The true inside facts about the 7/7 London bombings

A piece form earlier this year regarding the London Bombings, an interview with James Casbolt a former MI6 agent and someone called "X10" why they couldn't just have called them "Bob" or "Fred" I don't know "X10" seems a bit too Robert Ludlum for my liking. Published on February 18 2007. I still can't help thinking that Jean Charles de Menezes was involved in this bloody business...

The British and US government are stirring an atmosphere of animosity and hatred between white and Asian people in the UK, US and around the world. Whites verses Asians invents the excuse for the invasion of the Middle East. They are also looking for a minority to blame for the terrorism in the UK and US that the governments themselves are responsible for.

This is known as ‘false flag’ terrorism. 'Al Qaeda' is an MI- 6, CIA organisation utilising Middle Eastern assets. These are big claims but this is backed up with evidence from my MI 6 contacts. My friend below was briefed in detail regarding what really happened on 7/7 and how the British Government were responsible.

James Casbolt- “ So you are saying the bombs were planted into the bus several days before the 7/7 London bombings”

X10- “ Yes, the British government switched the safety checking team. When they went into the bus depot a few days before hand a trade union spokesman who was asked about this said he couldn’t understand who the security was. He didn’t recognise anybody. These were people who come into check the buses. They normally check the buses for things like suspension, braking systems and the security cameras. Instead of staying what is usually an hour or so these people were there for the entire day. When workers approached them and started making small talk they wrere basically ignored . So they had the feeling that these people were not regular security.

James Casbolt- “So they were probably MI 5?”

X10- “They were MI 5. They were there primarily to make sure the video camera went off at a certain time. Which is of course what happened. Isn’t it is amazing that on that day, this was similar to what happened with the cameras prior to the death of Princess Diana. All the security cameras that counted on 7/7, not the ones that didn’t count, the ones that really counted weren't working. The security camera on that bus wasn't working on that particular day.

James Casbolt- “So where did they plant the bombs on the bus?”

X10- “Inside the seats and under the floor. I know that the eye witness accounts of what happened were all at variance with one another. The BBC relied exclusively on a testimony given by a Scottish guy. The Scottish guy contradicted himself so many times and yet no one in the media asked him about these contradictory statements. He said in one report that he got off the front of the bus and in another report he said he left through the rear door. One report said he was the first out and another report he said was the last off the bus. So there appears to be a lot of confusion in terms of the report”

James Casbolt- “So the four Asian lads were they MI 5 assets?”

X10- “They were stooges”

James Casbolt- “Do you think they consciously knew they were working for MI5?”

X10- “No they weren’t working consciously for MI 5. They would just be a shadow team lured into London to be part of a covert programme of simulated attacks. They were paid to be in a certain place at a certain time to take part in a simulated attack. A company was running a simulated terror attack at the time. Those boys were part of that. They were told “Your backpacks represent explosive devices but of course they aren't explosives”

James Casbolt- “So they were told ‘this is just a dummy run”

X10- “It was a dummy run. They were part of the dummy run. They stopped their car just outside of Luton and they were briefed by somebody. When they left Luton of course, they didn’t leave Luton at the time described because there was a cock up with train times. So whether they managed to get to London or not is an unknown because the video camera evidence has been shown to be faulty. There is a problem with the timing on some of the video footage.

James Casbolt- “So they bought return tickets?”

X10 - “Yea, they bought return tickets. Of course you wouldn't but return tickets if you knew you were on a one way journey to hell. Some of the other reports that were briefly mentioned in the quality, alternative media and not the tabloid media. Then they were completely ignored by the controlled tabloid media, was one eye witness who was talking about the fact that as she was coming off the train were the bomb exploded. The police officer said “Mind the hole!” and he pointed to a huge blast which showed the metal structure of the under carriage facing upwards as if the bomb had blown upwards. This was the security services taking the extra insurance that in case any of the bombs that their agents had left on the train and those were ex MI 5, ex SAS people, that they would have had a back up, a contingency to make sure those explosions did take place. A number of reports reported more bombs than there were alleged terrorists.

James Casbolt- “Why is it ex MI 5 doing it? Why is it not active MI5 agents?

X10- “In a way there is no such thing as ex MI 5. Once your MI 5 you’re always MI 5 (I would have to disagree with that statement as I managed to get away from my involvement with MI 6- James Casbolt). A lot of MI 5 people get jobs with other organisation that are similar in structure when they leave the security services. These organisations are usually part of the private sector. There have been a number of these organisations over the years. A very, very famous intelligence unit that used to work under Peter Mandelson involved in the oil business, and they announced a disclosure about three years ago. Norton Taylor who works for the intelligence part of the Guardian. He pointed out then that such organisations often announce their demise and its nothing of the sort. Its just disinformation or they just change into another company with exactly the same brief. There a lot of these little private organisations that soak up people who have left these intelligence services and they have them working on a private basis but more often than not they are contracted and they get work contracted out to them from the government”

James Casbolt- “So the four Asian lads, they were probably having their strings pulled by MI 5 officers”

X10- Oh yea, absolutely without a doubt. They were runners, a dummy team. I’ve spoken to a few people about the way in which dummy teams are run. They interest lads like that, what MI5 do is they say something like “We want you to be part of a film, part of a dummy run working with the government and also working with BBC producers on developing scenarios in which terrorist attacks in the UK could take place. You get to London and then you do this, meet us at a certain place and we give you a thousand quid”. That’s easy money and its easy money for what? Travelling to London, sitting on a train with a backpack for about half an hour or so and you collect your loot”

James Casbolt- “Do you think Mohammad Sidique Khan would have been a conscious MI 5 agent?”

X10- “He may have been paid by MI 5 to go through that on the TV. The same way as, there is another guy who is a known MI 5 agent. He used to be the sidekick of Abdul H the Muslim preacher. He was no 2. He was a ‘Mr fixer’ and had links to all sorts of exotic quasi terrorist organisations, which are of course almost all run by British intelligence. I wish I could remember his name”

James Casbolt- “You said one of the ex SAS men who was responsible for the bombings was called Mcgreagor and he was disguised as a homeless person.”

X10- “That's what they do to blend in, well not blend in but to make them look conspicuous. If you’ve got a homeless person clutching an old Tesco’s bag or something you don’t tend to look at him and say the guy looks like security threat”

James casbolt- “Can you explain what he did”

X10- “He was on the train and left a package with explosives in. The man who told me this, I developed a close relationship in the past and trusted him”

James Casbolt- “And this man was an MI 6 officer?”

X10- “Ex MI 6. He longer worked for them. Even in the days when I knew him he had already left the service. As far as the bus operations were concerned that was not his main topic. He was talking mostly about the people in the tube bombings. When all of the eye witness statements came up later on talking about the possibility that the bombs may have been placed under the buses, what the government did was put in a fail safe to make sure that even if some thing went wrong on the day with those people who were involved in the bombings themselves, they would at least have a secondary system to ensure the bombs exploded at exactly the time they wanted”

James Casbolt- “So would they have been set on timers?”

X10- “They were set on timers”

James Casbolt- “So they wouldn’t have needed to remotely detonated?”

X10- “No. This whole remote system is quite strange because on the day itself Ian Blair took down all of the mobile phone communications. Everything was switched off. You couldn’t make a mobile phone call. He knew in any event that there were no remote detonators and he was just covering his arse in case any curious journalists asked him a pertinent question later on. There were no remote detonations on the day at all. They were all personally delivered to the destinations”

James Casbolt- “What happened on the tube then?”

X10- “The agents were there at the exactly the right time they were supposed to be. If it was the actual case that those guys actually did get the train from Luton. I don’t believe they got the train from Luton because apparently that train never turned up. But if they had got to London before hand which s probably the case, they would have had plenty of time to receive the briefing in London. They would have got on train. They would have then been followed by these ex MI 5, SAS officers so that they were actually in the same cart as the so-called juvenile bombers. It would have taken place as scheduled”

James Casbolt- “So the guys on the train who were ex MI 5, ex SAS, they left the explosives on the train and then got off. What were their names again?”

X10- “The ex MI 5 man was codenamed ’J-boy’ and Mcgreagor was the ex SAS guy”

James Casbolt- “And then you say they escaped in a Vauxhall cabriolet?”

X10- “Yes and they were driven away from the scene”

James Casbolt- “So your MI 6 contact confirmed it was a Vauxhall cabriolet?”

X10- “Yes”

James Casbolt- “So J-boy and Mcreagor left explosives in bags under the seats but there were secondary explosives under the train carriage (See photos. Ed.) in case they didn’t go off”

X10- “Yes”

James Casbolt- “Do you know were the safe house was were Mcgreagor and J-boy went afterwards”

X10- “The safe house was in South London. This is a very unfortunate event that is going to be churning around in people’s minds for a long time to come. We need a proper public enquiry”

To the government factions who were involved in this act of mass killing I say this. How dare you blow up and murder my British people! All those who are accountable will be held fully accountable when the time comes! That time is coming soon. In my vision I see Asian and white brothers and sisters coming together in love and harmony in this country. We will confront the government peacefully for their terrorist crimes.

