077472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-966657342587900402010-11-20T14:02:00.006+00:002010-11-20T14:05:29.080+00:00J7 7/7 Inquest Blog: The Strange Account of Ross Mallinson<div align="justify"><br />
</div><div align="justify">Originally posted on the <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/strange-account-of-ross-mallinson.html">J7 7/7 Inquests blog: The Strange Account of Ross Mallinson</a>:</div><hr align="left" width="30%" /><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">In J7's submission to the 7/7 Inquests, amongst the many questions we posed in relation to the events at Aldgate, we asked:<br />
<blockquote>What train was Mr Mallinson on? Was an announcement made at Aldgate that there had been a bomb on a train?<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/J7-Inquest-Submission/03.Immediate_Circumstances.pdf">J7: Inquest Submission 03, Immediate Circumstances Aldgate</a></div></blockquote>In the morning session of <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/25102010am.htm">25 October</a> Mr Keith questioned a Miss Melanie Jane O'Dell:<br />
<blockquote>"MISS MELANIE JANE O'DELL (sworn)<br />
Questions by MR KEITH<br />
MR KEITH: Good morning.<br />
A. Good morning.<br />
Q. Could you give the court your full name, please?<br />
A. Melanie Jane O'Dell.<br />
Q. May I ask, is it Miss O'Dell or Mrs O'Dell?<br />
A. Miss."<br />
<br />
....<br />
<br />
"Q. Did you take Mr Henning with you, in fact, towards the rear of the train as well?<br />
A. Yes, he wanted me to hold his hand and he wanted me to stay -- he asked me to stay with him.<br />
Q. And so obviously, because he was injured, you did so?<br />
A. Mm, I<b> was concerned there was another passenger called -- whose name was Ross, and I was worried about him, because he wasn't particularly coherent and he was quite quiet, and he was -- he had quite a bad -- what looked to me like a bad head cut</b>.<br />
Q. Presumably, he left the carriage along with the rest of you, did he, or did he stay --<br />
A. Somebody else helped him.<br />
Q. Could you see him being brought out?<br />
A. I didn't see him because he was behind us, but then I saw him -- when I got to Aldgate eventually, I went over to Aldgate bus station and got on a double decker bus, I saw him being helped onto -- into an ambulance.<br />
Q. So you knew he had been removed from the train?<br />
A. Yes."</blockquote>According to O'Dell's account, Ross Malinson was aboard train 204 along with Michael Henning.<br />
<br />
However, Mr Mallinson was one of the people on the list of survivors designated as Properly Interested Persons (PIPs) in the initial hearings to the Inquests, and also one that had received legal aid to be represented. Justice Hallett was later to make her ruling that PIP status for survivors was to be withdrawn and they were not to be represented at the Inquests proper, although they could be called as witnesses during proceedings.<br />
<br />
Mr Mallinson is described in the footnotes to those initial hearing transcripts as follows:<br />
<blockquote>80 The following applicants were not in the same carriage as the explosions: Michael Henning, Elizabeth Kenworthy, John Blundell, Joanne Cole, Jacqueline Putnam, Ellaine Young, Angela Ioannou, Susan Maxwell, Lesley Ratcliff, George Roskilly. Further Tim Coulson <span style="font-weight: bold;">and Ross Mallinson were not travelling on the same train as the explosion, </span>although Mr. Coulson entered the affected carriage and provided first aid.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/docs/submissions-counsel.pdf">Submissions of Counsel to the Inquests, 26/04/10, p61</a></div></blockquote>O'Dell places Mallinson on Ciricle Line train 204, yet the Inquests' own documentation states quite clearly that Mr Mallinson wasn't on that train at all.<br />
<br />
J7 would suggest that the reference to 'her' in the following Inquests transcript is an error as Mr O'Connor was not representing a female client travelling in another train. The only PIP who suffered the injuries described was Ross Mallinson and Mr O'Connor was his legal counsel:<br />
<blockquote><b>[Mr O'Connor] </b>carriage, and thus drawing a boundary about whether you're in the same carriage or not would be arbitrary and irrational, <span style="font-weight: bold;">and indeed, even not in the same train, one of our clients, madam, you will have seen suffered a very serious fractured skull requiring two operations and was actually in a train passing opposite the explosion. Such is the random impact, that it went through windows and injured her desperately seriously.</span><span style="font-weight: bold;"><br />
</span><br />
<div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source: </span><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/27042010pm.htm">Hearing transcripts, Afternoon, 27 April 2010, p103 line 21 on</a></div></blockquote></div><div style="text-align: justify;">As can be seen in the Trackernet image in <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/behind-scenes-of-aldgate-explosion-it.html">a previous article about the events at Aldgate</a>, there appears to be no train 'passing opposite the explosion' on Circle Line train 204.</div><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">In an interview with <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/beethoven-then-bang-for-australian-victim/2005/07/17/1121538866660.html">The Age</a> published in July 2005, it was claimed that Mr Mallinson was travelling on a train in front of Circle Line train 204, travelling between Aldgate station and Tower Hill:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><blockquote>Mr Mallinson was on his way to work as a computer programmer for an insurance company at Tower Hill when Shehzad Tanweer, 22, detonated the bomb on a train between Liverpool and Aldgate stations on the Circle Line. Minutes later, <span style="font-weight: bold;">Mr Mallinson's train, also on the Circle Line, began moving again, slowly passing Aldgate station, where an announcer warned passengers that there had been a bomb on a train, probably the one directly behind Mr Mallinson's. His train continued to Tower Hill station, </span>where two police officers carried him to the surface. He gave his mobile phone to a woman next to him and asked her to call his wife, Judy.</blockquote></div><div style="text-align: justify;">This would have huge implications if indeed this account is true. Firstly, the announcement at Aldgate of a 'bomb' whilst all the accounts heard at the Inquests this week have referred only to an 'electrical explosion' or 'power surge' in the first moments after this event and secondly, that the power was indeed on or had been reset after the explosion on train 204. The tracks would have to have been live <span style="font-style: italic;">after</span> the explosion.</div><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">Not a word has been heard at the 7/7 Inquests of any other train 'moving' at Aldgate or in the vicinity of Circle Line train 204, apart from a Metropolitan Line train 447 which was going in the opposite direction and had only just begun to leave the station from platform 2 before it stopped suddenly. There has certainly been no mention of the explosion impacting 'through the window of a passing train' onto Mr Mallinson as referenced by his legal counsel, Mr O'Connor.<br />
<br />
The driver of Metropolitan Line train 447 was not called to court to give evidence, instead the first of two statements that he made was read by Hugo Keith QC:<br />
<blockquote>[Statement of MR MARK WILLIAMS] read "I then got on to train 447, which again is a Metropolitan Line train which was running on time. As I pulled away, I heard an extremely loud bang. At this point, I was about half a car length out of the station. I immediately stopped and, at the same time, the Underground electrical traction current turned off and the lights in the tunnel turned on. I did not open my doors as I was unsure of exactly what had happened. I then heard shouting from the station staff on the platform and the doors were being opened by two other train operators, Eldridge and Paul Haskins who were manually opening the doors. I could see this train was facing me in the tunnel, as it had just turned the corner. This was a C stock style train. I then went back through one car and got out of the train and joined the two other train operators, Eldridge and Paul Haskins.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/26102010am.htm">Hearing Transcripts, 26 October 2010, morning, p 26, lines 18 on</a></div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div></blockquote></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Metropolitan Line train 447 appears to have been evacuated within 3 to 4 minutes and well before the evacuation of Circle Line train 204.</div><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">At yesterday's hearing, Mr Mallinson was mentioned, not by a witness present to give evidence and answer questions but in a statement read to the court by Hugo Keith QC, from 'rookie' BTP officer, Robert Whyte:<br />
<blockquote>[Statement of Mr Robert Whyte, dated 8/07/05, read] "Myself and PC Hatcher, along with the cycle officer, attempted to break open the door of the next carriage along from the badly damaged carriage. We were not successful in doing this. We then attempted to locate some sort of metal object that could help us in our effort to open the train doors. We could not find anything that could help us. "<span style="font-weight: bold;">I then helped a male, who had a very severe head injury, who was holding a piece of bloodstained cloth tightly on the side of his head. The male, who I now know to be Ross Charles Mallison. </span>He was shaking and kept telling me he was very faint. I took the male's small suitcase in one hand and told the male to put his arm around my shoulder for support. I told the male it would be a short walk to the platform where we could get him some medical attention. I kept trying to reassure the male along the entire walk of the track. I walked the male to the exit of the station where I was joined by a firefighter. This firefighter took the male by the other arm for more support. I was informed by this firefighter that they were using double decker buses across the road as the places to sit down injured people. Myself and the firefighter walked the male over to the buses. We sat him down on the first bus. The firefighter then asked if I was okay. I said I was. The fireman then left. I asked the male to sit back down and try to relax and try to take deep breaths. A male sitting behind me then handed me a piece of clean cloth. I replaced the man's cloth he had on his head with this piece of fresh cloth. A paramedic then came over and spoke to the male. He asked how he was feeling. I then asked the male if he was okay and he said 'yes' so I left the male in the hands of the paramedic on the bus.<br />
"At this point, I decided to head back down into the station and try to help anybody else that needed help. Once again, I went into the station, headed downstairs to the left and on to the track. I came across a male and female that needed some help. I believe that they were boyfriend and girlfriend.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/27102010pm.htm">Hearing Transcripts 27 October 2010 afternoon, p21 lines 21 on</a></div></blockquote>How curious that Mr Whyte was able to include the full name of Ross Mallinson apparently on 08/07/05 whereas he doesn't name the 'male and female' to whom he also gave assistance.<br />
<br />
Neither is there any mention of the place from which Mr Mallinson was rescued and aided. Nor any mention of him being rescued from a different train to Circle Line train 204. In fact, O'Dell's account places him on the very train that the Inquests' documentation claims he wasn't. It may be worth noting at this stage that Miss O'Dell gave a statement in July 2005 and was asked by Lady Justice Hallett to prepare another statement, over five years later, in August 2010.<br />
<br />
The fact remains that the evidence adduced to the Inquest from Mr Whyte & Ms O'Dell differs greatly from the original account of Mr Mallinson's that he gave to The Age in July 2005 and that Mr O'Connor QC submitted to the Inquest.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
Mr O'Connor QC had no option to question or challenge these statements on Mr Mallinson's behalf, since survivors such as Mr Mallinson are no longer legally represented at the Inquests.<br />
<br />
</div><hr align="left" width="30%" />If you wish to comment on this article, please <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/strange-account-of-ross-mallinson.html#comments">join the discussion on the J7: 7/7 Inquests blog</a>.<div class="blogger-post-footer">--
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
http://julyseventh.co.uk
J7 Blog: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/
J7 Inquests Blog: http://77inquests.blogspot.com/
J7 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581
J7 Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
J7 Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
J7 MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth</div>The Antagonisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01459201402366077472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-90803915296886200812010-11-13T13:27:00.006+00:002010-11-20T14:07:14.692+00:00J7 7/7 Inquest Blog: The Curious Case of the Jag That Parked in the Daytime<div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
Originally posted on the <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/curious-case-of-jag-that-parked-in.html">J7 7/7 Inquests blog: The Curious Case of the Jag That Parked in the Daytime</a>:</div><hr align="left" width="30%" /><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">Two weeks into <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/index.htm">the 7/7 Inquests</a> and we've heard about <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/final-curtain-cctv-rich-to-cctv-fail.html">the strange lack of CCTV footage</a> of any of the four accused from the day, the even stranger account of the police investigation which led to <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/cctv-fuss-about-nothing.html">the car park in Luton</a> before the accused had been identified at King's Cross Thameslink station, the lack of interest in pursuing and interviewing <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/fifth-or-sixth-man.html">a 'fifth man'</a> and now we have the strange case of a Jaguar at Luton that seems to appear there at the same time as the accused on both 28 June 2005 and 7 July 2005.<br />
<br />
Before the Inquests started no CCTV footage had been released showing how three of the accused, Khan, Tanweer and Lindsay, made their journey to Luton Station on 28 June 2005, a journey touted as a dummy run or rehearsal for 7/7. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><a href="http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh/index.php?showtopic=1307&view=findpost&p=14535831">A Freedom of Information request</a> submitted by J7 asking for precisely these details was refused by the Home Office.<br />
<br />
The Official Home Office report into the events of 7/7 (the "narrative") states:<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;"><blockquote>Other aspects of the planning<br />
<br />
65. <span style="font-weight: bold;">There appears to have been at least one recce visit to London on 28 June by Khan, Tanweer and Lindsay, </span>but not Hussain. They made a similar journey from Luton to King’s Cross early in the morning and travelled on the underground. They are picked up on CCTV near Baker Street tube station later in the morning and returning to Luton at lunch time. Lindsay was later found to have a chart of times taken to travel between stations which he might have written during this recce. <span style="font-weight: bold;">Tickets found at 18 Alexandra Grove also suggest visits to London in mid-March.</span><br />
