Are We Boiling Frogs?

by Home home

  video of Mohammad Sidique Khan, and a last will

  and testament, indicating that he intended to fight

  jihad.

  This ‘state narrative’ was very different from the accounts

  given by the authorities in the immediate aftermath of the

  7/7 attacks. Initially police were said to have used controlled

  detonations to destroy suspect devices, and the widespread

  disruption was a result of electrical power surges. This

  quickly morphed into a story about suicide bombings.

  For the first two days the bombs were said to have detonated

  at different times. On July 7th 2005, Scotland Yard's Deputy

  Assistant Commissioner Brian Paddock made a public

  statement that the underground explosions occurred at

  08:51, 08:56 and 09:17.

  Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair stated that

  he knew of “six explosions,” listing the six affected areas as

  Edgware Road, King's Cross, Liverpool Street, Russell

  Square, Aldgate East and Moorgate, adding that it was “still

  a confusing situation” .[93]

  221

  A Dangerous Ideology

  Initial reports suggested victims were killed or injured while

  heading towards Kings Cross, from where the bombers

  allegedly caught the trains they attacked. Among them was

  Jenny Nicholson, who sadly died in the Edgware Road blast.

  She had called her boyfriend shortly before boarding her

  train at Paddington. This meant she was eastbound at

  Edgware Road.[100] Divinia Turrell, who suffered facial

  injuries at Edgware Road, was also reportedly heading

  eastbound towards Canary Wharf.[101]

  Police initially stated, at 09.17, an explosion on a train

  approaching Edgware Road blew a hole through the side of

  the carriage and tunnel wall, impacting another train. They

  maintained this account for more than a week. However, the

  official story later attributed the Edgware Road blast to

  Khan, on a single westbound train. Why the initial police

  assessment of events lasted so long is perplexing.

  Similarly, Manjit Dhanjal and Ana Castro were both on a

  westbound Circle Line train, between Aldgate East and

  Liverpool Street, when it was apparently bombed. They

  described a loud explosion, thick black smoke, seeing

  horrendous injuries and the bodies of the deceased.

  This train was also heading towards Kings Cross, where

  Tanweer was said to have caught the eastbound Circle Line

  train he destroyed. Despite considerable evidence of a bomb

  at Aldgate East this was soon excluded from the official

  account.[99]

  Transport for London (Tfl) issued a press update on the 7th

  stating there had been an explosion on a northbound

  Piccadilly Line train, heading towards Kings Cross. This was

  corroborated by a Tube Lines’ statement to the same effect.

  Initially this train was identified as the northbound 311.

  Gary Stevens, the duty manager of Russell Square Station

  confirmed 311 was bombed, as did the Piccadilly Line

  operations manager. A year later the ‘official account’ had

  Lindsay on the southbound train, leaving Kings Cross.

  Investigators subsequently changed the times of the bombs

  having analysed 'technical data' from London Underground.

  [92] They also revised the number of reported explosions,

  down from as many as seven, to four. By the time the report

  222

  A Dangerous Ideology

  was released in 2006, the account had changed to four

  suicide bombers on three trains and one bus.

  Already suspicious of the official narrative, many were

  unhappy about the amount of conjecture within it. There

  was heavy reliance upon words like 'assumed', 'possibly',

  ‘must’ and 'suspected.' Certainly from 08.26 onwards, there

  was a notable lack of evidence to support the given timeline.

  The police investigation took some 20,000 witness

  statements, it looked at 40,000 pieces of physical evidence

  and cost the British tax payer £100M. However, to date, no

  one has been convicted of any direct involvement in the 7/7

  attacks.[26] Furthermore, the initial report, supposedly

  based upon this thorough investigation, got some basic key

  facts wrong.[17]

  The four alleged bombers were said to have caught the 07:40

  train from Luton. However, due to disruption caused by

  damaged overhead lines in the Mill Hill area, the 07:40 was

  cancelled that morning. The next available train was at

  07:42 (the delayed 07:30) but that didn't arrive at Kings

  Cross until 08:39. This would have placed their arrival at

  Kings Cross about quarter of an hour after witnesses

  supposedly saw them. It would also have meant Tanweer

  would have missed the train he allegedly blew up. Nor could

  they have caught the 07:56 (the delayed 07.48) as this would

  have placed their arrival in Kings Cross at 08:42, too late for

  either Khan or Tanweer to catch their respective trains.