James Casbolt
http://jamescasbolt.com/bombings.htm

Notes:
1 “these people were not regular security”: www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2005/150705busbombing.htm

2 “A company was running a simulated terror attack at the time”: www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2005/110705bombingexercises.htm

3 cock up with train times: www.financialoutrage.org.uk/thameslink_database.htm

4 “Mind that hole”: www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=3583

5 Mohammad Sidique Khan: www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=4260

6 See photos: www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=3583

For further background also see:

The Road To World War Three
www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=4121

Who Was Albert Pike?
www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=1086

How Could They Get it So Wrong?
www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=3478

Full story...

Car bomb found in central London

I always think these things are somehow engineered to remind the new PM that the nasty terrorists are still out there. Who knows why this bomb was planted and by whom, really. But we know who will take the heat!! It's all smoke and mirrors.

Police have disabled a car bomb containing gas cylinders in the heart of central London.

Officers carried out a controlled explosion after reports of a suspicious vehicle parked in Haymarket shortly before 0200 BST (0100 GMT).

The area was cordoned off while police examined what they described as a "potentially viable explosive device".

Prime Minister Gordon Brown said Britain faces "a serious and continuous threat".

He added the public "need to be alert" at all times.

The government's emergency unit Cobra has called a meeting to be chaired by the new Home Secretary Jacqui Smith.

The BBC's Andy Tighe said the timing was significant coming a day after Gordon Brown became prime minister, and with the second anniversary of the 7 July bombings approaching.

A witness reported seeing gas canisters being removed from the car, believed to be a silver Mercedes, at around 0400 BST (0300 GMT).

Bouncers from a nearby nightclub said they saw the car being driven erratically before it crashed into a bin. They said the driver then got out and ran off.

Police sources have confirmed that gas canisters were involved in the incident, close to Piccadilly Circus.

But Scotland Yard has refused to comment on reports that a large number of nails were found in the car.

Full story...

Did The Government Force BBC To Drop Menezes, 7/7 Docu-Dramas?

New revelations may have influenced decision to can recreations

by Steve Watson

The family of Jean Charles de Menezes, the innocent man who was gunned down by British police in the wake of the London bombings, has today accused the BBC of aiding a cover up after plans to film a politically sensitive docu-drama about his murder were unceremoniously dropped. The filiming of a docu-drama about the 7/7 London bombers has also been suddenly abandoned.

The London Guardian reports that the BBC shelved both projects because, despite unearthing "difficult or dark" new evidence, it claims it has given the events enough coverage on news and current affairs programming.

But de Menezes cousin Alex Pereira said:

"They are trying to make people forget what happened. It is all political. If the BBC just wanted to do the right thing, they would show the programme. To show the truth is not illegal, to show how the police treated me is not a crime. But they won't because they want to protect the criminals, the police. All reports say they are innocent in everything they have done. We can't prove there is a cover up but we think it is a cover up .Because it will look bad for the police, they won't do that because the BBC is part of the government."

The move is indeed a strange one given that the BBC had, according to the award-winning producer of the project, previously been touting the drama as "the most important television commission of the year".

So did the government have a hand to play in the decision as Pereira suggests? It is not so far fetched to imagine so, particularly given that the BBC has been on a tight leash ever since the 45 minute warning revelations and the dodgy Iraq dossier business in the aftermath of the invasion of Iraq.

The government has certainly gone to great lengths in the past to cover up the murder of de Menezes. It would be no surprise if this was a continuation of that policy.

Full story...

MI5 Dame: British Intelligence Busy Creating Terror Events

Unfortunately "Spooks" is just a TV show and the BBC does a good job of portraying them in a very good light. Unfortunately I don't think reality matches up with fantasy in this case.

Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller, director general of MI5, wants Brits to be afraid.

“There are up to 30 alleged ‘mass casualty’ terror plots in operation in Britain, as well as hundreds of young British Muslims on a path to radicalization,” reports the Independent. “Describing the scale of the home-grown terrorist problem, she said MI5 and the police were tackling 200 groups or networks totalling more than 1,600 identified individuals in the UK who were ‘actively engaged in plotting or facilitating terrorist acts,’” never mind that such terrorist acts rarely come to fruition, usually instead sputtering out into absurd allegations of liquid bombs and other fantastical plots nipped in the bud, or so we are expected to believe, that is after we suspend credibility, again for the umpteenth time.

In addition to freeze-drying credibility, Manningham-Buller would have us stooped with amnesia as well.

A bit of Google sleuthing produces embarrassing results on the depth and breadth of British involvement in terrorism. For instance, as it now appears, the so-called Dirty War in Northern Ireland was an MI5 affair, with the Brits going so far as to provide “infra-red equipment which was used to provide the IRA with state-of-the-art bomb detonation technology,” according to the Sunday Herald. According to “a former soldier who joined the Provisional IRA at army intelligence’s request,” reported the Guardian in 2002, both MI5 and the FBI were in on the act. As well, it turns out some of the most violent and feared members of the IRA were in fact members of Britain’s special forces, including John Joe Magee, billed as the IRA’s “torturer-in-chief,” again according to Neil Mackay, Home Affairs Editor of the Sunday Herald.

Contrast Manningham-Buller’s comments, obviously designed to trick the gullible into accepting more police state intrusion, with the reported fact British intelligence put Abu Qatada—the “alleged spiritual leader of the al-Qaida terrorist network,” “Osama bin Laden’s right-hand man in Europe,” and “believed by several European countries to be a pivotal figure in international terrorism”—up in a safe house, an assertion apparently corroborated by French intelligence, according to the Guardian. Instead of delivering Qatada to justice, “British security services offered him a chance to escape to Afghanistan,” the Guardian reported elsewhere. In fact, if we are to believe a report published by the Times Online, Qatada “has been revealed as a double agent working for MI5.”

In addition, British intelligence nurtured al-Muhajiroun, said to be a recruiting arm for al-Qaeda in London, run out of the Finsbury Mosque and managed one Abu Hamza al-Masri, now in prison. Abu Hamza al-Masri’s right-hand man, Haroon Rashid Aswat, “is believed to be the mastermind of all the bombings in London,” according to intelligence expert John Loftus. Aswat had connections to British intelligence and while “the entire British police are out chasing him … one wing of the British government, MI-6 or the British Secret Service, has been hiding him.”

But, according to two French intelligence experts, it is worse, far worse. “British intelligence paid large sums of money to an al-Qaeda cell in Libya in a doomed attempt to assassinate Colonel Gadaffi in 1996 and thwarted early attempts to bring Osama bin Laden to justice,” the London Observer reported in November, 2002. “The latest claims of MI6 involvement with Libya’s fearsome Islamic Fighting Group, which is connected to one of bin Laden’s trusted lieutenants.”

Because “of the sheer scale of what MI5 faces, the issue” of preventing terrorism “is a daunting one,” Manningham-Buller told the department of contemporary British History at Queen Mary College in London. Or rather, considering the above, because of the sheer scale of what MI5, MI6, the CIA, FBI, Mossad have created through collaboration, the issue of preventing “30 alleged ‘mass casualty’ terror plots” will be daunting unless the British people consent to live in a police state.

Full story...

London Bombs - unanswered questions

London Bombs - unanswered questions

1. Was Netanyahu warned in advance?
A report published by the Associated Press (AP) at 12:16 p.m. on July 7, authored by Amy Teibel in Jerusalem, stated, “British police told the Israeli Embassy in London minutes before Thursday’s explosions that they had received warnings of possible terror attacks in the city, a senior Israeli official said... Benjamin Netanyahu had planned to attend an economic conference in a hotel over the subway stop where one of the blasts occurred, and the warning prompted him to stay in his hotel room instead, government officials said."
Unanswered questions in London bombings
2. Were the explosives C4?

LONDON, July 13 (UPI) -- Scotland Yard has asked for European cooperation in finding how last week's London subway and bus bombers obtained military plastic explosives.
Traces of the explosive known as C4 were found at all four blast sites...
ScienceDaily: London explosives have military origin
3. Why did the authorities lie when they said Khan and the other alleged terrorists had not come to their attention before the attacks?
Court documents show that Khan and another of the bombers had been under surveillance by anti-terrorism officers more than a year beforehand and had been in contact with a suspected British terrorism cell.
The security services had links to the four July 7 London 'bombers' a year before July 7th.
4. Why did the police claim that Aswat had made telephone calls to the alleged bombers, and then declare that Aswat was of no interest in the bomb investigation?
Is it true that Aswat was an MI6 agent provocateur?
Former Justice Dept. prosecutor John Loftus claims alleged London bombing mastermind Haroon Rashid Aswat is a "double agent" who "works for the MI6".
London bombs: former UK cabinet minister Meacher says MI6 is trying to cover its tracks.
5. One witness, Bruce Lait, suggested that the bombs had been placed under the trains. He said he saw no bomber or rucksack in the place where the bomb went off. Has this witness been interviewed?
Bruce Lait - I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag.
Bombs went off under the trains - eye witnesses
6. Were the 7/7 bombers movements physically possible?

