/** Tools */

24 April 2008

Operation Crevice - "7/7 trial" reprise

Since posting Spring/Summer 2008 Terror Season is Open, the article has been updated as and when information of note from the "7/7 trial" has come to light. The information posted in today's update is worthy of greater prominence and wider distribution, so here it is with few amends:

Crevice / 7/7 Who's Who by another name

Precious little is being reported from the first trial in three years resulting from Sir Ian Blair's "largest criminal inquiry in English history", ignoring (for now) the testimony from U.S. prison provided by FBI informant and supergrass Mohammad Junaid Babar -- who coincidentally provided 'evidence' in the Crevice trial being, as he once again was, the prosecution's 'star witness' -- and the conclusive proof of guilt provided by undercover surveillance footage of men walking past a kebab shop and a photo of the inside of Omar Khyam's bedsit.

"Reporting restrictions", similar to those decreed while the Operation Crevice trial was underway and which barred publication of information and photographs of the accused, has again been imposed by the State. Consequently, there is a dire lack of coverage of the "7/7 trial", perhaps because if the fullness of the events were to be reported, people's minds would boggle that a prosecution was even being brought against three men sightseeing in London.

So for general edification, research purposes and anyone following the so-called "7/7 trial", here are the handles of various people ensnared by the crack Crevice sting and who also feature in the "7/7 trial" story, even though you might not have known it until now. Courtesy of J7 and S over at Eco Postie:
  • "Abdul Haleem / Halim" = Kazi Nurur Rahman
  • "Abdul Rahman" = Anthony Garcia
  • "Abdul Waheed" = Waheed Mahmood (Also known as Abdul, Esmail or Javed)
  • "Ausman" = Omar Khyam
  • "Azhar", previously referred to as 'Unidentified male 3' = Azhar Shazad Khan, the brother-in-law of "Ausman" / Omar Khyam.
  • "Hamza" = Jawad Akbar (cousin of Nabeel Hussain, found not guilty)
  • "Imran" = Zeeshan Siddique
  • "Ibrahim" = Mohammed Siddique Khan
  • "Khalid" = Salahuddin Amin (tortured in Pakistan with the tacit approval of the British State)
Note: For those who would suppress information in the servitude of State interests over and above the interests of us all, all the information above is already in the public domain, just not compiled in any one particular place. Until now! Enjoy. Join the dots. Do your own research.

19 April 2008

Weekend spot the difference competition


7/7 accused 'joined weapons camp'


"Zubair [Mr Shakil] fired the Ak-47 and the light machine gun," said [Mohammed Junaid] Babar.
Guilty! String him up! Contrast:

Schoolchildren to be offered weapons training


Children at comprehensive schools will be asked to sign up for military drills and weapons training under new plans to improve classroom discipline.
And the moral of the story is?

17 April 2008

Abu Izzadeen & Co. convicted

Trevor Brooks, also known as Omar Brooks, but perhaps better known by his 'radical' 'Islamist' handle of Abu Izzadeen, has been found guilty of funding and inciting terrorism at the end of a three and a half month trial. His conviction could see him facing life in prison for daring to speak in a 'free' country that is now more repressive than your average third world dictatorship.

Izzadeen faced trial alongside six other defendants, all of whom were charged with fund-raising contrary to Section 15 (1) of the Terrorism Act 2000. His co-defendants included:
  • Abdul Rehman Saleem, 32, convicted of inciting terrorism overseas but cleared of fundraising for terrorists,
  • Omar Zaheer, 28, cleared, no verdict reached,
  • Abdul Muhid, 24, convicted of the fundraising count
  • Shah Jalal Hussain, 25, convicted of fund-raising in absentia having done a bunk, warrant out for arrest,
  • Rajib Khan, 29, cleared, no verdict reached, and
  • Simon 'Suleaman' Keeler, 36 - Another in the long list of white, British converts to Islam who manages to find their way to the top of the radical Islamist list. Keeler was convicted of the same two charges as Izzadeen and today became the first white British 'Muslim' to be convicted of a 'terrorist' offence. Compare and contrast with Iqra bookshop worker and ex-SBS serviceman Martin 'Abullah' McDaid and James 'Mohammed Yacoub/Yaqub' McLintock, better known as the Tartan Taliban.
Brooks, Saleem, Keeler, Khan and Ibrahim Abdullah Hassan, 25 were also charged with inciting terrorism overseas, contrary to Section 59 (1) (2) (a) of the Terrorism Act 2000. Izzadeen faced a further charge of encouragement of terrorism contrary to Section 1 of the Terrorism Act 2006 on July 2, 2006.

Izzadeen is perhaps most famous for describing the events of 7th July 2005 as "mujahideen activity" which would make people "wake up and smell the coffee." He is also reported as saying that American and UK troops would rape and murder in Iraq which, as we all now know, is in fact the case and adds another two crimes to the long list of war crimes perpetrated in Iraq for which Tony Blair and the State's gang of war criminals -- actual terrorists by deed as opposed to terrorists whose only crime is having a big mouth, or possessing an item of literature -- have yet to be tried.

