by John Hamer
After the event, we were immediately informed that the explosives used were of military origin and as most people in the truth movement are well aware, the first reports are always the most revealing, but are often never heard again and suppressed once the powers that be realise that initial reports do not fit the concocted story at which they eventually arrive and which then becomes the de facto truth.
“The nature of the explosives appears to be military, which is very worrying….the material used was not homemade but sophisticated military explosives …” Christophe Chaboud, chief of the French anti-terrorism Coordination Unit who was in London assisting Scotland Yard with its investigation.
How, it is perhaps pertinent to ask, would four, to all intents and purposes, perfectly normal youths procure a substantial quantity of military grade explosive material? And also that being the case, why did the police several days later announce that they had found the homemade bomb ‘factory’ near the homes of three of the four alleged terrorists in Leeds, West Yorkshire? Surely an experienced, senior anti-terrorist officer such as M. Chaboud could not have made such a fundamental error could he?
“A bath filled with explosives has been found at a house in Leeds that was the ‘operational base’ for the London suicide bombers.” ‘The Independent’ newspaper, 14th July 2005
The newspaper went on to blithely state that the explosives were made of black pepper and hydrogen peroxide. The notion of heating up hydrogen peroxide in their bathroom to the point where it would make an explosive mix with black pepper is simply laughable, to say the very least, let alone that a rucksack could hold enough of such a concoction that if and when exploding could supply enough energy to bend and even break steel bars. Also, how could they possibly test that their ‘bombs’ were actually going to explode on demand. Were they simply all going to go tramping across the city with this allegedly lethal mixture swilling around in their backpacks? Indeed, has anyone ever successfully managed to construct a bomb from a few such household ingredients, let alone one capable of such devastation as was created on 7/7?
Another perhaps obvious question is why would terrorists who wished to avenge themselves upon the British people for the UK’s involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, choose to kill themselves in the process? Surely on such crowded trains in rush-hour it would have been a simple task to set a timer to detonate the explosives and then quietly exit the trains, leaving their bags on the floor amongst the feet of hundreds of unsuspecting passengers. What would have been the risk involved there? Would not their cause have been better served by them living to ‘fight’ another day and possibly repeat the feat elsewhere? Suicide bombing is an expedient used only where smuggling explosives and leaving them in situ is impossible due to heavy security presence and not simply as a pointless statement of bravado, as the authors of this unlikely scenario would wish us to believe.
At the 7/7 Inquest in November 2010, Dr. Morgan Costello gave evidence that he was asked to attend two tube-stations, Edgware Road and Aldgate, for the ‘purposes of certifying the extinction of life’. He counted six bodies at Edgware Road and seven bodies at Aldgate and declared these as 'life extinct'. The huge contradiction arising from this simple fact, completely unreported in the compliant media of course, was that the numbers should have been seven and eight respectively – that is of course if we count the bodies of the bombers. This is surely indicative of the fact that the alleged bombers were not on the trains at the time of the bombs exploding. No similar count seems to have been carried-out on the Russell Square train, but we do have certain information regarding the behaviour of the Russell Square bomber, Germaine Lindsay, immediately prior to his untimely death.
“A New Zealander working for Reuters in London said two colleagues witnessed the unconfirmed shooting by police of two apparent suicide bombers outside the HSBC tower at Canary Wharf in London. The man who was not prepared to give his name said two English colleagues, whom he also refused to name ‘witnessed the shooting from a building across the road from the tower’.” ‘The New Zealand Herald’, July 2005
There is plenty of eye-witness evidence available proving beyond reasonable doubt that the 7/7 attacks were not ‘suicide’ bombings at all. For example, Bruce Lait who was in a tube train carriage near London's Aldgate East station when one of the bombs exploded described a scenario that absolutely confirms this fact without question.
According to Lait, as the survivors were being escorted from the wrecked train carriage by a police officer, he warned them... “…mind that hole, that's where the bomb was”. The metal around the edge of the hole was pushed and twisted upwards exactly as though the bomb had been underneath the floor of the train. Surely if the bomb had exploded above floor level then the opposite effect should have been observed. Lait further commented that… “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. Very strange indeed.
On the 5th July 2005, one of the quartet, Mohammed Siddique Khan took his pregnant wife to Dewsbury Hospital in West Yorkshire with a suspected potential miscarriage. Upon returning home, Khan announced to her that he was ‘going to see his friends’ and this was the last time that his wife ever saw him. She miscarried on the 6th July. Would Khan or anyone for that matter, really have abandoned his ailing wife for a whole day while she was in such a precarious condition? He was a highly respected member of his community, not just by the Asian element, but by all races alike in what is an extremely multi-cultural environment. He was also highly respected by the headmistress (principal) of the special school in which he worked as a classroom assistant. In addition, the police had used him to mediate between rival gangs in local disputes because simply put, he was trusted by all sides. The MP, Hilary Benn had taken Khan on a tour of the House of Commons and he was specifically regarded as being politically neutral, by no means an extremist and an upstanding citizen, protective of the good name of his community and was always seen to be keen to maintain amiable relations with the local white community.