"7/7 Bombers" movements Physically Impossible
7. Did the alleged bombers have doubles? Apparently there was more than one Mohamed Atta and more than one Lee Harvey Oswald.
8. Was the number 30 bus interfered with by elements of the security services?
The CCTV cameras on the bus bombed on 7 July - an e mail from a Stagecoach employee
9. Who is Anthony Larkin?
Anthony Larkin
10. Does the terror drill suggest involvement by elements of the security services?
Terror drill on morning of 7 July
~
Police chief- Lockerbie evidence was faked
Operation Gladio: Template for the War on Terror
The Gunpowder Plot of 1605
Bristol Evening Post report on David Shayler's claims that 9 11 was the work of elements of the US government and that Blair worked for MI5
Official version of 7/7 London bombings does not make sense
http://www.london77truth.com/
London Bombings Data Page
http://london-bombs.blogspot.com/
Was 7/7 designed to convince us that 9/11 was not really the work of people at the Pentagon and their allies in various governments?

The Al Qaeda Myth

by Tom Porteous

We now know that Al Qaeda had nothing to do with the London bombings in July 2005. This is the conclusion of the British government's official inquiry report leaked to the British press on April 9.

We now also know that the U.S. military is deliberately misleading Iraqis, Americans and the rest of the world about the extent of Al Qaeda's involvement in the Iraqi insurgency. This was reported in The Washington Post on April 10, on the basis of internal military documents seen by that newspaper.

What do these revelations tell us about the arguments of President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Blair that in Al Qaeda the "Free World" faces a threat comparable to that of the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, a world-wide terrorist network which seeks to build a radical Islamist empire over half the world?

That they are threadbare, to say the least. But also that they are cynical, misleading and self serving.

The London bombings, it turns out, were the work of four alienated British Muslims, with no links to "international terrorist networks", who had learned how to make bombs by trawling the Internet. They had been radicalized and motivated, according to the report, by British foreign policies in the Muslim world—a view Tony Blair has consistently sought to undermine and discredit.

The role of the alleged "Al Qaeda mastermind in Iraq," Abu Musab Al Zarqawi, we are now told, was cynically misrepresented and exaggerated by the U.S. military's propaganda units in an effort to discredit and divide the Iraqi insurgency and to provide a retrospective justification for the Iraq war by suggesting a link between Iraq and 9/11.

Wherever in the world Al Qaeda crops up, its appearance has often been uncannily convenient for the local authorities—dictators, warlords, occupation forces and elected governments alike. And often the precise nature of the Al Qaeda connection turns out, on close examination, to be tenuous or non-existent. But by that time the message has gone out and sunk in: "Al Qaeda was here".

It's almost certain that as the United States ratchets up the pressure on Iran in the coming months the non-issue of Tehran 's "links" with Al Qaeda will come to the fore. In fact the groundwork is already being laid. Blair, no less, said ominously in a speech last month that although "the conventional view is that Iran is hostile to Al Qaeda: we know from our own history of conflict that, under the pressure of battle, alliances shift and change." So as the confrontation with Iran builds, watch out for leaked reports from anonymous security officials about dastardly Iranian-Al Qaeda conspiracies.

Stripped of exaggeration, romanticism, demonization and myth making, the picture of Al Qaeda which has emerged from the trial in the United States of Zacarias Moussaoui is of a fractious organisation that has been a magnet for bewildered martyrdom-seeking fantasists. At least this has a ring of truth to it.

This is not to say that Al Qaeda is not dangerous. It is a serious security challenge. It may even one day be a strategic threat, especially if it gets hold of some WMD. But it is not the threat Bush and Blair tell us it is.

The recent revelations of the non-existent role of Al Qaeda in the London bombings and of the Pentagon's deliberate exaggeration of Al Qaeda's role in Iraq reinforce the argument that in their response to the threat of Al Qaeda (the so called "war on terror," or "Long War"), the United States and its allies are making strategic errors of monumental proportions.

First, this war, as it is being fought in Iraq and Afghanistan, is not principally fighting "Al Qaeda" but is creating and fighting new enemies: people who don't like being invaded, occupied and kicked around by foreigners and who are prepared to stand up and resist. These people may eventually become terrorists. But it will have been U.S. policies that created them. If Iran is next on the Pentagon's list, the same thing will happen there. To the extent that Israel is seen by the United States as pursuing its own war on terror in the Palestinian territories it occupies, it is happening in Gaza and the West Bank too.

Second, the Long War is a distraction from the real issues which need to be addressed as a matter of urgency in order to reduce conflict, violence and injustice in the region and thus to reduce the radicalization of a generation of angry and alienated Muslim youth at home and in the diasporas. These include: ending the Israeli occupation of occupied Palestinian territories through negotiation; pursuing peaceful nuclear reduction throughout the region; and engaging seriously with political Islam. Talk of "democratization" without engaging with political Islam is nonsense.

Third, on the grounds that it is fighting a "just war," the United States and its allies have justified using levels of violence, coercion and repression—including torture, collective punishment and the killing of large numbers of civilians—which are not only of questionable tactical efficacy, but have led to a collapse of U.S. prestige in a part of the world where it has long been seen as a necessary protector, stabilizer and arbiter.

The fact that there was no operational link between the London bombers and Al Qaeda shows that its real danger lies in its ability to inspire terrorist attacks. In this it has no better allies and collaborators at present than the United States and Britain under their current leaders.

Copyright © 2006 Tom Porteous / Agence Global

Full story...

Latest footage of London Bomber: More evidence of a frame up

by Steve Watson

One of the suicide bombers who attacked London on 7 July was filmed arguing with a cashier about being shortchanged hours before he blew himself up, The London Independent reported yesterday.

A Metropolitan Police counter terrorist expert also told a seminar that the four terrorists - Mohammad Sidique Khan, 30, Shehzad Tanweer, 22, Germaine Lindsay, 19, and Hasib Hussain, 18, - did not fit the preconceived terrorist profile.

The official told the seminar held in Preston, Lancashire two weeks ago: "This is not the behaviour of a terrorist - you'd think this is normal.

"Tanweer also played a game of cricket the night before he traveled down to London - now are these the actions of someone who is going to blow themselves up the next day?

"I've seen the CCTV footage of these people. They do not appear to be on their way to commit any crime at all. The Russell Square bomber [Hasib Hussain] is actually seen going into shops and bumping into people [prior to his attack]." The expert said.

An image taken from closed-circuit TV footage shows Shehzad Tanweer (left) and Germaine Lindsay at King’s Cross Underground station in central London.

These revelations are yet more evidence to suggest that the so called "suicide bombers" had little or no idea that they were going to die on 7/7.

Recapping the evidence
1. The bombers bought round-trip train tickets and paid for long-term parking -- According to experts who have been briefed by police, they parked a rental car outside the train station and paid to park for seven days, then purchased round-trip tickets to London.

2. Bombs were left in the car, If you were going to use four bombs in four locations, blowing yourself up in the process, why would you leave extra bombs in your hire car for the police to find? Also one of the bombers had spent a lot recently repairing his car.

3. No suicide notes or videotaped messages for their families have surfaced as has happened in attacks elsewhere.

4. Filmed by the closed-circuit cameras at the station, the four men looked, the police said, like "happy hikers", laughing and joking and carrying heavy bags. - London Independent | July 17 2005

5. Cash cards and a driving license belonging to Hasib Hussain were found among the ruins of the No 30 bus. Documents belonging to his named friends were also discovered at the Underground bomb sites. Why would suicide bombers carry personal documents?Were they under the impression they would be traveling elsewhere after they blew themselves up? Plus how is it that paper documents can survive bomb blasts that rip apart steel and people?

6. Why did Hasib Hussain's bomb detonate later and why was he on a bus? His chosen route was closed but he could have simply got on another tube line. There were reports of a man on the number 30 bus rummaging frantically in his bag just before the explosion. Did Hussain hear about the other explosions and panic? It was also revealed that he stopped off for a Big Mac. A portrait of a really hard-core Muslim fundamentalist who hates Western values, visiting McDonald's before 'blowing himself up'.

7. How very convenient that all of the suspected patsies should have been blown up in their own attacks even though the last word was that the attacks were not suicide bombings, but synchronized, timed bombings.

8. Tube survivor Bruce Lait told local media the bomb was UNDER the train - "The policeman said 'mind that hole, that's where the bomb was'. The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train. They seem to think the bomb was left in a bag, but I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag," he said.

Another credible source, Guardian journalist Mark Honigsbaum, talked to eyewitnesses at the Edgware Road bombing, who essentially described the same thing. Eyewitnesses told Honigsbaum that "tiles, the covers on the floor of the train, suddenly flew up, raised up." Click here to hear the audio.

9. The claim from an "Al Qaeda group" that the bombers were working for them was proven to be a hoax.

10. The bombers have been described as four "nice lads", "normal kids who played basketball and kicked a ball around" , one was the son of a fish n chip shop owner, one was a primary teacher. Their immediate family of one of the bombers, the 22 year old sports science graduate, have been quoted as saying they "could not comprehend why he had become a mass murderer."

HOW DID THESE NICE YOUNG LADS GET THEIR HANDS ON MILITARY GRADE HIGH EXPLOSIVES AND IF THEIR HOUSES WERE FULL OF THEM, ENOUGH TO WARRANT THE EVACUATION OF 600 PEOPLE FROM THE AREA THEN WOULDN'T THEIR FAMILIES HAVE NOTICED?

