My letter to BBC

NOTE: I assume I do not need to clarify how 7/7 is connected with 9/11.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Dear BBC journalists,

On May 6, 2004, the BBC Panorama program depicted a fictional terrorist attack involving four suicide bombs: three trains on the London Underground were blown up between 8-9 am, and one more explosion happened on a large street vehicle an hour or so later, in central London. This scenario was quite precisely realized a year later.

Then, on the day of the real attacks, the Managing Director of Visor Consultants, Peter Power, told in a BBC Radio Five interview that

"[A]t half past nine this morning we were actually running an exercise for a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning, so I still have the hairs on the back of my neck standing up right now."

Many statisticians have concluded that the probability for the exercises and the real events purely coinciding that way - independently of each other - temporally, locationally, and methodologically, is so small as to be nonexistent. Add to that the match between the fictive BBC program and the real events, and you have truly miraculous coincidences.

Or do you think they are coincidences? Has BBC practised investigative journalism to find an answer to this obvious and important question?

Thank you in advance for all information regarding this!

Best regards,

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
I haven't received a reply.

A colleague of mine reasoned that the fictional program and its realization a year later would have been explained as follows: the terrorists (the four suicide bombers) watched the program and modelled their attack on it. However, I haven't come across any such analyses. Has this even been discussed in the media? If not, I find it almost incomprehensible. After all, a lot of people must have seen the fictional program and remembered it a year after, when the real attacks happened.

I would appreciate all help in making sense of this.

Why would you model your attack

on a fictional attack which, it would seem to me, would be LESS of a surprise and MORE easily thwarted than one which was completely original?

On the other hand, if you were a false flag terrorist, why would you plan an attack so similar to a fictional one, knowing that some people would be suspicious for that very reason?

BTW, Vesa, you should check out this highly satisfying string of comments at Daily Kos:

Massa Kos don' like 9/11 Truth

Good questions

The colleague I was referring to finds the official scenario completely implausible. He was just trying to figure out how the match between the fictional scenario and the real events would be spun officially or in the media.

Apparently, the issue has not even been addressed, although on all accounts the "coincidences" should be subject to a thorough investigation. But still, many people have seen the program and must be wondering.

Thanks for the KOS link.

More Power to you

I forgot to mention that Peter Power also featured in the imaginary BBC program, which was "set in the future - but only just", as the program's webpage preciently states.

Thanks for the link to this blog

The Peter Power interview will remain a standout. I believe, it will gain in its significance as it finally filters into minds of people, the world over!

Thanks for the link.

...don't believe them!