<br />
66. Other things suggest discipline and meticulous planning with good security awareness including careful use of mobile phones and use of hire cars for sensitive activities associated with the planning of the attacks. <span style="font-weight: bold;">There are some indications that Khan was worried about being under surveillance during this time.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/34643218/2006-05-11-HC1087-Report-of-the-Official-Account-of-the-Bombings-in-London-on-7th-July-2005">Report of the Official Account of the Bombings in London on 7th July 2005</a></blockquote></div>At some point in early 2011, the Inquests will hear the evidence regarding how the events of 7 July 2005 were investigated, so it might be worth bearing in mind events that occurred in Luton car park on these two days. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Perhaps the Inquests will also help explain why men so 'worried about being under surveillance' would hang on to their tickets from a journey to London in mid March, and also how these tickets came to be found in 18 Alexandra Grove, the alleged 'bomb factory', a location that apparently wasn't used until June 2005, some three months later.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
In his Opening Statement to the Inquests, Mr Hugo Keith QC, felt the need to mention Conspiracy Theories that have arisen around the lack of released CCTV footage and the quality of the footage that had. He continued:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><blockquote>[MR KEITH] Turning to the CCTV which appears to be the object of the substantial bulk of the claims, there is nothing to suggest that, <span style="font-weight: bold;">where there is CCTV missing, this reflects anything other than the fact that many CCTV systems do not continuously record.</span><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;">Source: <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/11102010pm.htm">Transcripts 11 October 2010<br />
Afternoon session, page 7, line 25 on</a></div></blockquote><span style="font-style: italic;">Where there is CCTV missing, Mr Keith?</span> Such as King's Cross underground station, the McDonalds visited by Hasib Hussain, the number 91 and 30 buses that Hussain is alleged to have boarded, as well as at significant moments in Luton station car park on the morning of 7 July 2005.<br />
<br />
Whilst we have no evidence to suggest that there is anything sinister about the coincidental movements of a dark-coloured Jaguar at Luton station on the mornings of both 28 June 2005 - the 'rehearsal' - and 7 July 2005, there is plainly evidence of more than a lack of 'recording continuously'. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">What is evident is the editing of the CCTV footage at significant moments, which begs the questions:<br />
<br />
<span style="font-weight: bold;"></span><br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-weight: bold;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;">What precisely is being cut from this footage, and Why?</span></span></div></div><br />
<div align="center"><br />
<iframe frameborder="0" height="300" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/16127256" width="400"></iframe><br />
<a href="http://vimeo.com/16127256">Jaguar at Luton station car park</a> from <a href="http://vimeo.com/j7t">J7 Truth Campaign</a> on <a href="http://vimeo.com/">Vimeo</a>.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;"><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>Update</b>: The graphic below shows:</div></div><ol><li style="text-align: justify;">The last frame of CCTV footage before the cut,</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">The first frame of CCTV footage after the cut,</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">An animated panel that cycles through images 1 & 2. </li>
</ol><div style="text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://julyseventh.co.uk/images/JagFrameCompare.gif">Click to Enlarge</a></span></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://julyseventh.co.uk/images/JagFrameCompare.gif" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5535436066698187154" src="http://julyseventh.co.uk/images/JagFrameCompare2w400.gif" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 347px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 400px;" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Graphic showing the CCTV frames before and after the cut</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table></div><br />
<div align="justify">If you wish to comment on this article, please <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/curious-case-of-jag-that-parked-in.html#comments">join the discussion on the J7: 7/7 Inquests blog</a>.</div><div align="justify"><br />
</div><div class="blogger-post-footer">--
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
http://julyseventh.co.uk
J7 Blog: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/
J7 Inquests Blog: http://77inquests.blogspot.com/
J7 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581
J7 Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
J7 Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
J7 MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth</div>The Antagonisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01459201402366077472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-41805406572934046492010-11-10T09:56:00.013+00:002010-11-20T14:07:47.814+00:00J7 7/7 Inquest Blog: Behind the Scenes of the Aldgate Explosion, at 11 minutes to 9<div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
Originally posted on the J7: 7/7 Inquests Blog: <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/behind-scenes-of-aldgate-explosion-it.html">Behind the Scenes of the Aldgate Explosion, at 11 minutes to 9</a></div><hr align="left" width="30%" /><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;"><b></b><br />
<blockquote><b>So we can say with confidence that the explosion at Aldgate occurred at that moment, 08.49.00</b></blockquote></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: right;"><blockquote><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/11102010pm.htm">Hugo Keith, Opening Statement</a><br />
<a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/11102010pm.htm">11 October 2010, page 16 Lines 3 -5</a></blockquote></div><span style="font-style: italic;">J7's submission to the Coroner, detailing questions and anomalies that have arisen regarding this event, can be downloaded <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/J7-Inquest-Submission/03.Immediate_Circumstances.pdf">here</a>. and our analysis of the events at Aldgate can be viewed on the J7 website <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/7-7-liverpool-street-aldgate.html">here</a>.<br />
<br />
</span>Week Two of the 7/7 Inquests has concentrated on the issue outlined in the <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/J7-Inquest-Submission/provisional-index-of-factual-issues-update-230610.pdf">Provisional List of Factual Issues</a> as:<br />
<blockquote>The explosions and the immediate aftermath<br />
3. Circumstances at each of the four scenes immediately following the explosions</blockquote>The first scene under scrutiny is Aldgate.<br />
<br />
Compared to the first week of the inquests, this second week has been particularly harrowing, hearing the reports about those who died and the stories of others who were severely injured. Tales of humanity and heroism have also emerged, along with inspirational accounts of overcoming horrendous injuries.<br />
<br />
Mr Hugo Keith QC, Counsel to the Inquests, opened the proceedings by reading a statement which has not yet been released onto the Inquest website. Reading statements to the Inquests presupposes that none of the information it covers is contentious and the author will not be open to questioning. This following statement was prepared by Mr John Porter, a London Underground power control room manager, written on 26 July 2005, and followed by a supplementary statement dated 29 September 2010:</div><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;"><blockquote>"<span style="font-weight: bold;">When the device on the train between Liverpool Street and Aldgate stations exploded, it damaged three power assets</span>, an 11-kilovolt feeder cable number 642", which is the feeder cable to which I made reference in my opening "running along the tunnel wall and its associated pilot cable, pilot number 62, and a signal main cable between Moorgate and Tower Hill which provided the power for the signal supplies between Moorgate and Aldgate. "The danger to the number 642 feeder cable caused the 11-kilovolt electrical feeder to trip at Moorgate substation at <span style="font-weight: bold;">08.48.40</span>. This in turn caused the 22-kilovolt coupling transformers, which supply the Mansell Street distribution network, to trip at <span style="font-weight: bold;">8.49.02</span>. <span style="font-weight: bold;">This caused widespread power disruption to a significant area of the London Underground network."<br />
<br />
</span><br />
<div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source: </span><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/18102010am.htm">Transcripts, 18 October</a></div><div style="text-align: right;"><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/18102010am.htm">Morning session, page 4, lines 6 on</a><br />
<span style="font-weight: bold;"></span></div></blockquote>To illustrate the widespread disruption caused by the loss of power at Mansell Street. this image was shown and released as <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/evidence/docs/TFL653-1.pdf">evidence</a>:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjgJ7VEUTCM0OY3nYJl-2hSukLVMIUjZejbbEcXMQj38HBmnMn9z4Ej0A0Oi5_Y43rYME6x5A2n5Kp94SC1d_9Dxh63cC4maF0V__wlq0rgMe6gaX3F1lkh3WJIoqeXFZhe4VCXJw/s1600/Mansellst.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5530608095313458290" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjgJ7VEUTCM0OY3nYJl-2hSukLVMIUjZejbbEcXMQj38HBmnMn9z4Ej0A0Oi5_Y43rYME6x5A2n5Kp94SC1d_9Dxh63cC4maF0V__wlq0rgMe6gaX3F1lkh3WJIoqeXFZhe4VCXJw/s400/Mansellst.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 295px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 400px;" /></a><br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjgJ7VEUTCM0OY3nYJl-2hSukLVMIUjZejbbEcXMQj38HBmnMn9z4Ej0A0Oi5_Y43rYME6x5A2n5Kp94SC1d_9Dxh63cC4maF0V__wlq0rgMe6gaX3F1lkh3WJIoqeXFZhe4VCXJw/s1600/Mansellst.jpg"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;"></span></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjgJ7VEUTCM0OY3nYJl-2hSukLVMIUjZejbbEcXMQj38HBmnMn9z4Ej0A0Oi5_Y43rYME6x5A2n5Kp94SC1d_9Dxh63cC4maF0V__wlq0rgMe6gaX3F1lkh3WJIoqeXFZhe4VCXJw/s1600/Mansellst.jpg"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Click to Enlarge</span></a></div></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">We'll let Mr Keith off with the 20 seconds between the "11-kilovolt electrical feeder tripping at Moorgate substation at <span style="font-weight: bold;">08.48.40"</span> to allow him to remain confident of his opening statement, after all, what's 20 seconds in the grand scheme of things? Perhaps he has a pressing need for this first event on 7 July 2005 to have the significance of occurring at 11 minutes to 9?<br />
<br />
Keith reiterates the 08.49 timing:<br />
<blockquote>"... and would explain that the times referred to are approximate times recorded by the power control operation in the handwritten logs. The times I have referred to are <span style="font-weight: bold;">the actual times</span> extracted from the power system computerised event logs. "In summary, the times recorded by the power control room are 08.49 in respect of Aldgate East, 08.49.43 in respect of Edgware Road and 08.49.52 in respect of King's Cross/Russell Square."<br />
<div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;"><br />
Source:</span> <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/18102010am.htm">Transcripts, 18 October 2010</a></div><div style="text-align: right;"><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/18102010am.htm">Morning Session, page 9, Lines 6-19</a></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">London Underground runs a train monitoring system called Trackernet. TrackerNet is one of London Underground's key operational systems that monitors the whereabouts of every single underground train on the network. The system received a lot of coverage earlier this year when <a href="http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2010-06/15/surge-of-london-travel-apps-looms-as-tfl-opens-up-data">TfL lifted all restrictions on the commercial use of its data</a> and provided <a href="http://data.london.gov.uk/apibeta">access to real-time train information</a>.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Tim O'Toole, the Managing Director of London Underground at the time of the events of 7 July 2005, released a series of Trackernet images at a <a href="http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0507/09/smn.01.html">press conference on July 9th</a>, saying:</div><blockquote>"You can see what has happened is the track circuits on all of those other lines, you can see the orange lines indicate that an event has occurred to trip out the power system. And that was almost certainly the blast. <span style="font-weight: bold;">And this software allows us to confirm the timings.</span>"</blockquote>Copies of these Trackernet images can be viewed on the <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/7-7-liverpool-street-aldgate.html#trackernet">J7 website</a> and were included in our Submission to the Coroner. Curiously, the Trackernet images from Aldgate on 7 July 2005 don't appear to have made it into the Inquest bundle of evidence, or at least not yet, although the Trackernet images of Edgware Road have. Over to Hugo:</div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">My Lady, we don't have, in fact, a trackernet image for the eastbound Circle Line train, </span>but in respect of train 216, its last movement was timed at approximately 8.49.46 and we have a trackernet image for that train.</div><br />
<div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">source:</span> <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/18102010am.htm">Transcripts, 18 October 2010<br />
Morning, page 11. Lines 9-12</a></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">Quite what the Trackernet image for train 216 at Edgware Road has to do with the Provisional List of Factual Issues, 3 and the "Circumstances at Aldgate immediately following the explosions" only Keith knows. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">After five years of dedicated and dogged research J7 might hazard a guess that the reason for this could perhaps be that the explosion didn't actually occur at Aldgate at 08.49, despite all Mr Keith's efforts to make it so.<br />
<br />
This Trackernet image of the time of the explosion has been annotated by J7 using the Working Time Table for the London Underground, which we obtained through a Freedom of Information Request. The information it contains may well be the reason Mr Keith hasn't shown any Aldgate Trackernet images at the 7/7 Inquest.</div><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjTCPSaC7RD4sIRvZp0xHZWdBIDwHMIdYH3sMLvKW3R1DRhRzX95HTtArXrPu9yYppmPFKQOaLpvQpCRusGOyN-GYIZyGgJ2MhUzpT6G9NfZZPfrzy1qp6Hpc-aY7k6HlRGR7oxfA/s1600/TrackerNetaldgate.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5530406879905930322" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjTCPSaC7RD4sIRvZp0xHZWdBIDwHMIdYH3sMLvKW3R1DRhRzX95HTtArXrPu9yYppmPFKQOaLpvQpCRusGOyN-GYIZyGgJ2MhUzpT6G9NfZZPfrzy1qp6Hpc-aY7k6HlRGR7oxfA/s400/TrackerNetaldgate.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 320px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 400px;" /></a><br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjTCPSaC7RD4sIRvZp0xHZWdBIDwHMIdYH3sMLvKW3R1DRhRzX95HTtArXrPu9yYppmPFKQOaLpvQpCRusGOyN-GYIZyGgJ2MhUzpT6G9NfZZPfrzy1qp6Hpc-aY7k6HlRGR7oxfA/s1600/TrackerNetaldgate.jpg"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Click to Enlarge</span></a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br />
