7/7
Joe Wed, 07/06/2011 - 1:21pm
Regarding the 7/7/2005 terrorist attacks in London, let us look at the facts, and what we were told, and compare them. Then, using Ockham's Razor and common-sense, let us see what conclusions are to be drawn, so we can all understand what most likely really did happen that day.
Full version of investigative documentary 7/7: Seeds of Deconstruction. Examines many of the outstanding questions and conspiracy theories about the 2005 London Bombings. Available for download via http://blip.tv/file/3985398 and http://www.archive.org/details/77SeedsOfDeconstruction and http://stagevu.com/video/bzmyohjuatvm
- Joe's blog
- Login to post comments
7/7 Judge: NO PUBLIC INQUIRY, NO "BOMBERS" ' INQUESTS.
There are many aspects of the 7/7 bombing which have commonality with 9/11. (Of course, in this forum, most of the readers here will know that). However, to recap just two of the many problems with the official hogwash fairystory: There were, on the mornings of both incidents, security drills/military exercises taking place which mimicked the exact same scenario that was being played out in real time. In the London case, 1000+ people were taking part in a huge exercise organized by Visor Consultants Plc. at the same train stations, the same times, on the same morning that the bombs went off. Visor Managing director Peter Power's interview here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKvkhe3rqtc
How did the kids who were accused of the simultaneous bombings manage to pull that off, especially when the train they were alleged to have caught to put them at the crime scene, was canceled that morning? (oops). Even if those patsies had known the fine details of that drill, how did they time "their attacks" to coincide so precisely?
As in the case of 9/11, in which the Bush administration refused for 441 days to authorize any form of inquiry, the Blair government also followed suit. Some 5 years later, there was an inquest of sorts. Judge Lady Hallett made the following comments in her report:
(1) A verdict of unlawful killing.
(2) Emergency services 'could not have saved more lives'.
(3) Coroner does not accept MI5 has made every improvement.
(4) There should not be a public inquiry.
(5) Inquests into four bombers' deaths 'should not resume'.
Yes, very good, your honor. Sound just like the proverbial fox guarding the proverbial henhouse. No public inquiry, and no inquests into the *alleged* bombers' deaths. (!!!!!).
The same thing happened in the wake of the October 2001 anthrax attacks, in which the actual perpetrators deliberately set up "Muslim" radicals as the guilty party.Naturally, the US corporate media eagerly swallowed the bait and covered the attacks with an obsessive "All Anthrax, All the Time", 24/7 zeal... until it was discovered the powder originated from the Ft. Detrick bio-weapons labs, and the intense media coverage instantly screeched to a juddering halt. After the Oklahoma City Bombing, a similar feeding frenzy in which the corporate media were instantly blaming "Middle Eastern radicals", until Tim McVeigh got himself arrested and spoiled all the fun.
Anything which might dilute of remove the easy-to-digest notion of Muslim guilt in terror incidents, and the eagerness with which the US (and to a lesser extent UK) public as a whole accepts such preordained guilt, must be squashed at all costs.
For German readers
I wrote an article about this here: http://www.heise.de/tp/artikel/32/32915/1.html
It´s summarizing the main points about the missing investigation of 7/7 (German language).
English Translation of your 7/7 summary is here:
http://babelfish.yahoo.com/translate_url?doit=done&tt=url&intl=1&fr=bf-home&trurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heise.de%2Ftp%2Fartikel...
Joe
I'd like to issue you a request. Could you remove the '7/7 Ripple Effect' video? It's been pointed out below why it's not a reputable documentary but i suspect that some people will miss this important information.
take it up with the moderators
.I submitted it, they approved it.
7/7 Ripple Effect
A video by a guy who claims to be the messiah and has harassed family members of 7/7 victims.
Who does that help?
7/7 Ripple Effect - a rebuttal and rejection
A video was released on 5th November 2007 entitled '7/7 Ripple Effect' which appeared via a website called JforJustice. Both the video and website are authored by Muad'Dib (the name of a fictional character from Frank Herbert's Dune) who believes he is the Sheffield-born messiah and demands 'that he be acknowledged as the Rightful British-Israel King.' He also appears to hold rather offensive, anti-Muslim views:
The video begins with Muad'Dib saying:
J7: The July Seventh Truth Campaign, who have been researching the events of 7/7 since the day they happened, take issue with any production which can claim to 'understand what most likely really did happen that day', unless this can be backed up with evidence that supports the alternative hypothesis. J7 maintain the view that the official Home Office report into July 7th, released by the Home Office on 11th May 2006, remains totally unproven, as no evidence has ever been placed in the public domain which categorically proves, beyond reasonable doubt, the official version of events. On the contrary, our research has shown that this report contains many errors, inconsistencies and anomalies and, in fact, the Home Office has twice been forced to amend the narrative in response to challenges by J7, resulting in an updated narrative that makes even less sense than the original version did. Our position on attempting alternative narratives which are not based on evidence is very succinctly expressed by a J7 researcher who, after viewing 7/7 Ripple Effect, wisely wrote:
So, what does Muad'Dib and 7/7 Ripple Effect claim 'most likely happened that day'?