The Frame up
There have been multiple in depth reports on the fact that these men do not fit the profile of hard-core terrorists and were actually likable people that had everything to live for. See the reports below:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2005/140705frameup.htm

http://www.prisonplanet.com/Pages/Jul05/170705questions.html

When a video tape of Mohammad Sidique Khan was released showing him in Arab garb and talking about committing bombings, his former friends and locals who knew him were adamant that the tape was fake. "A lot of people loved him round here. I have known him all my life, he was a friend to everyone," said one man. "I know people can change in a second, but I can't say he is one of them. He taught my son, he was a very good teacher. He was never hard-line - no one could say he was an extremist - he was peaceful and dedicated to the children. They all loved him."

The familes of the bombers to this day still remain "mystified" as to why they would do such a thing.

Similarly when a suspect of the failed 21/7 bombings was captured in Rome, people who knew him were "shocked" that he would have even considered such activities. These people are patsies that believe they are taking part in exercises or drills and when the events actually go live they are either blown up or grabbed as the culprits and linked with phony Al Qaeda groups.

In the case of the Madrid bombers they were cornered in a hotel and then they blew themselves up. Mmmmm how convenient. It was later revealed that two of them were police informants and they were linked with the head of Spain’s Civil Guard bomb squad.

We have extensively documented how drills of bombs on tube trains were being run in the same locations at the same time on 7/7. The same thing happened on 9/11. These drills are used as cover so to dupe those involved and also slow down or halt reactions of emergency services and the like in the immediate aftermath.

The Government can then use the excuse of the terror attack to crack down on the population and instigate draconian legislation and restrict freedom, thus empowering itself tenfold whilst claiming it is merely protecting its people. We have seen this with new terror laws, free speech areas and ID card legislation being tabled in the UK.

The final nail in the coffin regarding inside involvement emerged when it was admitted that the so-called mastermind of both the 7/7 and 7/21 attacks, Haroon Rashid Aswat, is a British Intelligence Asset.

Terror expert John Loftus told Fox News,

"Back in 1999 he came to America. The Justice Department wanted to indict him in Seattle because him and his buddy were trying to set up a terrorist training school in Oregon... we've just learned that the headquarters of the US Justice Department ordered the Seattle prosecutors not to touch Aswat... , apparently Aswat was working for British intelligence."

The Independent on Sunday reveled that one of the bombers, Khan, did have links - including telephone contact - with Aswat. A security source revealed that MI5 was so overstretched at the time that it had to ask for agents from its sister force, MI6, to be recalled from abroad to help keep track of suspects. Although Khan's name came up during the course of inquiries, he was not questioned.

Khan was well known to and had been filmed by British Intelligence.

The mastermind of the London bombings was under the direction and protection of MI6. The lead London Bomber was in contact with Aswat days beforehand. How much more obvious does it need to be that criminal elements of the intelligence agencies were involved in this attack?

Related: London Bombings Data Page

Defeating terror may mean giving up rights, MI5 warns

The head of MI5 has publicly backed Tony Blair’s warning that the rules of how Britain combats the threat of terrorism have to change.

In a break with tradition, Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller, Director-General of MI5, allowed a confidential speech that she had given to Dutch intelligence officers to be published on the agency’s website yesterday. She gave a warning that an erosion of civil liberties might be necessary to stop more British citizens from being killed by terrorists.

Her intervention will provide ammunition for the Prime Minister and Charles Clarke, the Home Secretary, in their battle with the courts over dealing with suspected terrorists. It will also bolster the Government’s struggle to introduce rules to make it easier to deport foreign preachers of hate.

The arrests of radical clerics, promised by Mr Clarke, have been delayed, and European ministers at an anti-terrorism conference in Newcastle this week frustrated his plan to store mobile phone records for a year.

Dame Eliza does not specify which human rights need to be compromised to help the intelligence agencies and police to cope with the threat of attacks, but her intervention is certain to intensify the debate among MPs and human rights groups.

Dame Eliza insisted that MI5 would not be “coerced” into sharing intelligence with friendly agencies.

Mr Clarke faced strong opposition to his call for tougher counter-terrorism laws after the July 7 and July 21 attacks in London, when he addressed the European Parliament in Strasbourg this week.

Dame Eliza, speaking in The Hague on September 1 at a meeting to mark the 60th anniversary of the founding of the Dutch General Intelligence and Security Service, made it clear that she had serious concerns about trying to counter the terrorist threat without greater powers, even if that meant encroaching on human rights.

Echoing words used by the Prime Minister, Dame Eliza said: “The world has changed and there needs to be a debate on whether some erosion of what we all value may be necessary to improve the chances of our citizens not being blown apart as they go about their daily lives.”

She admitted that the July attacks in London had been “a shock” to MI5 and to the police, but said that intelligence was always going to be fragmentary and incomplete.

She praised the response of the public to the bombings and people’s refusal to be cowed. Most people, she said, understood that the attacks were “on all our citizens, whatever the ethnic origins”.

The central dilemma for MI5 and other agencies, and for the Government, was trying to protect British citizens “within the rule of law when intelligence does not amount to clear-cut evidence and when it’s fragile”.

Dame Eliza said that she wished to do nothing that would damage “hard-fought-for [human] rights”. But trying to contain terrorism in a democratic society was “not straightforward”.

Full story...

A plot by a secretive section of the military to kill De Menezes as part of a strategy of tension?

The Sunday Herald and the Observer have new revelations about the de Menezes murder.

~

There has been speculation that all the recent terror incidents in London are part of a 'strategy of tension' similar to that which brought terror to Greece, Italy and Turkey in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s.

It looks as if there were (at least) two groups who were involved in the pursuit of de Menezes:

1. The police
2. A shadowy military group

Senior sources in the Metropolitan Police have told The Observer (21 August 2005) that

1. their surveillance officers felt that de Menezes was not about to detonate a bomb,
2. was not armed
3. and was not acting suspiciously.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1553440,00.html

A police source said: 'There is no way those three guys would have been on the train carriage with him [de Menezes] if they believed he was carrying a bomb. Nothing he did gave the surveillance team the impression that he was carrying a device.'

It was only when they were joined by 'armed officers' that things changed.

The Sunday Herald, which often has the best sources on security matters, tells us about the Special Reconnaissance Regiment (SRR).

http://www.sundayherald.com/51372

The Sunday Herald, 21 August 2005, tells us about the monitoring of the flat in Scotia Road, Tulse Hill, in south London.

The address was said to be linked to alleged bomber Hussein Osman.( Hussain Osman - arrested in Rome )

Among the surveillance team in Scotia Road was a soldier from a new “special forces” regiment -the Special Reconnaissance Regiment (SRR).

James Cusick, in the Sunday Herald, writes:

"According to security sources, SRR personnel were involved in the tailing operation that saw de Menezes leave the block of flats, board a bus, and then enter the tube station at Stockwell. SRR personnel are also believed to have been on the tube train when he was shot.

"The SRR soldier at Scotia Road (given the codename Tango 10) used equipment which sent realtime pictures of all who came and went from the flats. Those receiving the pictures could check them against footage of who they were looking for. One security source said: 'In this kind of operation you never leave. You need to pee: you use a bottle; if there’s no bottle, tough. You never leave.'

"The police account says there is no footage of de Menezes leaving because the SRR soldier had to relieve himself. The police account says he sent out a message calling the man who left [de Menezes] an 'ICI' – a white northern European...

"Hussein Osman – arrested in Rome and scheduled for deportation to the UK within the next two months – was not an ICI. The CCTV footage of Osman the police held showed an Asian/north African male.

"De Menezes took a bus to Stockwell tube station, stopping briefly at Brixton...

"It is also understood that the senior police officer in charge of the operation, Commander Cressida Dick, had ordered de Menezes at this stage to be detained before he went into the tube station and that he should be alive...

"So why was de Menezes not stopped before the station?"

Both members of the police and the mysterious second group were on the train with de Menezes. Members of the mysterious second group murdered de Menezes.

"A security agency source contacted by the Sunday Herald said: 'This take-out is the signature of a special forces operation. It is not the way the police usually do things.... this has special forces written all over it.'”

The Sunday Herald points out:

"The initial post-mortem report into de Menezes’s death states the young Brazilian had 'vaulted over the ticket barrier'.

"A post-mortem report does not take its information from media reports. The police are contacted directly and written accounts are delivered. Details of the barrier being “vaulted” therefore came from the police. Why?

"And why at 4pm – five hours after the shooting – when the police would have known they had not killed Hussein Osman but a young Brazilian, did Sir Ian hold a press conference and insist that the shooting was 'directly linked' to the anti-terrorist operation?"

~~

What about the de menezes flat? Did Osman really live there?

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1553440,00.html

From the Observer, 21 August 2005:

"Questions have been raised about the accuracy of the police intelligence that led to the raid on the block of flats occupied by de Menezes. It was initially suggested that the flat was connected to the man known as Hussein Osman, who was arrested in Italy.

"On the Saturday after the shooting, officers raided the flat in a high-profile operation watched by the world's media. As a result, a man, identified only as 'C', was arrested 'on suspicion of the commission, instigation or preparation of acts of terrorism'. But he was released on 30 July with no charge, raising the possibility that the flats had no connection with the bombings."

~

Was there a plot to fool the public?

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/anthonylarkin.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4706787.stm

A passenger on the train, Anthony Larkin, told BBC News the man appeared to be wearing a "bomb belt with wires coming out".The 'man' was Brazilian Jean Charles de Menezes, who was shot by government agents.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4706913.stm

Commuter Anthony Larkin, who was also on the train at Stockwell station, told 5 Live he saw police chasing a man.