</div></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Circle Line train 204 has left Liverpool Street and is in the tunnel on its way to Aldgate station. All other trains in this image are also in their correct places, according to the Working Timetable, if the time of this explosion is <span style="font-weight: bold;">08.46.30</span>, the time that train 204 was in transit to Aldgate, <span style="font-style: italic;"> not</span> 08.49. Unless all these trains were running late on the London Underground, Circle Line train 204 would have been in transit between Aldgate and Tower Hill at 08.49. Train 204 appears to have been running on time; a <a href="http://bridgetdunnes.blogspot.com/2005/10/train-times-from-kings-x-at-last.html">FOI Request to TfL,</a> asking for the time that it was at King's Cross received the response of 08.35 - corresponding to the timetable.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
The time of 08.46.30 is also confirmed by the only CCTV footage that has been released to date from any of the stations that were affected that morning, showing Liverpool Street station as Circle Line train 204 arrives and leaves, and the moments when smoke billows from the tunnel whilst commuters run back along the platform in reaction to the noise:</div><br />
<div align="center"><br />
<object height="320" width="400"><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><param name="movie" value="http://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=13185022&server=vimeo.com&show_title=1&show_byline=1&show_portrait=1&color=&fullscreen=1&autoplay=0&loop=0"><embed src="http://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=13185022&server=vimeo.com&show_title=1&show_byline=1&show_portrait=1&color=&fullscreen=1&autoplay=0&loop=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" height="320" width="400"></embed></object><br />
<a href="http://vimeo.com/13185022">7th July 2005 CCTV of explosion at Liverpool Street station</a> from <a href="http://vimeo.com/j7t">J7 Truth Campaign</a> on <a href="http://vimeo.com/">Vimeo</a>.</div><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">As Circle Line 204 was due into Liverpool Street at 08.44 and the CCTV footage is showing a timestamp of 07.44.20, it is likely that this footage is one hour out due to the adjustment for British Summer Time rather than the time being out by the odd figure of 1 hour and 3 minutes claimed by DI Kindness in an exchange with Mr Keith:</div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">A. [DI KINDNESS] This footage will show the frontal view of the 204 train number, Circle Line train pulling into Liverpool Street station, and it's coming towards the camera at the moment.<br />
Q.MR KEITH] Officer, this is Liverpool Street. It stands to reason that the bomb, if it entered the train at King's Cross, is already on that train.<br />
A. That's correct, sir, yes.<br />
Q. As is the bomber.<br />
A. That's correct. This image shows the last -- the first carriage of the train.<br />
Q. The timing in the top left-hand corner, although the CCTV itself shows 07.44,<span style="font-weight: bold;"> did your researches show that, in fact, the CCTV system itself was one hour and three minutes slow?</span><br />
<span style="font-weight: bold;">A. That's correct, sir, yes.</span><br />
<span style="font-weight: bold;">Q. So we mustn't be misled by that timing. The timing of this is, in fact, 08.47 or thereabouts?</span></div><br />
<div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/14102010pm.htm">Transcripts 14 October 2010</a></div><div style="text-align: right;"><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/14102010pm.htm">Afternoon session, page 9, Lines 5-24</a></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">Incorporating the adjustment for British Summer Time, Circle Line train 204 leaves Liverpool Street at 08.45.40, and the explosion happens (according to the smoke & passengers running)<span style="font-weight: bold;"> at 08.46.35</span>. (Note: There are 39 seconds of footage missing). This is exactly the time estimated by J7 for this explosion according to the Trackernet image, evidence which Mr Keith has chosen not to exhibit.</div><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">To ensure that even the British Transport Police officer, DI Baker, present at Aldgate on 7 July 2005, has got his timings wrong, and to ensure Mr Keith can maintain his confidence in his and the narrative's timing of 08.49, there is also this exchange during the Inquests:</div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">LADY JUSTICE HALLETT: Sorry, can we just go back? The time of this second call?<br />
MR KEITH: According to the transcript, my Lady, it's 08.52.40. There has been a certain degree of confusion, I think, in the past as to whether or not that time indicates the beginning or the end of the call. <span style="font-weight: bold;">These transcripts have been revised now a number of times to reflect the accurate time of each call. </span>My learned friend Mr Gibbs might be able to assist in relation to whether or not that time indicates the beginning or the end of the call now.<br />
MR GIBBS: It indicates beginning of the call.<br />
LADY JUSTICE HALLETT: Right, so it indicates that a call is made by Mr Baker at 08.52.40 and a second or two into<br />
MR GIBBS: That's right. Whether that timing is accurate is a matter still of some conjecture, but that is the timing that we have.<br />
LADY JUSTICE HALLETT: Well, Mr Baker, on the question of timing, given we know what time the explosion occurred, does 08.52.40 seem to be about right for when you made the second call?<br />
A. [DI BAKER] It does. We were there pretty much instantly and trying to ascertain what was going on, so it was merely a few minutes.<br />
LADY JUSTICE HALLETT: Thank you.<br />
MR KEITH: My Lady, if it assists, may I just refer you to the Aldgate time line, which is at INQ10426 [<a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/evidence/docs/INQ10426-1.pdf">INQ10426-1</a>]? <span style="font-weight: bold;">The first entry you may recall from the opening is at 08.47.38, which is a BTP call from London Underground, but we know from the absolute time at which the explosion occurred, which was 08.49.00, that that call, which is taken from the same exhibit, BTP167 must therefore be about one minute and 40 seconds out, and that is our best estimate as to the accuracy of those transcripts.</span><br />
LADY JUSTICE HALLETT: So if that was right then this call is about 08.54?<br />
MR KEITH: Absolutely.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source:</span> <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/20102010pm.htm">Transcripts <strong style="font-weight: normal;">20 October 2010</strong></a></div><div style="text-align: right;"><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/20102010pm.htm"><strong style="font-weight: normal;">Afternoon session, Page 60, Lines 11 on</strong></a><br />
<strong style="font-weight: normal;"></strong></div></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">Editing transcripts? Adjusting CCTV timings? Withholding Trackernet images? All to make the 08.49 timing fit? Fixing the evidence to fit predetermined facts? Whatever next?</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">This is insulting to the bereaved and survivors who deserve the truth, and is not the role of the Inquests which, if it is to fulfill the proper function of an Inquest, should be examining the evidence to uncover the facts, particularly when one fact, based on the available evidence is:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><blockquote><span style="font-weight: bold;">The explosion at Aldgate on Circle Line Train 204 DID NOT occur at 08.49. It occurred between 08.46.30 and 08.47. </span></blockquote></div>After just two weeks into a five month hearing, can anyone have any faith in this Inquest process?<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-style: italic;">Accounts of power surges and electrocution and whether Shehzad Tanweer was actually sighted on train 204 to follow.</span></div><br />
<br />
<hr align="left" width="30%" />If you wish to comment on this article, please join the discussion on the <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/behind-scenes-of-aldgate-explosion-it.html#comments">J7: 7/7 Inquests blog</a>.<div class="blogger-post-footer">--
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
http://julyseventh.co.uk
J7 Blog: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/
J7 Inquests Blog: http://77inquests.blogspot.com/
J7 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581
J7 Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
J7 Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
J7 MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth</div>The Antagonisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01459201402366077472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-63608239987994324902010-11-07T18:53:00.004+00:002010-11-07T18:58:17.093+00:00J7 7/7 Inquest Blog: Don't Mention The Fifth (or Sixth?) Man<div><br /></div>Originally posted on the <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/fifth-or-sixth-man.html">J7: 7/7 Inquests Blog</a>.<br /><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">The <a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/34643218/2006-05-11-HC1087-Report-of-the-Official-Account-of-the-Bombings-in-London-on-7th-July-2005">Report of the Official Account of the Bombings in London on 7th July 2005</a>, published on 11th May 2006 (hereafter known as The Narrative), made it abundantly clear that the public should consider media reports regarding the so-called “fifth man” groundless. It stated:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">“There was at the time of the attacks, reports of a “5th bomber”. It was thought, because of witness statements and CCTV, that there was a “5th man” with the group travelling down from Luton. Inquiries showed the individual was a regular commuter and he was eliminated from the inquiry. Also in the period immediately following the attacks, one man was arrested in connection with the investigation but he was released without charge. In subsequent weeks, a further man who had claimed to be the “5th bomber” was also arrested and later charged with wasting police time. There is no intelligence to indicate that there was a fifth or further bombers.”</div><br /><div style="text-align: right;"><b>Source</b>: <a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/34643218/2006-05-11-HC1087-Report-of-the-Official-Account-of-the-Bombings-in-London-on-7th-July-2005">Home Office 'Narrative' – page 10</a></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In the opening week of the 7 July Inquests, we have heard from the witnesses mentioned above who claim to have seen a fifth (and in some cases a sixth) man - and the Home Office Narrative's claim that the man was a “regular commuter” seem odd at best – and misleading at worst. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The witnesses in question include Sylvia Waugh, who believes she saw the men outside the flat in Alexandra Grove, Leeds where it is claimed the bombs allegedly used on July 7th 2005 were manufactured. There is also Susan Clarke, who believes she saw the men in the car park at Luton Station. Joseph Martoccia was the witness whose statement to the police in July 2005 regarding his believed sighting of the men at King's Cross station was <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5032756.stm">mutated by the media</a> into a <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1176280/The-supper-Chilling-new-pictures-7-7-bombers-casually-buying-snacks-way-kill-52-innocent-people.html">CCTV image</a>, so successfully, that even a former newspaper editor <a href="http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh/index.php?showtopic=460">appeared to believe he had actually seen such an image</a>. Yet, as detailed in <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/final-curtain-cctv-rich-to-cctv-fail.html">this previous post</a>, no such image ever existed. This however hasn't stopped it being described as "iconic" and <a href="http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh/index.php?showtopic=2495&view=findpost&p=14711784">even the Press Complaints Commission</a> agreed that an image that doesn't exist and hasn't been seen by anyone is still perfectly entitled to be described as an "iconic image".</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Sylvia Waugh, who says she saw the men in the early morning of 7 July 2005 in Leeds, gave four witness statements to the police. Under oath at the Inquest, Mrs Waugh claimed that she regularly saw at least 6 people entering and leaving 18 Alexandra Grove. Significantly, Mrs. Waugh states that she finds it difficult to discern differences between 'coloured people'. Indeed, after stating on four occasions during her testimony that Jermaine Lindsay, who was, according to mobile phone evidence and the official 'narrative', some 160 miles away at the time, this difficulty does seem to be the case. However, despite this, it seems reasonable to assume that Mrs. Waugh is able to count:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. You remember a white car. Might that have been car B that you put on the map for the police?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. It could have been.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. What about the other car, what colour was the other car?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. Like a bluey colour.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. There were a group of men. Can you help us as to how</div><div style="text-align: justify;">many you think you saw?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. <b>At least six</b>.</div> <div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: right;"><b>Source</b>: <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/13102010am.htm">Transcript, 13 October 2010</a></div><div style="text-align: right;"><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/13102010am.htm">Morning session - page 69, lines 1-8</a></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">A few moments later, Mrs. Waugh is reminded that she told police she had seen four men getting into what seems to be the Nissan Micra in which Mohammad Sidique Khan, Shehzad Tanweer and Hasib Hussain travelled to Luton from Leeds. She recalls seeing six men in total, and two cars. The other car, according to Hugo Keith, counsel to the inquest, has never been traced. Mrs. Waugh's testimony is very confused; on more than one occasion she denies what she had said in her police statements and at one point she denies something she was recorded as saying several minutes previously whilst under oath. However, her claim to have seen four men getting in the Micra, and six men in total, is interesting when compared to the statement Susan Clarke gave to the police in July 2005, which was read out in part whilst she was questioned under oath during the inquests:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. [Mr Patterson] "One car had one or two males in it. The other, <span style="font-weight: bold;">a lilac-coloured Nissan, had four males leaving it</span>, all carrying rucksacks. When asked, she described all the males as not white."</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. [Susan Clarke] He then goes on to say that you handed him the piece of paper that you've told us about.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. So pausing there, is that an accurate note of what you told the officer on that Tuesday?