  According to the official narrative, they were caught on CCTV

  entering Luton station at 07:15. However, the video was time

  stamped at 07:21:54. This would not appear to have given

  them enough time to catch the earlier 07:24 (delayed to

  07:25.) This may explain why the Home Office thought they

  had caught the later train. Although the delayed 07:24

  arrived at Kings Cross Thameslink platform just after the

  Home Offices stated time of 08:23 (time stamped CCTV

  footage gave this as 08:25,) if the Luton video timestamps

  were correct, it seems unlikely the terrorists ever intended to

  catch this train. Frankly, the timings stated in the Home

  Office's official account didn't make any logical sense and

  were impossible in some instances.[52]

  223

  A Dangerous Ideology

  After 'conspiracy theorists' had pointed this out, then Home

  Secretary John Reid was forced to inform parliament the

  investigation had got the train times wrong. Reid informed

  MP's of the error stating the 'terrorists' actually caught the

  07:24.[53] The police insisted they had informed the Home

  Office about the correct train times when they first noticed

  the error in the report. If so, it begged the question why the

  impossible times remained in it for more than a year,

  especially given that independent researches had been

  pointing out the mistake for many months.

  The reason for this error was further confused when footage

  from Luton was released in 2008. This purportedly showed

  the men going through the ticket barriers and waiting on the

  Luton platform.

  These clips should have resolved the timing issues, but the

  timestamps were largely blurred out for some reason. The

  Police had already suggested that some timestamps were

  wrong and maintained they had entered the station at 07:15.

  Unable to see many of the timestamps on the new footage, it

  was impossible to independently verify this at the time.

  However, CCTV footage from Luton, later given to the

  inquest, clearly showed the previously
blurred out

  timestamps, recording the men on the platform at 07:23.

  This would have given them time to catch the delayed 07:24.

  [97]

  Therefore, the train timing fiasco was inexplicable. Why were

  either investigators or the Home Office ever muddled? After

  five years of disorientation, the Luton CCTV timestamps were

  all revealed to be perfectly clear and entirely consistent with

  the revised, now workable, account. The police claimed they

  hadn't initially told the Home Office what time the bombers

  caught the Luton train, only later correcting their mistake.

  Surely such information was crucial? Why would the Home

  Office ever issue a report without requesting this vital

  evidence? Perhaps they just guessed. Incorrectly, as it

  turned out.

  At the time, the error strewn 2006 report was the only

  publicly available account of the worst terrorist attack in

  British history. The state’s protestations, that they hadn’t

  224

  A Dangerous Ideology

  received all the relevant information, did not offer adequate

  explanation.

  It certainly didn't explain how the police possibly spoke to

  witnesses who were recorded as being on the non-existent

  07:40 train. These people were reported as stating the men's

  casual clothes stood out from those of the average business

  commuter. They interviewed other witnesses on the phantom

  07:40 who recounted the four’s noisy conversations.

  Although The Home Secretary John Reid claimed, during his

  parliamentary apology, that the rest of the report was

  accurate, it was not without good reason many had their

  doubts. If the investigation couldn't get such basic

  information straight, what confidence could any have in the

  other ‘facts’ offered in the official account?

  The calls for an independent inquiry increased but, for

  reasons we will soon discuss, it never happened. The only

  review of the state’s narrative came with the inquests, more

  than 5 years later.

  The 2011 inquests into the deaths of the 52 people killed by

  the supposed suicide bombers returned verdicts of unlawful

  killing for all.[18] The coroner, Lady Justice Hallett, ruled

  there would be no inquests into the deaths of the four

  accused terrorists.

  There is no official record of how these men died and

  certainly no court verdict proving them suicide bombers.

  None of the four alleged terrorists were pronounced ‘life

  extinct’ at the scenes. It may seem a moot point to most but,

  given the many other anomalies surrounding the official

  account of 7/7, it is a notable addition to the list.

  As the story of the four suicide bomber emerged, the official

  account stated the four suspects were unknown to the

  intelligence and security services. Then Home Secretary,

  Charles Clarke, said they were so called 'clean skins.'[19]

  Therefore, it seemed surprising to some that the police were

  able to identify the men so quickly. Fortunately,

  identification documents were found at the scenes, which

  helped the police immensely.[27]

  225

  A Dangerous Ideology

  Mohammad Sidique Khan's Identification documents were

  found at Aldgate, Edgware Road and Tavistock Square.[95]

  Tanweer's were found in a wallet at Aldgate and Jermaine

  Lindsay's with his body at the scene of the Piccadilly Line

  explosion. Hasib Hussain's driving licence and bank card

  were found at Tavistock Square. It was noted at the inquests

  the documents weren't damaged to the extent one might

  expect if they were in close proximity to a bomb. The

  government's QC, Neil Flewitt, explained this to the inquest.

  “Although they were damaged to some

  extent, they did not show the damage that

  would be expected if they were on the body

  of the bomber or in the rucksack, suggesting

  that in each case they had been deliberately

  separated by some distance from the actual

  explosion.”