"I saw these police officers in uniform and out of uniform shouting 'get down, get down', and I saw this guy who appeared to have a bomb belt and wires coming out and people were panicking and I heard two shots being fired."

...

Is the Anthony Larkin named above the same as the one named below?

www.cmr.qmul.ac.uk/cmrpeople.php?uid=130
(Accessible via a Google search for Anthony Larkin, cached page)

Mr Tony LarkinLead scientist, MET police. Forensic scientist Tel: Location: Mile End. Expertise: Forensic Science

http://news.scotsman.com/headlines.cfm?id=211762005

Anthony Larkin, the lead evidence recovery scientist with the Metropolitan Police...

~~

Did elements of the security services hope to fool the public into thinking that the person who was shot was one of the 'bombers' such as Hussain Osman - arrested in Rome .

Hussein Osman, who also uses the name Hamdi Isaac, moved to Rome by Eurostar five days after the 21 July attacks in London. His passport was not checked by the British at Waterloo.

~~

Operation Gladio and the 'strategy of tension' in Italy beginning in 1969.

Operation Gladio was organised by 'fascists' within the security services of the West.

Reportedly, the idea was to kill innocent people and then blame this on others.

Gladio was about keeping the right-wing elite in power.

Gladio agent Vincenzo Vinciguerra stated, in sworn testimony:

'You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple: to force ... the public to turn to the state to ask for greater security.'

Italian Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti revealed the existence of Gladio in 1991.

Parliamentary investigations in Italy, Switzerland and Belgium have given us a little of the truth.

The book "NATO's Secret Armies: Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe," by Daniele Ganser documents some of what we know so far.

Run by fascist elements in NATO and Washington, right-wing militias carried out acts of terrorism and electoral subversion in states such as Italy, France, Spain, Portugal, Greece, Turkey and West Germany.

Gladio was the name used in Italy. In Austria the name was Schwert, Belgium -Sdra 8, Britain - Stay Behind, France - Glaive, Greece -Operation Sheepskin, Holland, Sweden -Sveaborg, Switzerland -P26 and Turkey -Special War Department. [Source: "Operation Gladio." users.westnet.gr/~cgian/gladio.htm]

A Pentagon document, Field Manual FM 30-31B, details the methods for launching terrorist attacks.85 people were killed on August 2, 1980 in the bombing of the Bologna train station.

According to the Italian Senate, after its investigation in 2000, the bombers were later discovered to be "men inside Italian state institutions and ... men linked to the structures of United States intelligence."

The Bologna bomb was part of Gladio's " strategy of tension" - fomenting fear to keep populations in thrall to "strong leaders" who will protect the nation from the ever-present terrorist threat.

The beginning of the 'strategy of tension' in Italy came in Dec. 12, 1969 when a bomb exploded inside the Banca Nazionale dell' Agricoltura in Milan's Piazza Fontana. 16 people were killed and 58 wounded.

Full story...

Blair to curb human rights in war on terror

"All governments are lying cocksuckers, I hope you know that." - Bill Hicks

Ultimately, this is why the bombs went off and all those people died. More moves to turn this country into a police state. And people seem to welcome it with open arms. Westminster and the media whores have them all so scared that I've seen people getting off buses in Brighton when Muslim guys with rucksacks get on. It shows you how ill-informed certain sections of this country are, thanks largely to the efforts of Rupert Murdoch I might add. It's rather frightening when one thinks about it.

Tony Blair served notice yesterday that he was ready to renounce parts of the European convention on human rights if British and European judges continued to block the deportation of Islamic extremists in the wake of the London bombings.

In a significant shift away from the human rights policies championed by Labour since 1997, Mr Blair indicated that he was no longer prepared to allow Britain to be a haven for Muslim extremists whose presence in London has resulted in its being dubbed "Londonistan".

He said he was prepared for "a lot of battles" with the courts, which have repeatedly intervened to prevent the Home Secretary from deporting "preachers of hate" and other foreign nationals regarded as a threat to national security.

"Should legal obstacles arise, we will legislate further, including, if necessary, amending the Human Rights Act in respect of the interpretation of the European convention on human rights," the Prime Minister said.

At a Downing Street press conference before leaving for his summer holiday, he outlined 12 far-reaching curbs on civil liberties to tackle the growth of Islamic extremism.

The sweeping package of anti-terrorist laws included deporting Islamic extremists, closing mosques that fomented hatred, outlawing radical Muslim groups such as Hizb-ut-Tahrir, vetting foreign imams before they came to Britain and stronger powers to deal with home-grown fanatics.

Mr Blair said that because of the London bombings the public wanted new laws to deport and exclude religious fanatics and extremists who were abusing the country's traditional values of tolerance and fair play. The mood was now different and people no longer accused the Government of "scaremongering".

"Let no one be in any doubt," he said, "the rules of the games are changing."

At the heart of the security measures was Mr Blair's determination to regain the right of the elected government to deport foreigners it believed posed a threat to national security.

This was a recognition that the Human Rights Act, introduced by Labour in 1998, had made it virtually impossible to deport foreign militants and enabled the law lords to strike down anti-terrorism laws because they considered them incompatible with the European convention.

Mr Blair's wife, Cherie, a human rights lawyer, has said that the Government should not be provoked into interfering with the independence of the courts. Questioned about her views, the Prime Minister said the right to life and freedom from terrorism was a basic human right.

New grounds for deportation published by the Home Office included fostering hatred, advocating or justifying violence, or active engagement with extremist websites, bookshops and networks.

Mr Blair acknowledged that, since 1996, deportations had been blocked as a result of a European Court ruling that article 3 of the convention on human rights prevented people from being sent back to countries where they could face torture or ill-treatment. He said the circumstances of Britain's national security had changed and the Government was ready to test its new powers in the courts at home and in Europe.

The Government was seeking assurances from the countries where deportees would be returned that they would not be ill-treated. Agreement had been reached with Jordan and discussions were continuing with 10 other countries, including Algeria and Lebanon.

In what will be seen as a plea to British and European judges to reflect the public demand for action, Mr Blair said that France and Spain, both subject to the same human rights convention, were able to deport by administrative decision, with their courts ready to accept assurances that deportees would not be ill-treated on their return.

David Davis, the shadow home secretary, welcomed the Government's proposals. He said it was vital that the Home Secretary was able to use his powers to deport or exclude non-British citizens who threatened national security.

Mr Blair ran into opposition from civil rights campaigners and the Liberal Democrats, who said the Government risked inflaming tensions and alienating Muslims.

Eric Metcalfe, of the human rights group Justice, predicted that any attempt to amend the Human Rights Act to force the courts to deport foreigners was "doomed to failure".

Full story...

7/7 Bombings Final Word: Her Majesty's Terrorist Network

The chaps at propagandamatrix.com are to be commended for their dilligent following of this story. It's because of them that a lot of the story has emerged and we owe them a debt of gratitude. Make sure you visit their site and buy one of their t-shirts!

Only conspiracy theorists would believe the government wasn't involved

by Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones

The wealth of evidence that has emerged in the month following the 7/7 London bombings only leads us to one clear conclusion, that the attacks had to have been orchestrated by or with help from the very highest levels of British intelligence.

The latest piece of evidence to suggest that the official story is a fraud focuses again on the contention that the bombs were placed under the trains and were not detonated by suicide bombers wearing backpacks.

The first eyewitness to report this was Bruce Lait, a victim of the Aldgate Station bombing.

He told the Cambridge Evening News,

"The policeman said 'mind that hole, that's where the bomb was'. The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train. They seem to think the bomb was left in a bag, but I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag."

Now another credible source, Guardian journalist Mark Honigsbaum, talked to eyewitnesses at the Edgware Road bombing, who essentially described the same thing.

Eyewitnesses told Honigsbaum that "tiles, the covers on the floor of the train, suddenly flew up, raised up."

How could the floor of the train raise up from a bomb supposedly in the backpack of an individual seated in the carriage, above the floor?

The victims then heard "an almighty crash" as a train traveling in the opposite direction collided, clearly indicating that the train had derailed due to the bomb being placed under the carriage.

Click here to hear the audio.

For individuals to plant bombs underneath trains and secure them in place without being caught, they would need to secure access to the trains. In this scenario, London Underground could have been told that a dummy device was to be placed underneath the train as part of an exercise to test security an alertness. When the real attacks happened some LU officials would have been alarmed but their suspicions would have dampened when it was revealed that the bombs were carried in backpacks, meaning that the drill was just a strange 'coincidence'.

The fact that the bombs were actually planted underneath the trains could have easily been buried in an avalanche of official announcements to the contrary.

On the other hand the backpack bombs could have just been the diversionary blasts to enable patsies to be framed, just like the planes flying into the towers acted as the diversionary cover for the explosives planted inside the World Trade Center.

The fact that the ID's of all the so-called suicide bombers were found in pristine condition right next to where the bombs went off strongly suggests the planting of evidence to frame patsies. The ID's would have had a very good chance of surviving if the bomb was not in the backpack with them, but underneath the train.

The drill scenario would have provided culpability cover if investigators started asking questions about objects underneath the carriage.

As we have exhaustively documented, such a drill did take place on the morning of 7/7.

A consultancy agency with government and police connections was running an exercise for an unnamed company that revolved around the London Underground being bombed at the exact same times and locations as happened in real life on the morning of July 7th.