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. As far as I remember, yes.</div><span style="font-weight: bold;"><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. So although today you've told us that you thought that it was four, possibly five, men associated with those two cars, within days of the incident, the very first time you spoke to the police you were saying that it was two men from one of the cars, four men from the other car, all carrying rucksacks?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. Yes.</div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: right;"><b>Source</b>: <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/13102010pm.htm">Transcript, 13 October 2010</a></div><div style="text-align: right;"><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/13102010pm.htm">Afternoon session - page 18, lines 24 on</a></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Joseph Martoccia, a commuter who believes he saw the accused at King's Cross mainline station on the morning of 7th July 2005, also said he saw six men:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. Have you marked X as the spot where you came across a group of men?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. Correct.</div><span style="font-weight: bold;"><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. Do you recall how many there were?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. Yes. At the time, I said between four and six.</div></span><div style="text-align: justify;">I wasn't entirely certain of the number.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: right;"><b>Source</b>: <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/13102010pm.htm">Transcript, 13 October 2010</a></div><div style="text-align: right;"><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/13102010pm.htm">Afternoon Session Lines 39-40</a></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Mr. Martoccia goes on, however, to say that the men caught his attention because they were in a huddle. It was this behaviour that led him to initially deduce they were probably a sports team.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Interestingly, although Mr. Martoccia contacted the police the following day, he was not asked to identify the men from photographs until almost a year later, a somewhat odd approach in what was termed by Sir Ian Blair as "the largest criminal inquiry in English history". When shown a picture of Jermaine Linsday during his testimony to the Inquests, Martoccia stated that he did not remember seeing him. Moreover, Martoccia said that the man he saw heading towards the Piccadilly line – who, one would presume on the basis of the official 'narrative', would be most likely to be Lindsay, who stands accused of causing the explosion on the Piccadilly line train – was instead Hasib Hussain; the man accused of being responsible for the number 30 bus incident.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Detective Inspector Kindness of Scotland Yard's Counter-terrorism Command gave an intriguing response when specifically questioned by Mr. Gareth Patterson, representing four bereaved families, over the number of men witnessed:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. You're probably aware, Inspector, of why I'm asking you these questions. Presumably you were told that there's a witness, Susan Clarke, who told the police quite early on that there may have been more than four people in and around those two cars. Were you aware of that? Did you look for the number of people around those cars? </div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. Yes, at the time, when we were viewing the CCTV, <span style="font-weight: bold;">we were </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">comfortable with the amount of people that were there </span>and that we'd managed to track them to the position where we got decent CCTV images that we could say, yes, there are that number of people.</div> <div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: right;"><b>Source</b>: <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/14102010pm.htm">Transcript, 14 October 2010</a></div><div style="text-align: right;"><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/14102010pm.htm">Afternoon Session Line 50 on</a></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Shortly after this, Mr. Patterson is interrupted by Hugo Keith QC, who expresses concern over his questions “because they do appear to me to be designed to leave the impression that either there was another person at large or that in some way the investigation has been inadequate or has not properly pursued leads available at the time.” After further admonishment by both Mr. Keith and Lady Justice Hallet, Mr. Patterson is able to continue:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">MR PATTERSON: If we pause it now, perhaps. Can we see four figures walking off, Inspector?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. Yes, we can, yes.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. Is there a figure who hovers and lingers between the two cars for a period of time?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. Yes, there is a person there, yes. I think that's the person that exited that vehicle that just arrived.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. Was that something that was investigated and looked into to see where that additional fifth person --</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. The individuals around the car were -- their movements were assessed, yes.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. Is that something that you dealt with or that somebody else dealt with?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. I didn't personally follow this individual away, no.</div> <div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: right;"><b>Source</b>: <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/14102010pm.htm">Transcript, 14 October 2010</a></div><div style="text-align: right;"><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/14102010pm.htm">Afternoon Session Line 55 on</a></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Later that same session, Ms. Caoilfhionn Gallagher, representing five bereaved families, continues a similar line of questioning:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. You said in your evidence earlier: "At the time of viewing the CCTV, we were comfortable with the amount of people that were there." That's for your reference, my Lady, page 180 of the</div><div style="text-align: justify;">transcript today, lines 10 to 14. That was referring to that footage of Luton rail station that we've referred to earlier. Can you just go to page 2 of this document, Inspector?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. Yes.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. Can you see the entry at 7.19 about halfway down the page? This is an entry by DC Stephen Bain who was viewing it on 10 or 11 July. Can you see at the end of that entry at 7.19, after he describes four persons at the rear of the vehicle, he says: <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">"Fifth person remains at vehicle, movement between </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">both, fifth person towards Luton station, distant view." </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">Then a little further down the page, 7.23: </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">"Fifth male through ground level barriers from car </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">park", and there's continued references to the fifth </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">male there, so two more entries at 7.23. </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">So did you discuss with DC Stephen Bain the fact </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">that, on viewing the footage, he had originally thought </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">there were five males at the car?</span></div><span style="font-weight: bold;"><div style="text-align: justify;">A. I think the footage that you are referring to is what we have just played on the screen. What he has sighted is the fifth man and what he has done, quite rightly, ishe's tracked the movements from small image to Luton where you can get the big image and you can identify the person and the relationship with the other four. <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;">So for me, yes, we did discuss it at the time, </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;">definitely, because we needed to identify -- when I say </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;">that we were happy with four, by the time they got to </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;">the station, there was a group of four that we felt </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;">were -- we were comfortable that those were the four </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;">that were going to be engaged -- that were engaged in </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;">the activity. </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;">So it's right that he's identified it, because we've</span></div></span><div style="text-align: justify;">seen when we've viewed it that there is a fifth person that arrives. The officer has noted it in his log and he's tracked him to the station.</div><span style="font-weight: bold;"><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. But you were satisfied at that time, and you discussed with DC Stephen Bain that, in fact, the fifth person was unconnected to those four males, or is that a view</div><div style="text-align: justify;">you've come to subsequently? </div><div style="text-align: justify;">A.I can't recall if we discussed it in those terms, but we were certainly looking at the movements around the vehicle and identifying fully how many people of relevance to us were there and, certainly, others who were sighted we were looking to eliminate in terms of movements with the four bombers.</div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: right;"><b>Source</b>: <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/14102010pm.htm">Transcript, 14 October 2010</a></div><div style="text-align: right;"><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/14102010pm.htm">Afternoon Session Line 66 on</a></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In his opening statement to the inquest, Hugo Keith QC confirmed that a rucksack containing “four further improvised explosive devices” was found in the Nissan Micra, plus eight other devices. Why were devices put into a rucksack if not to be carried by somebody? This question, and the question as to why all three witnesses who claim to have seen the men at various stages en-route to London numbering between four and six men each time, it appears, are not of concern to the counsel to the inquest. Indeed, both Hugo Keith QC and Lady Justice Hallet's attitude to Mr. Patterson's questioning regarding the matter, gave the sense that suggesting that any more than the four men were involved is a subject completely untouchable by the inquest. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The Narrative claimed in 2006 that “there is no evidence of a fifth bomber”. In fact, as shown by the evidence given under oath to the Inquests, there is "evidence of a fifth bomber". But, much like “the war” in Basil Fawlty's hotel, nobody is allowed to mention it.</div><br /><p align="justify">If you wish to comment on this article, please <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/fifth-or-sixth-man.html#comments">join the discussion on the J7: 7/7 Inquests blog</a>.</p><p align="justify"><br /></p><div class="blogger-post-footer">--
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
http://julyseventh.co.uk
J7 Blog: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/
J7 Inquests Blog: http://77inquests.blogspot.com/
J7 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581
J7 Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
J7 Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
J7 MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth</div>The Antagonisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01459201402366077472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-69072046600652365882010-11-05T10:34:00.008+00:002010-11-10T10:09:26.264+00:00J7 7/7 Inquest Blog: The Final Curtain - "CCTV rich" to "CCTV FAIL!"<div><br /></div>Originally posted on the <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/final-curtain-cctv-rich-to-cctv-fail.html">J7: 7/7 Inquests Blog</a>.<br /><hr align="left" width="30%"><br /><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-style: italic;">"In the next image, <span style="font-weight: bold;">this is the last sighting of Lindsay, Khan and Tanweer.</span> This was the first CCTV sighting that we had on the unit on this enquiry as they pass through towards the underground station</span>." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: right;">DI Kindness, to the 7/7 Inquests 13 October 2010</div></blockquote><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_cb0EhugBOxBK8vp72yO6HGVtDscHZUvQXpEgBAF6DvIgXtgwjsdqvaKTq7ucabmi05OEwqmmD32nwe9k-DNIPFKIoGtfxgpYwF2Swi-F_VS-3m8oP_-0MMjysgMJ81QS2AAB-w/s1600/vlcsnap-2010-10-17-15h21m30s179.png"><img style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 300px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_cb0EhugBOxBK8vp72yO6HGVtDscHZUvQXpEgBAF6DvIgXtgwjsdqvaKTq7ucabmi05OEwqmmD32nwe9k-DNIPFKIoGtfxgpYwF2Swi-F_VS-3m8oP_-0MMjysgMJ81QS2AAB-w/s400/vlcsnap-2010-10-17-15h21m30s179.png" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5529021861638598754" border="0" /></a><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. [Hugo Keith QC] Can you recall on what day you first spotted a number of men walking through the King's Cross area, in particular through the Thameslink station carrying rucksacks?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. [Detective Inspector Ewan Kindness] It was on 11 July 2005, sir.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. So on the Monday?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. It was, yes.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. Can you recall what it was about the appearance of those men on the CCTV that alerted you to the fact that you might have identified the bombers?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. My officer, who was engaged in the actual CCTV recovery, was ex-military. He saw the four individuals walking through and they were walking two by two and he felt it was significant. They were carrying large rucksacks and he brought my attention to it. I concurred with him that it was a matter of priority for us.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: right;"><b>Source</b>: <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/13102010am.htm">Transcript, 13 October 2010</a></div><div style="text-align: right;"><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/13102010am.htm">Morning session - page 6, lines 12-25</a></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">On Day 4 of the Inquests it became clear that the image above was the last piece of CCTV, according to the Metropolitan Police, that exists of the four accused together anywhere near King's Cross underground station and also the last of Khan, Tanweer or Lindsay. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">CCTV footage of Hasib Hussain outside King's Cross was shown to the Inquests and released to the press. However, no other footage exists, we are told, that shows the movements of Khan, Tanweer or Lindsay after the King's Cross Thameslink was captured. Why not? Especially when on 11 July 2005, Deputy Chief Constable of the British Transport Police, Andy Trotter, boldly announced, "<a href="http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D05E2DF153DF93AA35754C0A9639C8B63&pagewanted=all">The Underground network is a CCTV-rich environment</a>".