I believe that the most likely scenario for the four hapless young men being embroiled in this situation in the first place was that they had naively (as it turned out) agreed to take part in what they thought was going to be an anti-terrorism exercise. The plan was that they would pose as terrorists and to make the scenario absolutely realistic and plausible it would have to be planned exactly like a precision military operation. Of course there were no live bombs in the rucksacks, just dummies, but the four did not realise of course that the real bombs were planted under the exact seats in the exact carriages in which they had no doubt been instructed to sit and in the case of Hussain, the bus. The best laid plans of mice and men… All was probably going exactly to plan until the 6th July…
The most likely explanation for Khan’s sudden disappearance on the 6th was that he informed his handler for the 7/7 exercise that he was not going to be able to meet his obligations due to his wife’s extreme ill health. He may then have been told to ensure that the others could make it without him because it was certain that the bombings were not going to be called-off but unfortunately he had now presented his handlers with a problem that had only one possible outcome and I do not believe that I actually need to spell this out.
Could this possibly also neatly explain why the attendant at the filling station where Tanweer filled his car and argued about the change he was given, stated categorically that he only saw one other person in Tanweer’s car, Hasib Hussain. Khan was almost certainly not there and probably unknown to Tanweer and Hussain, was already dead. This would also provide a reason that the now-suppressed BBC Radio 5 news reports from the morning of 7/7 reported that only two and not three ‘suspected terrorists’ had been shot at Canary Wharf and as seen by dozens of witnesses in the surrounding office buildings.
Anyway, on the morning of 7/7, Germaine Lindsay drove the relatively short distance from Aylesbury in nearby Buckinghamshire to meet the other so-called bombers at L
uton railway station. He arrived too early and decided to take a short nap in his car before the others were due to rendezvous with him. Interestingly, he paid for a car park ticket for the full day but surely, had he been a real suicide bomber and not a patsy he would have known that he had only a few short hours left to live and this would then have rendered the purchase of a ticket totally unnecessary.
At the inquest, one of the station attendants, a Mr Patel, gave testimony to the Inquest to the effect that a man whom he identified from photographs as Germaine Lindsay, arrived on the concourse of King’s Cross station and immediately asked to speak urgently with ‘the Duty Manager’ and stated that it was ‘very important’. Mr Patel remembered Lindsay simply for the reason that it was extremely unusual for any member of the public to know the exact job title of the person in overall charge of the station. Usually people would ask for the ‘supervisor’ or simply the ‘manager’. By this time there was utter chaos on the station concourse. The metal grilles on the outer doors to the station had been lowered and locked shut and passengers were not being allowed through the barriers. A sizeable crowd had gathered and were starting to abuse staff in their frustration at being unable to enter the station concourse and several police community support personnel were trying to keep order. However when Patel managed to finally locate the Duty Manager, Germaine Lindsay had disappeared, as it turned out – forever.
The primary cause of Lindsay’s confusion was the fact that he was late for his date with destiny and events had already spiralled out of control for both the patsies and the real perpetrators, by this time. The train upon which the ‘bombers’ had been scheduled to travel from Luton to London King’s Cross station, the 7.40am, had been cancelled. The train that they eventually caught was also delayed by 23 minutes and so by the time the hapless foursome arrived in London using their ‘return’ tickets, yes return tickets note, the master-plan was already underway without them as they had all already missed their respective trains.
According to many people who visited the Leeds area they had spoken with several local residents and all were adamant that all three of Khan, Hussain and Tanweer had shown no inclination whatsoever in their communities towards political or religious radicalism.
In much the same vein as other inside-jobs or false flag events, there are so few videos or even still photographs of the quartet together. Even those that do exist could easily have been ‘photo-shopped’ with only a basic knowledge of this technique. In reality there should be dozens if not hundreds of pictures of these men at various stages of the plot. London is the most CCTV-intensive environment on the planet and so the pertinent question must be, why are there only two extremely poor, grainy, still pictures of the four, one at Luton station and one at Kings Cross, Thameslink station, the date and time stamps on which could have easily been faked. In fact I could probably have done it myself! Is it possible perchance that the photos of Khan have been dubbed-in from the ‘dummy run’ that the foursome carried out on the 29th June 2005, a mere eight days earlier?