On a BBC Radio 5 interview that aired on the evening of the 7th, the host interviewed Peter Power, Managing Director of Visor Consultants, which bills itself as a 'crisis management' advice company, better known to you and I as a PR firm.

Peter Power was a former Scotland Yard official, working at one time with the Anti Terrorist Branch.

Power told the host that at the exact same time that the London bombings were taking place, his company was running a 1,000 person strong exercise which drilled the London Underground being bombed at the exact same locations, at the exact same times, as happened in real life.

How can anyone credibly claim that this was sheer coincidence when pieced together with the rest of the evidence?

Our original article on this matter is the top link on Google when you type in 'London bombing' - above BBC, CNN and ABC News, proof of how much attention this article received.

Our suspicions were aroused just hours after the bombing when it was reported by Associated Press that Israeli Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had received a warning from the Israeli Embassy not to leave his hotel for a speech he was to give that morning. The location of the speech was right next to the site of one of the bombings.

Despite debunking attempts from much of the establishment press, Associated Press never retracted the story and later Mossad admitted that it was true.

The so-called claim of responsibility for the attack was made by a group that is known to not physically exist and which at best is one guy sitting at a computer posting messages on a forum.

And yet the establishment media still report Al-Qaeda responsibility for the attack as if it were the gospel truth.

Exactly what evidence have we seen to even agree with the contention that four men with rucksack bombs carried out this attack? Four grainy CCTV pictures of dark skinned men with rucksacks? Should we not question this evidence especially when verified witnesses on two of the three trains that were bombed said that the bombs were underneath the train and that they saw no men with rucksacks even in the area?

Questions about the attacks are never ending.

Why was it reported that the explosives used were military in origin but then the story changed to say they were homemade? Can explosive experts not tell the difference or was the story changed for a reason?

Why would a man with an 8-month old baby, another who was only interested in sports, and another who taught disabled children, want to kill themselves, other innocent people and cause so much carnage in the process?

Even the establishment media started speculating that the bombers were duped into killing themselves by someone else.

Why did the cameras on the targeted bus malfunction that day? Why was the bus diverted from its usual route? We personally visited the site of the bus bombing at Tavistock Place and verified that no number 30 bus travels down that road.

What are we to make of claims by Stagecoach bus employees who say that a different group of contractors inspected the CCTV cameras in the days before the bombings and that they took two entire days to carry out tasks which normally take just hours to complete.

What is the reason behind Alan Greenspan's decision to flush nearly $40 billion in liquidity into financial markets two days before the attack? Was this an attempt to preemptively head off a run on the markets? If Greenspan had information about a terror attack then why didn't the people on the trains and buses get the same warning?

Who were the individuals that profited from short-selling the British Pound in the ten days before the attack? The pound fell 6% for no particular reason. Fortunes were made after the pound dropped even further in the aftermath of the attacks. This directly mirrors short selling of United and American Airline stocks in the days before 9/11. These suspicious transactions led directly to the CIA.

Why was an innocent man, Jean Charles de Menezes, shot in the head eight times at Stockwell tube station? Why did the police change their story, from saying Menezes was wearing a heavy jacket to admitting it was a lightweight denim jacket? Why did the media initially report that Menezes was shot in the stomach but then change the story when it was pointed out that it would be stupid to shoot suspected suicide bombers in the very place that the bomb would be.

Was Menezes shot because he knew something about the drills? Menezes was an electrician by trade. Did he have damaging knowledge of why the bombings were reported as an electrical surge for over an hour?

Why did Tony Blair immediately reject a public inquiry into how and why the bombings took place? In Britain, there is a public inquiry for every event, no matter how insignificant, and yet after Britain's biggest tragedy since the blitz, Blair shuts the door. What is he frightened of?

The final nail in the coffin regarding inside involvement emerged when it was admitted that the so-called mastermind of both the 7/7 and 7/21 attacks, Haroon Rashid Aswat, is a British Intelligence Asset.

Terror expert John Loftus told Fox News,

"Back in 1999 he came to America. The Justice Department wanted to indict him in Seattle because him and his buddy were trying to set up a terrorist training school in Oregon... we've just learned that the headquarters of the US Justice Department ordered the Seattle prosecutors not to touch Aswat... , apparently Aswat was working for British intelligence."

The mastermind of the London bombings was under the direction and protection of MI6. How much more obvious does it need to be that criminal elements of the intelligence agencies were involved in this attack?

Related: London Bombings Data Page

Dupes and dupers in London, America, and the world

How does it feel to be lied to, manipulated and generally treated like you're the dot above the "i" in the word "shit"? The bombs have given our Dear Leader the license to do whatever he wants. He and his friends, George and Arik, now continue their rampage across the civil liberties and lives of thousands. They inhabit the earth like a cancerous growth, out of control and destroying the very environment in which they exist. Working at the behest of their capitalist paymasters they know no remorse or guilt, nor do they grieve for the thousands that die in their meaningless wars. They just do what they're told, they hold us in contempt so why would they not easily sacrifice our lives in the name of power? They hold up their flags and banners as symbols for us to follow but I say that those banners are written in blood and any who follow them follow the way of blood and death, and ultimate disgrace. To be with them is to be on the side of darkness, to follow them is to damn yourself. Mark my words, this darkness must be stopped or humanity's days are numbered. If we allow it to cloak the world in night then nothing in our history will have prepared us for the consequences of the living hell which we will surely all inhabit thereafter. It may seem like you are one voice of sanity in a symphony of idiocy but you're wrong. The only idiocy is that which forms the systems of control in this world, they are drunk on their power and have lost the capacity for reason. They see only their goal and care not how it is achieved, the cost in human souls is irrelevant, they must prevail. But in the greater scheme of things they won't because even the smallest match can illuminate the darkest room. You are that match.

by Jerry Mazza

Now that the British police and intelligence are having second doubts about the four bombers being suicide bombers, the notion has surfaced that maybe they were duped into dying. The question is who are the dupers?

After all, each of the four young men who died (or vanished) on July 7 had purchased round trip railway tickets from Luton to London. I guess you wouldn't do that if you weren't planning to come back. Germaine Lindsay's rented car was left in Luton with a seven-day parking sticker on the dashboard. Also, a large quantity of explosive was left in the trunk of that car, maybe for a second round of bombings.

One of the other alleged bombers also had his car fixed, probably to insure a getaway. What's more, all the men carried driver's licenses and other ID cards with them to their deaths, unusual for suicide bombers, unless you were Mohammed Atta, and your ID somehow managed to pop up clean and clear as day in the wreckage of 9/11. That is, after the plane you flew into the tower exploded in flames and came down in a heap with the building. But that could be someone else's way of saying, hint, hint, it was him, he did it, which might indicate someone was trying to dupe us. Who could that have been?

Well let's think. Maybe the London guys carrying the bombs onto the trains were 'mules," who planned to just leave them to make a few bucks. Maybe they were angry young men making a political statement, maybe both. Their handler might have promised it was an in and out job and they could get out before the blast. The blasts might have surprised them as much as the horrified onlookers and victims. Bottom line, dead men tell no tales, which perhaps they never considered. But 57 minutes later, the fourth bomber, who I guess never bothered to check on his first three cohorts, went up in smoke the same way. Witnesses, it is said, actually saw him put his hand in the backpack—to ignite the bomb or look for his shades and split? We'll never know.

Then we have the July 21 bombers, exactly two weeks later, for whom practice obviously didn't make perfect. The bombs failed to explode. The bomber on the bus took off as the detonator fizzled. Did he and the others instantly assume they might be on their way to heaven? If so, maybe they weren't ready to meet the virgins waiting there. Maybe they were lightweights. And calling them suicide bombers, calling on the full flagon of fear from the English and Europe, was bloody unnecessary, and not a signal for a new level of threat. After all, it is easier to recruit "mules" than die-hard patsies, a la the 9/11 guys (if indeed they were) or Lee Harvey Oswalds (one or two of them), the genuine article(s) or even Jack Rubys, dying of cancer in jail, lips sealed in Omerta. So what are we dealing with here, and whom? In addition, the explosives went from being high level military material to home-brewed boom for the blooming home boys.

Supposedly there's some lively debate going on about the level of commitment and fear ratings in intelligence circles. Or maybe the intelligence agencies, MI-5, MI-6 or CIA, are purposely going round in circles to obfuscate. Because we all know, or should, this is an inside job, a booster shot for Tony Bliar's, excuse me, Tony Blair's War on Terror. Some people even think that saying, as the New York Times did, "that the initial hypothesis that the July 7 attacks were carried out by determined fanatics willing to die in the name of a radical interpretation of Islam may have been too simplistic." Well, it's good to see the investigative principal of questioning government press releases is still alive in the uptown press.

The Times went on to say that maybe these weren't "dedicated but stupid guys run by a smart group of people pulling the strings." Now there's a memorable line, a kind of one-size fits all terrorists' line. And maybe even Hanni Hanjor (the purported idiot, according to his flying instructor) who supposedly flew Flight 77, didn't know he was going down with the plane, if he and his buddies were on the four flights at all. They weren't listed on the manifests, nor did anyone actually prove they were on the planes.