</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The exchange below, between Mr Patterson QC, counsel for the bereaved, and Detective Inspector Ewan Kindness, provides further details. Details which only become apparent to keen listeners in attendance at the Inquests or eagle-eyed readers of the transcripts because, as usual, major show-stoppers in the official "narrative" of 7/7 are regularly and completely ignored by the press.<br /></div><blockquote style=""><div style="text-align: justify;">MR PATTERSON: Officer, we then watched the footage -- and I don't think we need to play this, thank you -- of the men entering the railway station. In fact, we don't actually see them buying tickets, do we, in the footage? <span style="font-weight: bold;">Were you able to find any footage or CCTV evidence that helps to explain how they got their tickets?</span><br />A.[DI EWAN KINDNESS] <span style="font-weight: bold;">I can't recall the tickets being purchased.</span><br />Q. Then in terms of the journey south, I think you told us that <span style="font-weight: bold;">t</span><span style="font-weight: bold;">here were no cameras on board the train, is that right?</span><br />A. <span style="font-weight: bold;">That's correct.</span><br />Q. When they got to King's Cross, in terms of the available footage, although there were quite a few cameras<span style="font-weight: bold;"> at King's Cross station, is it right that the only cameras that were recording for the relevant time was a camera in the tunnel?</span><br />A. There were 76 -- it was a temporary system. King's Cross underground had a temporary system in place. 76 cameras moving in sequence from one second at a time. <span style="font-weight: bold;">Fortunately for us, at the appropriate period, between 8.30 and 8.50, it sat for 20 minutes on that one camera and that allowed us, at that period, they came through and we got the first sighting.</span><br />Q. Is there any footage of the mainline station as opposed to the Thameslink station?<br />A. When you say "mainline", do you mean mainline King's Cross?<br />Q. Yes.<br />A. At some distance away?<br />Q. Yes, is there any footage, CCTV footage -- you referred earlier today to many, many hours of footage that would be relevant to the emergency response.<br />A. I mean, King's Cross mainline footage was that which Hasib Hussain has been identified on, so that's some of it. Of course, it's quite a large estate, but there is definitely King's Cross mainline footage.<br />Q. So if anyone wants to look at footage of the platform or of the escalator, there is footage that has survived of all of those different areas of the mainline station?<br />A. I would -- I mean, we'd have to check the schedule, sir, but from my understanding, that would have been seized and certainly was viewed, so it would be accessible, yes.<br />Q. Was it possible to find CCTV footage showing the area of the station where the witness, Joseph Martoccia,<br />A. Could you just provide me a little bit of information about what he sighted, sir, just to refresh my memory?<br />Q. He was a witness who described seeing the group. He described four to six Asian males with rucksacks, and hugging and euphoric I think --<br />A. Certainly euphoric, but, no, there was nothing, we looked for that, sir, and <span style="font-weight: bold;">there was nothing at all.</span><br />Q. That wasn't covered by cameras?<br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">A. No.</span><br />Q. In terms of the platforms and the Circle Line heading west and the movements of Mohammed Sidique Khan, presumably you looked but <span style="font-weight: bold;">that wasn't covered?</span><br />A. That's correct.<br />Q. And heading east and the movements of Shehzad Tanweer, presumably you looked --<br />A. Yes, we did.<br />Q. --<span style="font-weight: bold;"> but there was no coverage of him boarding the train?</span><br />A. At King's Cross?<br />Q. At King's Cross.<br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">A. No.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-weight: bold;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;"></span><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source</span>: <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/14102010pm.htm">Transcripts, 14 October 2010</a></div><div style="text-align: right;"><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/14102010pm.htm">Afternoon session, p57, Line 19 on</a></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">From this we learn that "a temporary system" of 76 cameras was installed at King's Cross, but that it malfunctioned for 20 minutes between the crucial period of approximately 8.30am - 8.50am on the 7 July 2005. This "malfunction" left just one of 76 cameras actually recording CCTV footage. Fortunately for the investigating officers, the one camera which remained in operation happened to be the one which was trained on the tunnel between the King's Cross Thameslink station and King's Cross mainline station. This one CCTV camera captured the image shown above.<b><br /></b><br />The distance between the Thameslink tunnel where this image was captured and the King's Cross underground lines is shown on this map:<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgMc7dbelVBk7JWmEsAgBy5lyGtyYcHkf8YNPVIBqpERNTh2WYWEfy8ZigHnshhambbJQZPrr2B1ExHtRCtW0_oUhGtLRZAT38DGueyEOk6yfOY7C-RSPhU9iUvw5au5VsxKw2ZVQ/s1600/KXTL+map.jpg"><img style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 266px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgMc7dbelVBk7JWmEsAgBy5lyGtyYcHkf8YNPVIBqpERNTh2WYWEfy8ZigHnshhambbJQZPrr2B1ExHtRCtW0_oUhGtLRZAT38DGueyEOk6yfOY7C-RSPhU9iUvw5au5VsxKw2ZVQ/s400/KXTL+map.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5529832201970939298" border="0" /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">Click to Enlarge</span></a><br /></div><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Note: The account of this image being the key that led the investigation back to Luton station has been thoroughly discredited under questioning by Ms Gallagher QC, counsel for the bereaved. This is examined in detail </span><a style="font-style: italic;" href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/cctv-fuss-about-nothing.html">here</a><span style="font-style: italic;">.</span><br /><br />This means that:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><ul><li>There is no CCTV footage from the underground showing Hasib Hussain allegedly on the Northern Line,</li><li>There is no CCTV footage showing the "iconic" but never seen image of the four men hugging euphorically,</li><li>There is no CCTV from the ticket gates, subways or platforms showing any of the four accused at King's Cross.</li></ul></div><div style="text-align: justify;">It isn't clear yet whether any CCTV exists from the trains as Patterson didn't question DI Kindness on this issue but, given the following account from Rachel "North", it would be surprising if footage from the trains didn't exist. At a meeting in May 2006 between survivors and bereaved and the then Home Secretary, John Reid, Rachel "North" noted:<br /><blockquote>Over to the questions. The first question was from a man who lost his boyfriend at Russell Square who <span style="font-weight: bold;">wanted to know if there were CCTV images of the bombers on the trains, and whether he could see the last minutes of his loved one. The Counter Terrorism representative said that there were, but they had not been released, </span>as the post-bomb CCTV images 'were disturbing'. Dr. Reid promised to investigate whether images of the train before the bomb could be shown privately to the bereaved man. It sounded like the CCTV images were not of good quality.<br /><br /><div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source: </span><a href="http://rachelnorthlondon.blogspot.com/2006/05/meeting-new-home-secretary.html">Rachel "North"</a><br /></div></blockquote>If DI Kindness' statement is correct, and the image shown above is the last sighting of Khan, Tanweer and Lindsay, any footage that might exist from the trains will not show any of the three accused. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">So, what about any other crucial CCTV from the events of 7 July 2005 that might go some way to proving that the four accused were actually on the trains and the number 30 bus?</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />There are reams of footage showing Hasib Hussain in and around King's Cross and the Euston Road, but what about the footage from Hussain's infamous trip to MacDonalds, where it is claimed he inserted a 9 volt battery, purchased minutes before from W.H. Smith, into his 'malfunctioning explosives'?<br /><blockquote style="">Q. Finally this, Inspector: the movements of Hasib Hussain, you've shown us the various bits of footage of his movements and of the buses. Was there any footage from inside McDonalds restaurant where he seemed to be present for some 8 minutes?<br />A. There was no footage. We recovered the CCTV from McDonalds, but unfortunately the system was -- <span style="font-weight: bold;">the recording was stopped prior to him going into that location.</span><br />Q. So there were cameras, but for some reason they weren't recording?<br /><b>A. There were cameras and, in fact, you see the office manager in the office going to the video machine and switching the "stop" button and it stops.</b><br /><br /><div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source</span>: <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/14102010pm.htm">Transcripts, 14 October 2010</a></div><div style="text-align: right;"><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/14102010pm.htm">Afternoon session, p60, lines 24 on</a></div></blockquote></div><div style="text-align: justify;">How about footage from the Number 91 bus that Hasib is alleged to have boarded before allegedly switching to the Number 30 at Euston Station?</div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. Then finally the buses. The number 91 bus that he was believed to have taken along the Euston Road, <b>no cameras inside that bus</b>?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. <span style="font-weight: bold;">No, sir, no</span>.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. Is that because there were cameras and they had malfunctioned or --</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. I can't recall the reasons why, but it was a main priority for us to find him on the bus, as you can see by our actions on the night of the 7th, to get the route 30 bus footage to identify him. So when we had the witness statement stating that -- the 91 bus, that was a priority for us to identify it and, for whatever reason, we didn't identify that footage. So I can't say at the moment whether that was malfunctioned or it wasn't there, it was recorded over, but for one of those reasons why we didn't have access to it.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. The same with the number 30 bus, there were cameras, but it wasn't --</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. The <b>route 30 bus had malfunctioned</b> earlier in the year, so we identified it that night, we viewed it that night at the laboratory, and <b>it showed footage from earlier in the year, nothing of the date in question</b><span style="font-weight: bold;">.</span></div></blockquote><blockquote style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-weight: bold;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Source</span>: <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/14102010pm.htm">Transcripts, 14 October 2010</a><br /></span></span><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/14102010pm.htm">Afternoon session, p61, lines 13 on</a></blockquote><div style="text-align: left;">So, no footage of Hasib Hussain from the Euston Road boarding the Number 91 bus, nor is there any footage from Euston station of him boarding the Number 30.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />For over five years J7 have been calling on the government to 'RELEASE THE EVIDENCE" but, as a result of the revelations during the first week of the Inquests, perhaps we need to change our demand to, "WHERE <i>IS</i> THE EVIDENCE?"<br /></div><br /><hr align="left" width="30%"><br /><p align="justify">If you wish to comment on this article, please <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/final-curtain-cctv-rich-to-cctv-fail.html#comments">join the discussion on the J7: 7/7 Inquests blog</a>.</p><div class="blogger-post-footer">--
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
http://julyseventh.co.uk
J7 Blog: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/
J7 Inquests Blog: http://77inquests.blogspot.com/
J7 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581
J7 Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
J7 Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
J7 MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth</div>The Antagonisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01459201402366077472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-35014592139653791922010-11-02T21:09:00.009+00:002010-11-10T10:08:38.119+00:00J7 7/7 Inquest Blog: A CCTV Fuss About Nothing?<div><br /></div>Originally posted on the <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/cctv-fuss-about-nothing.html">J7: 7/7 Inquests Blog</a>.<br /><hr align="left" width="30%"><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">All witnesses to the Inquest take an oath. The oath is to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but... </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The <a href="http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/hc0506/hc10/1087/1087.pdf">Official Report into the London Bombings</a> (the "<a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/7-july-inquests-its-conspiracy-stupid.html">narrative</a>") states:</div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">12 July</span> In the early morning, the police search premises in the West Yorkshire area, including the homes of Khan, Tanweer and Hussain and 18 Alexandra Grove.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Report received that 4 people by two vehicles were seen putting on rucksacks at Luton Station car park. One of the vehicles was now missing but one remained in the car park.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><span style="font-weight: bold;"><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">By lunchtime</span>, police working on the theory that there is a King’s Cross link to the 3 train bombs, all being broadly equidistant from there at the time of the explosions, <span style="font-weight: bold;">identify a CCTV image of 4 men with rucksacks at King’s Cross. They recognise Tanweer first from a DVLA photograph.</span></span></div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">The police identify CCTV images of the same 4 at Luton Station. </span>The Micra is found at Luton and examined. 9 controlled explosions were carried out on material found in it. The Brava, which had been towed away because it did not have a parking ticket is later traced to Lindsay. There had been a report on the Police National Computer that the Brava may have been used in an aggravated burglary (see paragraph 69) and Lindsay was named as the registered keeper for the car.</div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">During the morning session of Wednesday 13 October 2010, the Inquest heard from Detective Inspector Kindness of Scotland Yard's Counter-terrorism Command. After being sworn, DI Kindness was questioned by Counsel to the Inquests, Hugo Keith, and stated for the record that the identification of the four accused at King's Cross Thameslink, and thus the link made to the Luton and Bedford areas, occurred on 11 July 2005:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. Can you recall on what day you first spotted a number of men walking through the King's Cross area, in particular through the Thameslink station carrying rucksacks?