After examining the role played by the BBC and Peter Power in the Panorama programme 'London Under Attack' and Power's subsequent 'terror rehearsal exercise' that he was running on the 7th July 2005, examined in detail by J7 here, the 7/7 Ripple Effect film states:
No evidence is produced to support this conclusion and no matter how neat and appealing this alternative scenario might be, it remains totally hypothetical and without supporting evidence. Muad'Dib goes on:
A convoluted attempt is then made to explain why the only image of the four men accused of being responsible for what happened, taken outside Luton station at 07.21.54, has to be faked:
Again, no evidence is offered as the basis for the statement “the four men were supposed to arrive together” and this is pure unsubstantiated conjecture in the same way that the Home Office has provided no evidence for its version of events. Further, there is no evidence for why Hasib Hussain would be the only one of the four entering Luton Station at 07.21.54. (Note: 7/7 Ripple Effect correctly states that the 7.40am Luton to King's Cross train, which the original Home Office report claims the accused caught, was cancelled on 7th July 2005. That the Home Office changed the official report on 11 July 2006 to say that the accused caught the 7.25 and that the 7.40 had been based on 'erroneous witness statements' fails to make it into Muad'Dib's version of events). Despite the supposed need to 'fake the photo' to show all four men entering the station together 7/7 Ripple Effect still manages to place the accused in King's Cross together -- again, something for which no evidence has ever been provided by the Home Office or police -- albeit too late to catch the tube trains that 7/7 Ripple Effect claims they have been told to board as part of Peter Power's exercise:
It would be highly unlikely, even if this scenario were plausible, that any 'exercise' could arrange for 3 'patsies' to board specific tube trains, especially as the tube that day was subject to many delays and line closures. (7/7 Ripple Effect's constant referral to Khan, Tanweer, Hussain and Lindsay as 'the Muslims' is also highly questionable and we can only wonder if Muad'Dib would refer to these 4 young men as 'the Jews' or 'the Christians' if the official story had alleged that to be the case.)
On 7th July 2005 there were reports that 'suicide-bombers' had been shot dead at Canary Wharf, Brian Paddick of the Metropolitan Police was even asked at a press conference whether he could confirm these reports, and replied “We have no reports of any police sniper shooting at anybody today”. Once again, there is no tangible evidence to prove or disprove the reports, or the subsequent denial of these reports by Brian Paddick. However, 7/7 Ripple Effect makes the claim that Khan, Tanweer and Lindsay were all shot at Canary Wharf, with a further stretch that perhaps they were attempting to find sanctuary in the offices of a newspaper:
7/7 Ripple Effect continues on in much the same vein, from which we can only conclude that using every known discrepancy in the reports of the events of July 7th, many of which are examined in detail by J7 in our sections Mind The Gaps I and II, and weaving them into a totally evidence-free and fanciful hypothesis, which would be more honestly described as a 'What If' rather than what 'Really did happen', will do more harm than good in aiding anyone to get to the truth of the events of that day.
In summing up 7/7 Ripple Effect, we leave the final words to a J7 researcher:
The advice of the J7 campaign and research collective is simple: Question everything.
As an addendum to the rebuttal and rejection of 7/7 Ripple Effect, J7 received email notification from Muad'Dib requesting cash donations and assistance in contacting the bereaved families and survivors in order to send them unsolicited copies of this film.
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign immediately responded with a refusal to support or condone the film and J7 researchers universally condemned the intentions of Muad'Dib in the unsolicited sending of the film to bereaved families or survivors, re-iterating the point that J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign have never endeavoured to contact bereaved families or survivors. J7 are not in any way party to the making of the 7/7 Ripple Effect. We do not support the film, its producers, its unsubstantiated conjecture, or the sending of the film to relatives of victims or survivors, nor has J7 provided any assistance with locating relatives of the deceased.
http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/j-for-justice-77-ripple-effect.html
Thats a really good summary,
Thats a really good summary, thanks for the link.
I was not aware of the J7 group, I wish I had been aware of them earlier.