  Therefore, we are told the bombers scattered identification

  documents on the floors of the carriages and the bus, prior

  to manually detonating their bombs. Suggesting their

  intention to be identified. There were no witness testimonies

  to corroborate this theory. It was simply assumed.[96]

  The inquest was controlled by Lady Justice Hallett, She

  determined what evidence could and could not be admitted.

  Ultimately she concluded the key points of the government’s

  narrative were all entirely correct. However, whatever her

  ruling was based upon, it is difficult to see how it related to

  the evidence openly revealed at the inquest.

  Firstly the concept of the suicide bombers initially arose, and

  was widely disseminated by the mainstream media (MSM),

  thanks largely to the statement of one man.

  Richard Jones said he saw a man, fitting the description of

  Hasib Hussain, fiddling with his rucksack on the No30 bus

  to Tavistock Square. For some unknown reason, never

  explained at the inquest or in any official account, the No30

  bus was diverted on 7/7. If, as suggested, Hussain changed

  from the No91 to the No30 bus he would ordinarily have

  been heading back in opposite direction. It was only the

  diversion which resulted in the No30 ending its Journey in

  Tavistock Square.

  226

  A Dangerous Ideology

  Jones’ testimony placed Hussain on the lower deck. The

  forensic evidence indicated the detonation occurred on the

  upper deck, contradicting Jones' eyewitness statement.

  Jones credibility, as a witness who could place Hussain on

  the bus, was dubious.

  He described Hussain as smartly dressed, wearing “hipster-

  style fawn checked trousers, with exposed designer

  underwear, and a matching jersey-style top.” This was

  completely at odds with the casual blue jeans, light purple

  top and dark jacket Hussain was wearing in the released

  CCTV images. Contrary to the ubiquitous media reports

  asserting his reliability, Jones description did not match that

  of Hussain. Something Jones later highlighted at the inquest

  when he stated:

  “......at no stage have I ever said I saw the bomber. Right?”

  Inquest testimony, from a severely injured survivor of the

  Edgware Road blast, Danny Biddle, also reported that

  Mohammad Sidique Khan had been fiddling with his

  rucksack as the bomb detonated.

  Biddle was in a coma for more than 5 months. Upon his

  recovery he was interviewed by investigators. Initially he was

  unable to offer them any significant additional information to

  assist their inquiries. Then he saw Khan's alleged

  'martyrdom video' on TV. Suddenly, Biddle remembered

  seeing Khan on the train. He testified that Khan had a small

  black camping rucksack on his lap. This is the rucksack he

  recalled Khan fidgeting with.[27]

  Khan's martyrdom video was apparently released on an

  Islamist website, by person's unknow
n. It suggested that

  Khan was associated with al Qaeda. Footage of Ayman al

  Zawahiri’s speeches were cut into the video. This implied

  connection was contrary to the official account. No official

  explanation clarified why Khan, or whoever made the video,

  would promote the idea a wider terrorist plot.

  Khan made no reference at all to either the London

  Bombings or his own martyrdom in the video. He didn't

  mention any of the other alleged bombers or name any

  future London targets. It wasn't clear who he was talking to

  227

  A Dangerous Ideology

  either. The video offered no evidence that Khan was involved

  in the 7/7 bombings. Rather, it suggested he may have been

  planning to fight jihad overseas.[51]

  Biddle's testimony differed from the forensic evidence which

  placed the Edgware Road device on the floor of the carriage.

  The hand movements, seen by both Jones and Biddle,

  suggested manual detonation but there was a lack of

  supporting physical evidence. No manual trigger

  mechanisms were ever found at any of the bomb locations.

  Jones didn't appear to positively identify Hussein at all, and

  Biddle's identification of Khan only came after he'd been

  shown a video informing him that Khan as one of the four

  alleged suicide bombers.

  Officially the four terrorists were working entirely alone. The

  inquest judged there were no reasons to suspect a wider plot

  or consider any possible co-conspirator involvement.

  However, contrary to Lady Hallett's eventual findings, the

  evidence given at the inquests indicated otherwise.

  According to the official story, Shehzad Tanweer, Mohammad

  Sidique Khan and Hasib Hussain collected the bombs from

  their bomb making factory in Alexandra Grove, Leeds, on the

  morning of the attacks. A local resident (Mrs Waugh) testified

  that she saw as many as six individuals going to and from

  the flat. This was supported by the discovery of at least 10

  separate sets of finger prints found in the 'bomb factory.'

  The same witness said that she had seen ‘at least’ 6 men

  loading rucksacks into the Micra on the morning of 7/7. Mrs

  Waugh remembered it because the early hour commotion

  woke her. She saw three men get into one lilac car and at

  least one more into a white car. She had assumed they were

  drug dealers.[28]

  This repudiated the official account. Supposedly only the

  three named terrorists were present at the flat that morning.