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. It was on 11 July 2005, sir.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. So on the Monday?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. It was, yes.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. Can you recall what it was about the appearance of those men on the CCTV that alerted you to the fact that you might have identified the bombers?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. My officer, who was engaged in the actual CCTV recovery, was ex-military. He saw the four individuals walking through and they were walking two by two and he felt it was significant. They were carrying large rucksacks and he brought my attention to it. I concurred with him that it was a matter of priority for us.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: right;"><b>Source</b>: <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/13102010am.htm">Transcript, 13 October 2010</a></div><div style="text-align: right;"><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/13102010am.htm">Morning session - page 6, lines 12-25</a></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;"><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/13102010am.htm"></a></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Under further questioning by Mr Keith, DI Kindness explains the manner in which Luton was discovered as the point at which the four accused met and travelled to London:</div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. Did you then concentrate your examination upon CCTV relating to the railway network to the north of London?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. Indeed, sir, yes, and we were looking at the route of the -- the Thameslink route up through Bedford and Luton and looking for fast-time CCTV recovery of those stations to see where the bombers had access to rail network.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. Were you able to access CCTV relating to, not just the stations, but the car parks at those stations, the entry points and the foyers?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. Yes, we were, sir.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. What did you discover?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. We were able to identify that the individuals had arrived at Luton underground station earlier that morning and boarded a train to London.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. Can you recall when it was that you discovered that they had boarded the railway network at Luton?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. I think it was on the 12th, sir.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. So the Tuesday?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. Yes.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. As a result of that process, how many of the men were you able to identify initially as having used the Luton railway station?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. We were able to identify all of the men had accessed -- the four men had accessed via Luton railway station.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. Were you able to identify the cars that they used at the station?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. Yes, we were.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. So you were able to identify that they had arrived in two cars, a Nissan Micra and a red Fiat Brava?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. That's correct, sir. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: right;"><b>Source</b>: <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/13102010am.htm">Transcript, 13 October 2010</a></div><div style="text-align: right;"><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/13102010am.htm">Morning session - page 10, line 19 on</a></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">Note that DI Kindness is neither asked for, nor offers, any explanation for why Luton was chosen from at least eight possible stations that the <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/evidence/docs/INQ8867-3.pdf">07.00 Bedford - Brighton Thameslink train</a> would have stopped at on the morning of 7 July. Any investigation looking for potential al Qaeda "suicide bombers" would perhaps concentrate their efforts instead on Luton Parkway station, with its links to Luton Airport, and one stop closer to London than is Luton station. Eight stations would have furnished a lot of CCTV footage to examine within a maximum of 24 hours between the identification of the four men on the 11 July 2005 and the Luton link on the 12 July 2005. </div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">One theory, indeed the one favoured by the Home Office narrative, is that Luton was chosen due to the witness sighting of four men putting on rucksacks at Luton station, as received on the 12 July 2005. This witness, Susan Clarke, gave her evidence to the Inquest during the <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/13102010pm.htm">afternoon session of 13 October 2010</a>. She describes handing a note of the cars she had seen at Luton station on the morning of the 7 July to a British Transport Police officer at St. Pancras station. This note was handed over on Tuesday 12 July 2005. [<a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/13102010pm.htm">Transcript, 13 October 2010, afternoon session - page 14, line 14 on</a>]. Officers attended her place of work at 11.45am on 12 July 2005 and Ms Clarke was interviewed for two and a half hours at Holborn police station. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">So this would appear to be how the Luton station CCTV came to be favoured and examined over and above seven other possible stations of focus. Or, at least it would be if either the narrative or DI Kindness were actually relating the facts of the matter. Fortunately for the bereaved and the wider public, the carefully plotted course of Mr Keith's questioning was exposed by further questions interjected by Mr Patterson and Ms Gallagher, the counsels for the bereaved. However, nobody would be aware of this through reading any of the press reports covering the inquest proceedings.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">A CCTV viewing log was discovered in evidence that had shortly before been posted on the Lextranet system that the Inquests are utilising to share evidence between the counsel and interested persons. Mr Hill, representing the Metropolitan Police Service, attempted an objection to this line of questioning and Judge Hallett compounded the issue by reiterating the evidence so far:</div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">LADY JUSTICE HALLETT: Strict rules of evidence, you're obviously right, Mr Hill. Do I take it, to try to cut this short, Mr Kindness, that essentially you were responding to somebody -- somebody else has got information and they've said, "All right, Detective Inspector Kindness, off you go, we want you to look at Luton and Bedford", is that really -- or did the information come to you personally? </div><div style="text-align: justify;">A [DI Ewan Kindness]. The information -- Luton and Bedford was seized, my Lady, as a result of the sighting at -- as a result of the sighting at King's Cross Thameslink which had been generated by the CCTV viewing by the CCTV team. So it was natural that we would follow the route up the line. It's as simple as that.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">LADY JUSTICE HALLETT: <i>I think this is a fuss about nothing</i>, Mr Hill, with respect. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: right;"><b>Source</b>: <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/14102010pm.htm">Transcript, 13 October 2010</a></div><div style="text-align: right;"><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/14102010pm.htm">Afternoon session - page 44, line 9 on</a></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">Here's the kicker:</div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>MS GALLAGHER: You say that you focused upon Luton station as a result of information received on 11 July. Is that right?</b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>A. </b><b> [DI Ewan Kindness] </b><b>That's correct, yes.</b></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. In that document which I've made reference to, I think you have it before you, my Lady, the Anti-terrorist Branch SO13 record -- do you have that document before you?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. No, I don't, no.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. Is it possible for a copy to be provided?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">MR KEITH: You can have my copy. (Handed)</div><div style="text-align: justify;">MS GALLAGHER: This is a record of an officer viewing CCTV. It seems to be by a DC Stephen Bain. Was he part of the same team?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. Yes, he was, yes.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Q. If you just look in the box at the top, it's on the left, five boxes down, <b>"Date viewing commenced: 10 July 2005, 20.00 hours"</b> and "Date viewing ended:11 July 2005, 23.30".</div><div style="text-align: justify;">A. Yes.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>Q. So is it possible that, in fact, that information was received on 10 July rather than 11 July, Inspector?</b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>A. [DI Ewan Kindness] That's absolutely correct. It's an error. It should have been the 10th. </b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: right;"><b>Source</b>: <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/14102010pm.htm">Transcript, 13 October 2010</a></div><div style="text-align: right;"><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/14102010pm.htm">Afternoon session - page 65, line 15 on</a></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">This leaves the one crucial and compelling question: Why were the police reviewing CCTV footage from Luton station and car park on 10 July 2005, when the accused apparently weren't identified on King's Cross Thameslink CCTV until a day later, 11 July 2005?</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">More importantly, why has it been deemed necessary to concoct the story about the discovery of CCTV at Luton on 12 July 2005?</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The Inquests now need to scrutinise the actual manner in which the four accused were identified, and re-examine how, when and why the link to Luton station was made and how, when and why the CCTV was recovered, as the evidential log shows, by 10 July 2005.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><br /><hr align="left" width="30%"><div style="text-align: justify;"><i>On the fourth day of the inquests we learn that this one image of the four accused entering the tunnel from King's Cross Thameslink is the only CCTV image captured of the four men together anywhere near King's Cross underground station on 7 July 2005. More to follow...</i></div><br /><hr align="left" width="30%"><p align="justify">If you wish to comment on this article, please <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/cctv-fuss-about-nothing.html#comments">join the discussion on the J7: 7/7 Inquests blog</a>.</p><div class="blogger-post-footer">--
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
http://julyseventh.co.uk
J7 Blog: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/
J7 Inquests Blog: http://77inquests.blogspot.com/
J7 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581
J7 Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
J7 Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
J7 MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth</div>The Antagonisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01459201402366077472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-11293544001664381592010-11-01T12:25:00.004+00:002010-11-01T13:03:09.167+00:00J7: Update - Into Week 4 of the Inquests<div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span">Greetings from J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span">INTO WEEK 4 OF THE INQUESTS</span></b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span">====================================================================</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span">A brief update from J7 as we enter the fourth week of the inquests proper, and a reminder to keep up to date with the latest analysis of inquest proceedings on the J7 7/7 Inquests blog. </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/"><span class="Apple-style-span">http://77inquests.blogspot.com/</span></a></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span">BEWARE FALSE PROPHETS </span></b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span">====================================================================</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span">The 7 July Inquests process is a crucially important process. It is also potentially the only occasion that the events of 7/7 will receive relatively open and public scrutiny, and the only public process during which some of the evidence is released into the public domain. </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span">Already evidence has been adduced at the hearings which directly contradicts the official Home Office 'narrative' of events, yet Counsel to the Inquests has not allowed the evidence to interrupt the use of the Inquests as mere confirmation of what we have already been told.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span">J7 have been researching the events of 7/7 since the day itself and we can confidently state, based on the evidence that has been released, that we have no idea a) what happened, b) how it happened, and c) who made it happen. </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span">After over five years of continuous research, J7 has very few answers. Instead we have considerably more questions than we started out with that have hitherto not been satisfactorily answered.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span">So, if you encounter articles, blogs or books -- in the mainstream media, or otherwise -- which profess to offer "THE TRUTH" about what happened, or which are trying to sell you something that contains an alternative narrative in which all the blanks are helpfully filled in, J7's advice is: Best stay clear.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span">7/7 INQUESTS TRANSCRIPTS AS SEARCHABLE, PRINTABLE PDF FILES</span></b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span">====================================================================</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span">The 7 July Inquests hearings transcripts are published each day the inquests sit, but only as web pages, making them unsuitable for printing, and cumbersome to search multiple transcripts. So, as a public service to all researchers, interested parties and investigative journalists everywhere, J7 are publishing print-friendly, easily searchable, PDF versions of the hearing transcripts. We have also helpfully summarised the nature of the contents of the evidence adduced in court and released via the 7 July Inquests web site.