The mobile phone evidence places them all on the correct train at the correct time, the Luton to Kings Cross train that is. However, there are three issues here worthy of note. Firstly, this is relatively new evidence that was not released in the previous, 2006 hearing. Why should this be? Is it an invented afterthought maybe, to lend greater credence to the official conspiracy theory? Secondly, is it really likely that the four men would have been texting each other on a train upon which they were all travelling together? And thirdly and perhaps most significant, this type of evidence is ridiculously easy to fake. It is after all simply a series of printed characters on an official-looking piece of paper.
It is worth at this juncture mentioning the famous ‘terror-warning’ videos made by Khan and Tanweer and which have been submitted as ‘proof’ of their radical or terrorist tendencies. Khan and Tanweer could easily have been coerced into making the Jihad-inciting videos that have played such a large part in convincing the public to accept their guilt. They were employees of the government for at least two days (possibly more) after all and probably very well-paid employees for the dry-run on the 29th June and the day of 7/7 itself. They would no doubt have been told that the exercise had to be completely realistic and were probably told that the film would be used by the station staff and other authorities to aid them in intercepting the four suspected ‘terrorists’. The ‘threats’ from Khan and Tanweer on the videos are totally vague and unspecific and unconvincing in the extreme. When Khan’s wife first saw the video it was reported that she said, “That’s not my husband.” Her brother however, said he believed it was Khan. I would surmise that it is most likely that her words were taken completely out of context and that she actually meant ‘that is not the husband I know as he would never say those things’.
Daniel Obachike is the most famous of the survivors of the bus blast in Tavistock Square, the ‘4th bomb’ as it has come to be known. Daniel’s experiences, terrible as they were on the day were also matched subsequently by the sheer terror he experienced by being subjected to several years of overt threats and surveillance by MI5. All he is guilty of is telling the truth as he saw it that day.
"I'm just a regular guy, I was born and bred and work in London and that day I was on my way to work in Old Street and there was some kind of disruption going on. We were told that it was a power surge on the underground and that's how I came to be on the bus." Daniel Obachike
He described in detail how he boarded the bus at Euston along with several dozen others who had all been denied access to the tube station as he thought that the bus was going in the direction he required. Shortly after the bus had started its journey, Daniel looked out of the window and saw two cars, a black Mercedes and a blue BMW blocking the road and their drivers directing the bus away from its normal route, towards Tavistock Square. It was in Tavistock Square where the bus exploded and this is where events took a distinctly sinister turn.
After the explosion, instinct took over and he just ran as fast as possible off the bus and away down the street in the direction the bus had just travelled in order to escape the scene. A few yards down the street, Daniel noticed that a man was actually filming him running away at which point he became confused and stopped. He looked around him and back in the direction of the bus which he could now see had the entire top-deck blown away by the blast
The 7/7 bus explosion
At this point his demeanour abruptly changed from fear to curiosity as he became aware that something strange was going on.
“I was looking at the people moving into the actual space on the square. There were guys who were hanging around. There was a row of policemen who were just standing there in yellow fluorescent jackets, they weren't doing anything, they were just watching. There was this guy filming and I'm saying 'what is going on here'. It didn't feel right."
Contrary to other witness’ statements, Daniel says he did not see any Asian-looking man on the lower deck of the bus, nor did he see an Asian man get on the bus at any time. The Metropolitan Police later changed their initial reports that the bomber was on the lower deck and instead placed him on the upper deck of the bus.
Daniel then described a man who he noticed after the blast, as he appeared to be injured but was acting very strangely. He (Daniel) went to help an injured woman and was assisting her down the street ahead of the bus towards a hotel where she could at least sit whilst waiting for medical attention and in doing so he passed a man who seemed to be injured himself as he was swathed in bandages. However, he was extremely confused by this because the man was forty or fifty metres ahead of the bus and the bomb blast had actually travelled backwards and had even killed a passer-by behind the bus. This person was making a lot of noise and generally creating a fuss by rolling around in the road which Daniel thought at the time was extremely strange behaviour, not to mention poor acting.
Do not forget that all this took place within perhaps a minute of the explosion and so how on
earth had this man managed to gain medical assistance let alone be already sporting bandages?
In addition to this strange scenario, Daniel noticed that…
“Some people were running forward, the medical staff and the medical professionals, you could tell who they were because they were seeing what they could try and do for people. But then there were these other people who were just watching, taking notes, organising people, moving things around.”
Daniel then went on to say that he believed that this person whoever he was, had prior knowledge and prior intelligence and was placed at the scene for some ulterior purpose. He actually conducted his own search on the Internet after the event, because a few days after the event, his picture ‘was everywhere’ and yet has now been removed from Internet. The face of this man complete with bandaged head was all over the BBC and British news websites as well as most of the international ones too.
There were also four men in a blue uniform and who had rucksacks and also two or three people who were just standing in doorways watching the scene and there was another person who was controlling everything. He was in plain-clothes and was co-ordinating police activity once they had started to actually do something other than simply standing around.