But subsequently the so-called 19, 9/11 terrorists, their names and pictures were produced only 19 hours after the tragedies out of a hat by the same dysfunctional FBI that couldn't stop them in the first place. Is there a pattern here of disinformation along with dysfunction? And may it all be for the purpose of obfuscation, part of a process Webster Tarpley calls 'synthetic terror' in his new book, 911 Synthetic Terror- Made in USA, and in the London case, made in Great Britain.

Full story...

Why There Is No Inquiry into the London Bombings

by Trowbridge H. Ford

Whenever something dramatic happens in a country - whether it be an assassination of an important figure, an unexpected war with another nation, or a devastating attack on some treasured symbol - the public expects not only the perpetrators to be punished but also an official explanation of why it happened. It is all very necessary for the public to maintain trust in the officials it has chosen to lead it, and in the very government it has given its allegiance to, and supports with its taxes.

When the Japanese attack on Hawaii on December 7, 1941, for example, occurred, the American people did not expect FDR's government to claim that it was all some terrible mistake which could be resolved by negotiations, or something not worth fighting for. The public anticipated a no-nonsense reply from Washington, and the President did not disappoint it, calling upon a joint session of Congress to declare war on Japan because of its infamy, and appointing Secretary of State Frank Knox to investigate the causes of the terrible tragedy rather than just dismiss it as a ludicrous diversion.

While the Japanese militarists thought that America would throw in the towel when its jewel, the Pacific Fleet, was struck a "mortal blow" while at anchor in Pearl Harbor, Washington behaved in just the manner Japanese fleet commander, Admiral Isoruku Yamamoto, predicted - waking from its slumbers, and initiating a war of revenge no matter what while punishing the commanders on the scene, Vice Admiral Husband Kimmel, and General Walter Short, for their alleged dereliction of duty in allowing it to happen. Roosevelt's government had not taken seriously the possibility of the Japanese, a nation of "little yellow men", starting a war with Washington, but now there would be Hell to pay for their foolishness.

Still, Washingon had time and interest in investigations into the tragedy. While the Knox one was followed by another finely-balanced military one during the war, headed by Supreme Court Justice Owen Roberts, and another one right after its end, headed by FDR loyalist and Vice President Alben Barkley, they all come up with the expected whitewash which exonerated the policy-makers in the nation's capital, and tarnished the reputations of the commanders on the scene. Roberts was the judge who changed sides on the constitutionality of FDR's New Deal legislation, especially social security and the National Labor Relations Board, preventing the President from having to pack the Supreme Court with judges of a more liberal stripe.

Kimmel and Short were repeatedly held accountable for the disaster though they had never been clearly informed about its possibility, and their responsibility in preventing it, especially steps which might have minimized its impact. About the intelligence failure, Christopher Andrew wrote in For the President's Eyes Only: "Not a single Japanese decrypt available in Washington pointed to an attack on Pearl Harbor." (p. 120) It took nearly another half-century for the officers to receive some kind of rehabilitation, though they were never granted the court-martials they demanded in order to clear their names.

When President Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas on November 22, 1963, and Jack Ruby conveniently silenced his alleged killer, Lee Harvey Oswald, there was no talk of just moving on since the whole matter had now been resolved. Actually, there were already too many investigations under way with Dallas District Attorney Henry Wade initiating a murder prosecution of the sleazy night club operator, and Texas Attorney General Waggoner Carr opening an inquiry, headed by later Watergate prosecutor Leon Jaworski, into the failure of law-enforcement agencies, especially Hoover's FBI, in preventing it. LBJ appointed the now infamous Warren Commission to clear up the mess - what threatened an international confrontation because of alleged complicity of Moscow and Havana in the murder.

While we all know now that its investigation was a complete fiasco - another whitewash of what had happened - because of the even greater risk of the public learning the truth, the Commission went through the motions of establishing LHO's guilt, while ruling out of hand any other explanations of the assassination for fear that it would lead to the conspiracy in the heart of America's secret government which had assassinated the President. The Commission had to tailor all the evidence to fit the premise the Oswald alone had done it, and, of course, this led to many distortions and omissions which subsequent inquiries, especially the House Select Committee on Assassinations in the late 1970s, have been unable to deal with.

Even when British WMD expert Dr. David Kelly was killed in July 2002, apparently by his own hand, Prime Minister Tony Blair could not treat it merely as a personal matter which could be best resolved by a coroner's inquest, given what the public already knew. It was Kelly's insights into Iraq's WMD - what had become the centerpiece of books that Judith Miller and Thomas Mangold had written on the subject - which had become the hooks that Washington and London had hung their pre-emptive war against Saddam Hussein on. Kelly was certain when they wrote their books that the Iraqi dictator had the missiles and the biological agents, particularly anthrax, to hit Israel within 45 minutes of the opening of any hostilities against his regime.

Thanks to UN Resolution 1441 which forced Iraq to make an accounting of what had happened to its WMD, and to allow its weapons inspectors back into the country to search for any secret stores, Washington and London learned that Iraq no longer had the capability that Kelly was so sure of. Consequently, they had to fix the evidence to justify Saddam's ouster (aka the Downing Street Memo), and fight the war under the pretext that Saddam would launch an WMD attack against Israel. The only trouble with the strategy was that Kelly soon learned of his errors, and started talking to BBC reporters, especially Andrew Gillian, about how he had been fooled.

As soon as the MOD, MI6, and Downing Street learned of Kelly's liberties, thanks to feedback from Judy Miller about his future plans on the matter - they outed him to the public in the hope of at least discrediting him, if not destroying him. Miller was deeply involved in covering up the fixing of intelligence to justify the war, contending in her NYT's columns that Saddam had
destroyed some of his WMD right before the war, shipped the rest to Syria, and had joined Al-Qaeda.

Once the Mossad fourn-man kidon helping MI5 fight Britain's terrorisim, it seems, learned of Kelly's outing, it mounted a boat mission on The Thames near Harrowdown Hill to assassinate Kelly - what was made to look like a suicide while he was taking a walk. The plan was to bushwack him, once he was alone in a secluded area, and stuff him with enough of his wife's pain-killers to render him unconscious, leaving him then to die an apparent natural death.

The only trouble with the plot was that Kelly, most suspicious of threats against him, was not surprised by the kidon. He broke away from it when confronted, and ran through a most wooded area, causing significant bruising and leisons to his legs. When he was finally caught, he still put up a struggle, causing bruises to his chest, scratches on his head, and a welt on his lower lip while the kidon was trying to stuff the pain-killer down his throat - which he continually vomitted back up.

In desperation, and in the dark, the squad finally held the left arm down long enough under a torch to open up the less important artery in his wrist. By this time, Kelly was barely conscious. He was then moved from the scene to where the body was found - and there was no evidence of a struggle - and left to die, after being stuffed with more pain-killer which he still managed to vomit back up.

Of course, the Prime Minister could not allow any coroner's inquest in the case - as it was most likely to come up with a verdict of foul play, or at least an open one - so he had the Lord Chancellor appoint a judicial inquiry, under Lord Hutton, into the death. Hutton was the British equivalent of Justice Roberts - FDR's judge who was just itching for a fight with the Japs when the attacks on Hawaii occurred. Hutton, as Northern Ireland's Attorney General, had made a similar career for himself by bringing its war on terror into line with what policy makers in Whitehall wanted through the establishment of Diplock courts - jury-less trials in which convictions were largely based upon the testimony of informer witnesses and coerced confessions.

Hutton delegated his primary responsibility - determining the cause of Kelly's death - to Professor Keith Hawton, the noted expert on suicide. Hawton had prescribed in writing that 30 tablets of a similar pain-killer would be sufficient to kill a person - advice the kidon had followed to a tee when it stole them from Mrs.Kelly's supply, and stuffed them down Kelly's gullet. In sum, the inquiry's verdict was a foregone conclusion.

It was completely out of character when the 7/7 bombings occurred in London that the Prime Minister dismissed calls for special inquiries into them as a "ludicrous diversion" unless officialdom cannot be helped by any biased investigation of them - what seems to be the case. With the four suicide bombers having pulled off a perfect conspiracy while dying in the process (For more on this, see my articles about Lord Stevens and the actual conspiracy in my archive.), there is little that can be gained by having even a most biased inquiry as there are no easy scapegoats to blame, as what happens with more traditional surprises.

Actually, any investigation would just air all kinds of evidence of official incompetence and
malfeasance in the matter. Ever since MI5 was given primary responsibility in stopping terrorism in October 1992, it has increasingly been expanding its relationships with other agencies, particularly Scotland Yard's Anti-Terrorist Unit aka SO13, the Secret Intelligence Service (SIS), and Israel's Mossad, in the hope of taking their measure, particularly the Provisional IRA and Osama bin Laden's Al-Qaeda network. The Security Service - being primarily interested in catching the masterminds of terrorism rather than just its foot soldiers - became increasingly involved in developing double agents within various suspected groups in the hope of achieving results which would satisfy all its associates.

Of course, Britain has long been a sanctuary for terrorists, emigrants, and asylum seekers. During the 19th and 20th centuries, many freedom-fighters - especially of nations under the yoke of the Austrian, Russian, and German empires in Eastern Europe, most notably Hungary's Louis Kossuth and Italy's Guiseppe Mazzini - sought refuge in London. While this process slowly wound down with the collapse of the Cold War and the formation of the European Union, people in the Middle East, Africa, and Asia increasingly joined the ranks of those seeking refuge in Britain, thanks to the collapse of its own empire, Israel's wars of expansion, and Western efforts to control the flow of oil - a process which diluted Britain's social cohesion.