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span">Read and download the Inquests Transcripts as PDFs, complete with evidence summaries:</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><a href="http://julyseventh.co.uk/j7-inquest-transcripts/"><span class="Apple-style-span">http://julyseventh.co.uk/j7-inquest-transcripts/</span></a></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span">Read and download the J7 Submissions to the Inquests</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><a href="http://julyseventh.co.uk/J7-Inquest-Submission/"><span class="Apple-style-span">http://julyseventh.co.uk/J7-Inquest-Submission/</span></a></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span">UPDATES TO THE INQUESTS BLOG</span></b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span">====================================================================</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span">Since our last email update, three new articles have gone live on the dedicated J7 Inquests blog, including an article featuring J7's very own first home-grown video production!</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span">J7: 7/7 Inquests Blog: The Curious Case of the Jag That Parked in the Daytime</span></b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span">--------------------------------------------------------------------</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span">A picture tells a thousand words, moving pictures a few more than that. Taking a closer look at the CCTV footage from Luton station on 28 June 2005 and 7 July 2005. The article also includes a J7-produced video to highlight the curious coincidence of the Jag that parked in the daytime. </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/curious-case-of-jag-that-parked-in.html"><span class="Apple-style-span">http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/curious-case-of-jag-that-parked-in.html</span></a><br /><br /><div align="center"><br /><iframe frameborder="0" height="300" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/16127256" width="400"></iframe><br /><a href="http://vimeo.com/16127256">Jaguar at Luton station car park</a> from <a href="http://vimeo.com/j7t">J7 Truth Campaign</a> on <a href="http://vimeo.com/">Vimeo</a>.</div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span">Behind the Scenes of the Aldgate Explosion, at 11 minutes to 9</span></b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span">--------------------------------------------------------------------</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span">Evidence adduced in court all points to major issues on the underground happening *before* the time at which the Counsel for the Inquests is adamant that suicide bombers instigated explosions.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/behind-scenes-of-aldgate-explosion-it.html"><span class="Apple-style-span">http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/behind-scenes-of-aldgate-explosion-it.html</span></a></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span">The Strange Account of Ross Mallinson</span></b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span">--------------------------------------------------------------------</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span">The Inquests have given rise to many more unresolved issues. One such issue is that of Ross Mallinson, and quite where he was and what happened to him. If the inquests are unable to satisfactorily define the story of a survivor, even one that hasn't been called to give evidence, with what precision will the inquest perform its proper task?</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/strange-account-of-ross-mallinson.html"><span class="Apple-style-span">http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2010/10/strange-account-of-ross-mallinson.html</span></a></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span">We will be in touch again soon. In the meantime, please keep checking back at the J7: 7/7 Inquests blog. You can also subscribe to the J7:7/7 Inquests blog using RSS feed links on the blog, or by email using the 'Subscribe to J7:Inquests Blog' form in the blog sidebar.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span">In solidarity, for truth and justice,</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span">J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">--
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
http://julyseventh.co.uk
J7 Blog: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/
J7 Inquests Blog: http://77inquests.blogspot.com/
J7 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581
J7 Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
J7 Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
J7 MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth</div>The Antagonisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01459201402366077472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-77393888653460443552010-10-16T19:36:00.004+00:002010-10-18T13:04:00.475+00:007 July Inquests: It's A Conspiracy, Stupid!<p align="justify"></p><p align="justify"></p><blockquote><p align="justify">"Although the plotters plainly designed their plot in a way that would add the fuel of worldwide publicity to their aims, these inquests have at their heart, however, the single fact that <b>there was a conspiracy</b> to murder. Each of these 52 inquests is concerned with an act of murder. We have found no evidence to the contrary. It is also clear from the evidence that is available that the four men who detonated the bombs were Mohammed Sidique Khan, Shehzad Tanweer, Jermaine Lindsay and Hasib Hussain. To reflect the reality of the position and to avoid legal sophistry, I intend to call them "the bombers". [page 13, lines 9-20]</p><p align="justify">...</p><p align="justify">"But again, I must emphasise it is not a proper function of an inquest to attribute blame or apportion guilt, or a proper function of mine to express opinions on impermissible areas. [page 15, lines 2-7]</p><p align="justify">...</p><p align="justify">"Some of the questions may never fully be answered and some may of course also fall outside the scope of these inquests, but what we can say is that a great deal of time, energy and resources has been devoted to finding out what happened to each deceased. Thus it is to be hoped that these inquests, however unpleasant and distressing, as they will be, will assist in answering the families' questions in allaying some of the rumours and suspicion generated by conspiracy theorists." [page 22, lines 8-16]</p><p align="justify"></p><div style="text-align: right;">-- Hugo Keith, Counsel to the 7 July Inquests</div><div style="text-align: right;"><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/11102010am.htm">11 October 2010</a></div><p></p></blockquote><p align="justify"></p><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">It's the end of the first week of the 7 July Inquests process. It's been a long and busy week for the J7 research collective as we endeavour to look beyond the largely throwaway headlines the mainstream media are happy to churn out to fill the spaces between adverts -- as cunningly crafted for them by Counsel to the Inquests, Hugo Keith<sup>*</sup> -- and examine the minutiae of the proceedings.</div><p></p><div style="text-align: justify;">Each day the Inquest sits results in approximately 200 pages of <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/index.htm">transcripts</a> and a varying amount of <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/evidence/index.htm">evidential submissions</a> that need to be diligently worked through and examined in light of the research work that J7 has been conducting during the five years that have passed since the events of 7 July 2005. And, quite frankly, if J7 doesn't perform this function, it's probably not going to happen in any other public forum.</div><p align="justify">Followers of J7's work -- which, if this week's activities at the inquests are anything to go by, undoubtedly include the counsel to the inquests -- will know that we recently published our <a href="http://julyseventh.co.uk/J7-Inquest-Submission/index.html">submissions to the inquests</a>. Our apparently "voluminous" submissions, as Hugo Keith described them on Day 1 of the inquests proper, outline many of the outstanding discrepancies, anomalies and inconsistencies of the still unproven 7/7 "narrative". The evidence on which this narrative of 7/7 is said to be based has, prior to the inquests, received absolutely no judicial scrutiny in over five years, although it has repeatedly been taken at face value, including in courts of law, and the contents of the "narrative" being taken at face value has been extended by the counsel to the inquests to the actual inquests themselves.<br /><br />It is perhaps opportune to note at this stage quite what the definition of a "narrative" is:</p><blockquote><p align="justify"><b>Narrative</b>; -noun<br />1. a story or account of events, experiences, or the like, whether true or fictitious.<br />2. a book, literary work, etc., containing such a story.<br />3. the art, technique, or process of narrating: Somerset Maugham was a master of narrative.</p></blockquote><p align="justify">So, a "narrative" of any sort may, or may not, by its very definition, be true, and is equally as likely to be fictitious. In this particular regard, if no other, the official Home Office report covering the events 7 July 2005 is very clear indeed and openly refers to itself as a "narrative", rather than what many presume or perceive it to be, a factual account of events. As such, the burden of proof lies with the narrative's hitherto anonymous story-tellers to make the case, not with anyone else to prove it to be false, as is commonly argued by the "conspiracy theorists" who champion the conspiracy theory touted by the Home Office.</p><p align="justify"><b>Judicial Scrutiny?</b></p><p align="justify">While the inquests may count, technically, as judicial scrutiny, it is judicial scrutiny that is occurring without the benefit of a jury. This apparent judicial scrutiny is in turn being orchestrated and funded by the State, overtly to appease <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/5357493/Families-of-July-7-bombing-victims-fear-they-may-never-learn-the-truth.html">the concerns of bereaved families</a> who feel they have not yet had the truth regarding the deaths of their loved ones. From the outset, it must be understood that the State cannot in any way find itself to be culpable for anything that would reflect badly upon it, and history is littered with countless examples of the State absolving itself of responsibility, illegality, or immorality in all degrees. </p><p align="justify">Further, if these concerns aren't by themselves sufficient to sound alarm bells, the Counsel to the Inquests has quite a history of forcefully defending the interests of Queen and State in many instances where these entities have been deemed to be under attack. High profile examples of Keith's work include defending The Queen, no less, at the inquest into the death of Diana; the DPP in the case of a judicial review brought by a member of the family of the mercilessly savaged Jean Charles de Menezes and, more recently, the "merciless savagery" of the Metropolitan Police in relation to the inquest into the murder of the barrister Mark Saunders.</p><p align="justify">Evidently, Mr Keith has no qualms defending "merciless savagery" when it suits the interests of the highest levels of the State, so one might be prompted to wonder quite why a counsel so wedded to the staunch legal defence of the realm against all-comers might be required for what, superficially at least, is an open inquest into the deaths that occurred on 7 July 2005.</p><p align="justify">Keith also specialises in extradition and his <a href="http://www.cpdcast.com/contributors/hugo-keith-qc">notable extradition cases include</a> "Abu Hamza, the <a href="http://p10.hostingprod.com/@spyblog.org.uk/freegary/2005/06/extradition-legal-precedents-enron-natwest-three.html">Natwest 3</a>, <a href="http://postmanpatel.blogspot.com/2006/03/italian-job.html">David Mills</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_Due">Silvio Berlusconi</a> in Italian mutual legal assistance proceedings and the Secretary of State in the cases of <a href="http://p10.hostingprod.com/@spyblog.org.uk/freegary/2010/02/ian-norris-loses-his-uk-supreme-court-appeal-against-extradition-to-the-usa.html">Ian Norris</a> [<a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov.uk/docs/UKSC_2009_0052_Judgment.pdf">PDF</a>] and <a href="http://www.freegary.org.uk/">Gary McKinnon</a>."</p><p align="justify"><b>The Inquest Process</b></p><p align="justify"></p><p align="justify">An intrinsic and vital part of any inquest process is to not prejudge any aspects of the factors leading up to and involved in the cause(s) of death. It would appear, given the contents and areas for further examination listed in the <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/docs/provisional-index-of-factual-issues-update-230610.pdf">Provisional Index of Factual Issues</a>, that the causes of death have already been pre-judged to be linked in some way to explosions occurring on three underground trains and a bus and, further, that these explosions have been prejudged to have been made to occur by the four accused, Khan, Tanweer, Hussain, and Lindsay. Indeed, over 60 percent of the contents of the <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/docs/provisional-index-of-factual-issues-update-230610.pdf">Provisional Index of Factual Issues</a> relates to the area of 'Preventability'; that seemingly being the potentiality for the preventability of an attack by four young, British, Muslim men, these specifically being Khan, Tanweer, Hussain and Lindsay. Therefore, the bulk of <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/docs/provisional-index-of-factual-issues-update-230610.pdf">the Inquest's Provisional Index of Factual Issues</a> is based around a substantial deviation from the core purpose of the inquest process, seemingly in favour of using the brutal and horrific deaths of 56 people, and the inquest to which they are entitled, as a cynical stick with which to beat the police and security services. While there may well have been significant involvement and failings on the parts of the various organisations, and while some of these areas may well be touched upon as evidence is presented and connections are made during the inquest process, having such activities comprising the bulk of provisional inquest investigation before the inquest has even started seems somewhat counter-intuitive to the notion of not having prejudged any aspects relating to the manner in which the deceased came about their deaths.</p><p></p><p align="justify">With these concerns about the narrative and the structural arrangements of the inquest process recognised and stated, in addition to the overwhelming lack of evidence that has been released and the great many concerns outlined by J7 in the five years since 7/7, it appears that the judicious aspect of judicial scrutiny that passes even the media by, falls to the general public. </p><p align="justify">Thanks to the Internet the 'ordinary' people of the general public no longer need to rely entirely on sneaking the odd letter past lowly editors into low-circulation newspapers, or the efforts of what were once known, and are now sadly lamented, as investigative journalists. Ordinary people have at their fingertips their own means of production and dissemination of information, along with the ability to produce analysis and content at least on a par with, if not far in excess of, that which the media and all its corporate interests foist upon us. This is what J7 have been doing for over five years now, and we have been doing so with sufficient vigour, transparency and credibility that the Counsel to the Inquests feels the need to make repeated, if indirect, references to the research we have conducted and the information we have published.</p><div style="text-align: justify;">And so the next phase of this process, the <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/">J7: 7/7 Inquests blog</a>, has been born, following on from the <a href="http://julyseventh.co.uk/">J7 web site</a>, <a href="http://j7truth.blogspot.com/">blog</a>, <a href="http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth/petition.html">petition</a>, <a href="http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581">Facebook campaign</a>, and <a href="http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh/">research forum</a>, established specifically to provide coverage and examination of the inquest proceedings, along with analysis of the evidence that is being released as part of the inquest process. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Contributions to the blog will be made by various members of the core J7 research team and the blog will be updated as regularly as possible during the duration of the inquests. As always, we welcome contributions from non-J7 affiliated parties who are taking the time and making the effort to follow the inquest proceedings.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><b>Inquest Resources</b></div><div><ul><li><a href="http://julyseventh.co.uk/J7-Inquest-Submission/index.html">J7 Submissions to the 7 July Inquests</a></li><li><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/">Coroner's Inquests into the London Bombings of 7 July 2005</a></li><li><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/index.htm">Inquest Hearing Transcripts</a></li><li><a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/evidence/index.htm">Inquest Evidence</a></li></ul></div><br /><hr width="30%" align="left"><p align="justify"><sup>*</sup> "<a href="http://news.google.com/news/search?ned=uk&hl=en&q=%22merciless+savagery%22">Merciless savagery</a>" is one of Keith's descriptions of the events of 7/7 that springs immediately to the fore, and one which received a great deal of coverage after the first day's proceedings. Without doubt all acts of premeditated murder are acts of "merciless savagery" and this applies equally to the victims of 7/7 as it does to any other murdered human beings. However, when the words are uttered by someone who has repeatedly and steadfastly defended for personal profit the actions and the interests of a Monarchy and State that is itself responsible, in just the last decade alone, for in excess of a million acts of "merciless savagery", orders of magnitude greater in number than those that occurred on 7/7, it could reasonably be argued that Keith's words are bereft of meaning. </p><div class="blogger-post-footer">--
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
http://julyseventh.co.uk
J7 Blog: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/
J7 Inquests Blog: http://77inquests.blogspot.com/
J7 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581
J7 Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
J7 Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
J7 MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth</div>The Antagonisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01459201402366077472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-43589738267650648272010-10-06T21:32:00.009+00:002010-10-07T09:40:14.942+00:00J7 Submissions to the 7 July Inquests<div style="text-align: justify;"><strong>J7 PRESS RELEASE</strong></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><br /></b></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Greetings from J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">7/7 INQUESTS BEGIN</div><div style="text-align: justify;">===========================================================</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Over five years on from the events of 7th July 2005 and, finally, the <a href="http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/index.htm">inquests into 52</a> of the deaths that occurred that day are about to commence in earnest. In a preliminary Inquest hearing on 23 June 2010 the coroner, Lady Justice Hallett, stated that she would accept submissions suggesting questions and lines of inquiry for the Inquest to consider.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">J7 decided to seize the opportunity presented by Lady Justice Hallett's generous offer to accept submissions suggesting lines of inquiry to the 7 July Inquest process. The J7 submissions were sent to Martin Smith, the Solicitor to the Inquests on 23 July 2010, and subsequently to the Counsels for the bereaved and survivors.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Our submissions detail suggested lines of inquiry and questions which we believe should be proposed and considered by the Coroner in the process of the Inquests relating to 7 July 2005.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Today J7 have published our submissions so that the general public can be aware of at least some of the many unanswered questions that still exist about the events of 7/7. Our submissions were prepared in response to the publication by the 7 July Inquests of a <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/J7-Inquest-Submission/provisional-index-of-factual-issues-update-230610.pdf">Provisional Index of Factual Issues</a>. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Copies of the Provisional Index of Factual Issues, along with J7's Submissions to the 7 July Inquests can be downloaded using the links below:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">J7 Submissions to the 7 July Inquests</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/J7-Inquest-Submission/index.html">http://julyseventh.co.uk/J7-Inquest-Submission/index.html</a> </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">or alternatively:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><a href="http://www.scribd.com/my_document_collections/2658993">http://www.scribd.com/my_document_collections/2658993</a></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">NOTES FOR EDITORS</div><div style="text-align: justify;">===========================================================</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><ul><li>J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign was established shortly after the events of 7th July 2005, when it transpired that the unfolding story was giving rise to more questions than answers.</li><li>J7's ongoing research efforts have twice forced the government to <a href="http://j7truth.blogspot.com/2007/08/home-office-corrections-to-july-7th.html">amend the official Home Office narrative</a> which, on one occasion, required the then Home Secretary, Dr John Reid, to stand before parliament and announce a major factual inaccuracy to the house.</li><li>J7 do not accept that the Inquests into 52 of the 56 deaths should stand in place of Inquests into the four men accused of perpetrating the events of 7/7.</li><li>J7 are dismayed that the families of the accused have been refused the legal aid that would have allowed them to be represented at the current round of Inquests.</li><li>J7 fully expect that the Inquests into the four accused should be opened and conducted publicly once the Inquests into the 52 have been completed.</li><li>J7 are concerned that some witnesses called at the Inquests may have already been presented with the Metropolitan Police site reports from each of the four locations. We have requested that any witnesses called to give testimony at the Inquests are asked to state for the public record whether they have viewed and/or read the Metropolitan Police reports as it is highly unusual that witnesses called to give evidence in any case would be privy to such reports. J7 are deeply concerned about the impact and effects that having access to these reports prior to giving their testimonies will have on their recollections of events and the witness testimonies that will be given to the Inquests.</li><li>In November 2005, after repeated refusals by the government to hold an independent public inquiry into 7/7, and given the paucity of evidence presented to support the official narrative of events, J7 established its <a href="http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh">People's Investigation Forum</a> to coordinate our ongoing research efforts and track the progress of the many Freedom of Information requests we have issued in order to try and uncover the truth.</li><li>Over <a href="http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth/">3,200 people have signed our petition</a> calling on the government and police to release the evidence they claim to have. J7 supports all calls for an independent public inquiry, and are the only organisation calling for a public inquiry who specifically stipulate that any inquiry should be held outside of the remit of the Inquiries Act 2005 that subjects all public inquiries to full government control.</li><li>The fruits of J7's research, along with <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/july-7-articles-letters.html">articles</a> by respected <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/july-7-article-william-bowles-the-economics-of-77-and-other-mysteries-of-capitalism-explained.html">writers</a>, <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/july-7-article-david-macgregor-july-7th-as-machiavellian-state-terror.html">academics</a> and researchers are published on our main web site at <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/">www.julyseventh.co.uk.</a></li></ul></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In solidarity, for truth and justice,</div><div style="text-align: justify;">J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign</div></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">--
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
http://julyseventh.co.uk
J7 Blog: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/
J7 Inquests Blog: http://77inquests.blogspot.com/
J7 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581
J7 Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
J7 Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
J7 MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth</div>Bridgethttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04220942517267393608noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27653305.post-15883192200304557652010-01-05T09:26:00.004+00:002010-01-05T09:48:51.631+00:00They lie to you: Jack Straw and secret inquests<div style="text-align: justify;"><br />After the conclusion of the second "7/7 helpers" trial in April 2009 (which, like the first, <a href="http://j7truth.blogspot.com/2009/04/another-miscarriage-of-justice-averted.html">failed to convict</a> anyone of conspiring to produce the explosions in London on July 7th 2005), there was no reason for the inquests into the deaths in those incidents to be delayed any longer. But further delayed they were.<br /><br />At the time, the Coroners and Justice Bill was passing through parliament. It made provision to hold inquests in secret, without a jury, just as the previous year's Counter Terrorism Bill had. At the committee stage in the Commons, the secret inquest clause was retained by a single vote thanks to the abstention of the leader of the Scottish Nationalists, Angus Robertson. Coincidentally, the government had just agreed to an <a href="http://www.snp.org/node/15027">amendment</a> to permit inquests of Scottish military personnel to be held in Scotland.<br /><br />The lack of cross party support did, though, eventually result in the government <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/may/15/jack-straw-drops-secret-inquests">dropping the secret inquest clause</a>, as it had done from the previous Counter Terrorism Bill. At least, that is the impression that Jack Straw gave to everyone.<br /><br />But as well as removing the clause, the government went on to add others that <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/henryporter/2009/oct/21/secret-inquest-inquiry-coroners">re-introduced secret inquests</a>. In fact, Andrew Dismore MP (Labour) said that the new proposals were worse, and David Howarth MP (Liberal Democrat) that they were in many respects worse, when the government finally <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8351559.stm">forced them through</a>.<br /><br />During the <a href="http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2009-11-09c.51.0">final debate in the Commons</a>, Jack Straw was insistent in his replies to his own backbenchers (Graham Allen and Robert Marshall-Andrews) that the new secret inquest provision would only apply to a single outstanding inquest, namely that of <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/dec/07/ukcrime.patrickbarkham">Azelle Rodney</a>. Mr Marshall-Andrews replied that if this was the case "<span style="font-style:italic;">The disproportionate remedy in the circumstances is <span style="font-weight:bold;">obvious to everybody</span>.</span>"<br /><br />Although it was obvious to everybody that Jack Straw was misleading parliament (indeed the whole debacle was described as a <a href="http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh/index.php?showtopic=2545&st=49&#entry15010923">procedural farce</a>), it was confirmed beyond doubt a few days later when arrangements for the inquests into those who died on July 7th 2005 were announced, and the <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/nov/26/july-7-bombings-inquests-decision">Guardian</a> informed us that:<br /><br /><blockquote>Jack Straw, the justice secretary, has said the government wants the option of a secret inquest when evidence of what the security services knew about the bombers is heard.</blockquote><br /><br />The fact that all progress on these 56 inquests was blocked while secret inquests were not lawful, and yet as soon as secret inquests became law plans were put in motion to hold them, strongly suggests that they (rather than the Azelle Rodney case) were the true targets of the secret inquest provision, and that Jack Straw was not being truthful when he claimed again and again that the Rodney case was the only one that would be affected.<br /><br />Aside from the secret aspect, the arrangements being made leave much to be desired.<br /><br />A judge has been appointed who has never conducted an inquest before, and who has not read the Coroners and Justice Act.<br /><br />The inquests of the alleged perpetrators are being combined with the others, causing offence to some of the relatives of the victims. This may have the effect (intentional or otherwise) of intimidating or embarrassing the relatives of the alleged perpetrators into not pursuing matters too vigourously. A suicide verdict requires evidence beyond reasonable doubt that the individual intended to take his own life, and one parent has expressed publicly his view that he has not seen such evidence.<br /><br />The bereaved families are <a href="http://www.thisiskent.co.uk/paddockwood/aid-7-7-families/article-1574753-detail/article.html">likely to be denied public funding</a> for legal representation at the inquests, but the Metropolitan Police, a public body, will have <a href="http://www.18redlioncourt.co.uk/index.php/barristers/hill/148">legal representation</a> even though there is no obvious reason why it needs it in these cases.<br /><br />Even now, the inquests are scheduled for autumn 2010, with no explanation for the further delay.<br /><br />To echo <a href="http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/ludicrous-diversion-the-j7-interview.html">Ludicrous Diversion</a>, if 7/7 happened the way they said it did, what is the reason for all these machinations?<br /></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">--
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
http://julyseventh.co.uk
J7 Blog: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/
J7 Inquests Blog: http://77inquests.blogspot.com/
J7 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116996339581
J7 Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
J7 Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
J7 MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth</div>cmainhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08127157361777800671noreply@blogger.com1