All the politically-involved emigrant groups - except for Irish Republicans, though even they were giving up their strategy of an armed struggle to gain independence of Northern Ireland from Britain - were committed to the so-called "covenant of security" which meant that they would never attack their fellow Britons, though there was little cause for them to do so. Consequently, Muslim groups became ideal recruits for special operations Britain had planned with America and Israel. MI5's T Branch, responsible for combatting domestic terrorism, saw this as an good way of keeping up with G Branch, whose mandate was international terrorism, when it came to funds, personnel, and missions, especially now that PIRA terrorism was drying up.

Little wonder that when Washington was looking for freedom-fighters and moles in the fight against Greater Serbia in Bosnia-Hertzegovina, shoring up Kosovo and Albania, and defeating the Taliban in Afghanistan, MI6 was most eager to oblige, and T Branch did what it could to help out. The center of Britain's recruitment efforts was the Finsbury mosque where the fiery Abu Qatada aka Captain Hook and Omar Uthman Abu Omar held forth on the need of jihadists to combat Western evils, and his assistant Haroon Rashid Awat signed up anyone willing to go. Huge sums were desposited in London banks and elsewhere to help fund the covert activities of his Al-Muhajiroun ('The Emigrants' in arabic) in laying the groundwork for rolling back Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan (Operation Gateway).

All this planning and good work went down the drain, though, when the 9/11 attacks occurred. Instead of Al-Qaeda's hijackers being harmlessly exposed to the world as the CIA and NORAD shut down the hijacked planes without loss - what would constitute an act of war, justifying the end of the Taliban for harboring such terrorists - the hijackers turned out to be suicide bombers, making all-out war with Osama and his supporters inevitable and immediate. Those who were not killed outright in the lightening strike on Afghanistan were killed by the hundreds, or perhaps thousands, in its aftermath. Those who were not killed were then imprisoned indefinitely wherever they could and forced to tell all they knew about the others. Al-Qaeda was like a plague, or a rogue state which had to be eradicated completely.

At first, this meant massive roundups in individual countries, and renditions of more likely middleman to countries like Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Uzbekistan for the full treatment when it came to interrogation. The Coalition, as T Branch had done in Northern Ireland, was looking for supergrasses, coerced informants, who would tell all about the movement. "Christopher Black, the first IRA supergrass," Caroline Kennedy-Pipe wrote in The Origins of the Present Troubles in Northern Ireland, "implicated thirty-eight people in his testimony." (p. 144) With Saddam Hussein's regime already marked out for destruction, it was just a question of time before Osama and his supporters would follow.

When these assumptions started proving unlikely if not impossible despite the roundups and renditions of likely suspects, the Coalition started outing its supergrasses, and implicating their associates in all kinds of terrorism. Abu Omar, the Intelligence and Democratic Security Service's (SISD) supergrass in Italy, became such an attractive source that the CIA kidnapped him in February 2003, and rendered him to Egypt for interrogation because the Agency did not think that SISD was getting everything out of him it could. Anzar's Higher Defense Intelligence Center ((CESID) in Spain locked up Syrian-born Edin Barakat Yarkas aka Abu Dahdah indefinitely on suspicion of his involvement in the 9/11 attacks. And in December 2001 Abu Qatada disappeared from his house in Acton, apparently having become a supergrass for the British security services.

In Britain, Abu Qatada's supergrass efforts turned out worse than those of Black and the Irish National Liberation Army's Henry Kirkpatrick back in Ulster in the 1980s. While convictions, based upon their informer testimony, were increasingly thrown out by the courts, Qatada's efforts resulted in little more than the sending to jail the "Portland Seven" - guys who had been led to Afghanistan by his assistant Aswat after their effort to establish a terrorist training ground in Bly, Oregon had failed. After that, Aswat himself went underground. Then Qatada's testimony that asylum-seeker and psychopath Kamel Bourgoss was establishing a ricin ring in Manchester, despite the roundup of 200 suspect associates, only resulted in the murder of Special Branch detective Stephen Oake when they failed to restrain him after making an arrest.

Still, Qatada was so effective in persuading T Branch that he knew all about what the terrorists at his mosque were planning that it agreed to conduct Operation Crevis in November 2003 to catch them. (For more on this, see my articles about Lord Stevens and the 7/7 bombings in the Trowbridge Archive.) Suicide bombers Asif Hanif and Omar Khan Sharif, member of Qatada's mosque, has just blown up Mike's Bar outside Tel Aviv, and security officials believed that similar terrorists would flock to his calls. MI5, with the help of Canadian counterterrorists, supplied the mastermind and bomb expert Mohammad Monim Khawaja to the false flag operation, and Qatada himself was expected to supply the necessary recruits through his cellphone calls, and what they generated among Britain's increasingly disaffected Muslims.

Well, Operation Crevis was completely upstaged by what Abu Dahdah's followers pulled off in Madrid on 3/11 - what was such a devastating blow to Aznar's government that it not only lost at the polls three days later, but also destroyed all the government's deliberations leading up to and after the attacks, as Socialist Prime Minister José Rodrigues Zapatero recently testified before the parliamentary commission investigating the tragedy. The evidence would show that GCHQ, Britain's signal intelligence system, was so intrigued by the "chatter" that Operation Crevis was creating that it persuaded Spanish counterterrorists that the real threat was in Britain, and that Madrid would only have to worry about a demonstration bombing by ETA, the Basque separatist group - what Aznar persisted in claiming his own counterterrorist people maintained.

MI5 did what it could to cover up the scandal by having its agent 'Gould' flush the young Muslim pasties in Crawley and West London to Pakistan, but they refused to flee. While Scotland Yard, thanks to continuing scare-mongering by its Chief Commissioner, Sir John Stevens, went through the motions of taking 'the plot' seriously, claiming that it had prevented a serious terrorist attack, the whole thing was simply dropped.

As in Northern Ireland, Operation Crevis's use of supergrasses had most unexpected consequences, especially since the wars in Iraq and on terror were simlpy getting worse. While security officials were giving the widest berth possible to all those connected in the slightest way to it, some of them, especially Mohammad Kayoun Khan, became increasingly radicalized by what they had been through, and were now experiencing. He even went to Pakistan and Israel to see what it was all about - what opened his eyes to what the West was really engaged in with its secret operations and lies. He had little trouble recruiting three like-minded Muslims to become martyrs - like what Northern Ireland's hunger strikers within the Maze Prison became, and what Prime Minister Thatcher had approved the use of supergrasses to stop.

While I have little to add to what I have already written about this conspiracy, one should note that the Security Service and Scotland Yard's Anti-Terrorist-Unit turned a completely blind eye on the whole process - vetting Khan apparently and deciding that he was not a threat. Thanks to Lord Stevens again, the security services were absolutely obsessed with the idea that only a "white convert" - reminiscent of what Washington thought about the Japanese before Pearl Harbor - could supply the needed planning, and bomb-making expertise for a coordinated urban attack. Actually, the bombs were made from readily-available peroxide compounds which anyone reading the internet could put together, and set to explode by synchronized mobile phones, provided they were kept cool until shortly before detonation.

This misconception by the British counterterrorists resulted in the reimprisonment of Shankill Road bomber Sean Kelly back in Northern Ireland in October 1993 four weeks before the July attacks in London in the expectation that this prevented all possibilities of a repeat of what happened in Madrid. In fact, the security services were so confident that they had everything under control that they reduced the threat level from "severe" to "substantial" after Kelly re-entered prison.

When the 7/7 attacks still occurred, the Blair government could not simply do what Aznar's did after 3/11. Instead of scrubbing the record clean - what was bound to leak out, and would certainly end in Blair's political humiliation and ouster - it had to create a new legend which would cover up the first attacks while apparently reassuring the public that everything was essentially okay. Its answer was a replay two weeks later, perhaps put together by "Gould" in order to make amends, in which a "copy-cat" operation had all the desired effects without any casualties. The mission was planned so that the coordinatesd bombs did not explode either because the explosive had become inert or was simply flour.

Then the Brits went hog-wild with their new Security Regiment, built from remnants of the 14 Intelligence Company from Northern Ireland, while one of the pseuo-bombers, Hussain Osman aka Hamdi Isaac, was allowed to escape to Italy. The special team following Jean Charles de Menezes had complete discretion in how to handle his surveillance, and when it became confused, as it had in at least seven or eight other occasions, it shot him dead - not to cover up anything but to establish that the counterterrorists had finally accomplished something. Osman, in Italy, was allowed to sing to the press about the operation not wanting to kill anyone - what so reassured the British public about the possibilities of future 7/7s that Scotland Yard was obliged to deny his claims.

MI5 had even tried to bring Aswat into the picture by having him come to Britain, and call one of the pseudo-bombers the night before the attacks before departing, hoping that this would fit him out as the mastermind of both attacks. Unfortunately, the South African Secret Service had spotted him there on 7/7, and counterterrorist expert John Loftus disclosed to Fox News that Aswat had been an MI6 asset for years.

As this is all slowly played out by Scotland Yard, and in the courts, the public will soon lose interest, and the Prime Minister can rest assured that Aznar's fate does not await him.