Izzadeen is widely reported as having 'shot to fame' in September 2006 when he heckled the then Home Secretary Herr Doktor John Reid, right on cue, at an invite-only State propaganda event held at a top secret location in East London. Darcus Howe, writing about Trevor Abu Omar Brooks Izzadeen and the Reid 'incident' in the New Statesman, noted:
“[the] clash was staged by Reid and his cohorts at the Home Office. They organised the meeting, Abu Izzadeen was invited in advance - his performance guaranteed - and the press was alerted to film and report the confrontation.”
Below is a video of the 'altercation' which you are advised to watch closely, specifically noting the protracted (in)actions of the 'security' operatives in red shirts, as well as the actions of the tall, suited, open-shirted man holding a radio who stands by the windows alongside the world's smallest policeman.

For further detail about this incident, Izzadeen and 7/7 as "mujahideen activity" see: If links back to UK or US sources are revealed.

Shortly after Reid and Izzadeen's highly amateur dramatics, ‘Gorgeous’ George Galloway — he who most vocally will not countenance the notion of any ‘theory’ that doth possess the remotest whiff of ‘conspiracy’ — wrote an open letter to the Home Secretary about what had happened alleging that, “There are only two conceivable explanations as to how this man, at this sensitive time, was allowed to hijack your Potemkin Village performance today.”
Dear Home Secretary,

I have been watching open-mouthed the altercation you have provoked in East London with your ill-judged, patronising and provocative foray into territory you clearly barely understand. There is much that will be said about the child-like - Patricia Hewittesque! - performance you gave your audience. I want to concentrate on the altercation.

The man who harangued you - Abu Izzadine - is a well-known and violent extremist from an organisation your own government has proscribed. Yet he was allowed within punching distance of the British Home Secretary. How ? Why ?

This is the same man who led a group of fanatic thugs in the brief “hostage-taking” of myself and my daughter and several innocent members of the public during a general election meeting last year. This is well known to the Special Branch and senior police officers in East London - the very people in charge of your security today.

This man has appeared on many occasions on television and in the press as a dangerous extremist who has praised the terrorist attacks on July 7th and 9/11. His comments were amongst those adduced in your own government’s case for the proscription of the Al Ghuraba organisation.

There are only two conceivable explanations as to how this man, at this sensitive time, was allowed to hijack your Potemkin Village performance today.

Either our police and security services are so fantastically incompetent that Bin Laden himself might have slipped in to beard you at your podium. Or someone somewhere wanted to engineer precisely this confrontation to show you in a certain light and to portray the Muslims of Britain in the most aggressive violent and extreme way possible, as a justification for the utterly counter-productive policies you are following.

Which is it ?

Because, as you know, I am not a believer in conspiracy theories I am leaning towards the first explanation. If I am right then yet again the Metropolitan Police have proved almost comically incompetent. The sight of a small, slight, helmeted police officer being dwarfed by a giant ranting fanatical thug - talk about a thin blue line! - as all that stood between you and a violent attack will certainly have provided food for thought and encouragement to the country’s enemies. Yet again the justification for continuing in office of Sir Ian Blair must be called into question.

But if I am wrong, and this all turns out to have been some Nixonian “dirty tricks” operation..then of course the questions raised are much more profound and dangerous

I await your response with interest.

Yours sincerely
George Galloway MP
Quite what the outcome of this communication was, is unknown. However, as William Ehrman, Director General (Defence & Intelligence) of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office memorably proclaimed:
"Dealing with Islamist extremism, the messages are more complex, the constituencies we would aim at are more difficult to identify, and greater damage could be done to the overall effort if links back to UK or US sources were revealed."
Without doubt those links back to UK or US sources are being steadily and ever more rapidly revealed for anyone that cares to look, not only in the UK but in Canada, Australia and the U.S. UK instances are being revealed on an almost daily basis, especially for anyone keeping an eye of Spring/Summer 2008 terror season court reports relating to ongoing alleged 'terror' trials.

The Canadian equivalent of 'Islamist extremism', as designed and directed by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and not Muslims, is amply revealed in this excellent video documentary.

For the US equivalent of 'Islamist extremism' in which "links back to UK or US sources were revealed", the latest reference point is the case of the Miami / Liberty City Seven where charges were brought in relation to an alleged plot to attack Chicago's Sears Tower. It transpired that:
The entire situation was concocted by the government. The warehouse was paid for by the FBI, and the defendants moved their operations there at the suggestion of an undercover informant who was also paid by the FBI. The swearing-in ceremony was led by the informant — who at another point also suggested a plan to bomb FBI offices in Miami.

"The case was written, produced and directed by the FBI," defense attorney Albert Levin said in his closing arguments.

Ehrman and the FCO's much-feared revealing of "links back to UK or US sources" aren't reported directly. There is, however, more than enough publicly available information contained in the world's news reports for anyone with a desire to make sense of the nonsense to start joining the dots and discovering for themselves the hidden hand involvement of State and security services.

Do your own research.

16 April 2008

New Banksy artwork hits the streets walls

The cheeky but elusive plaything of the middle-class art pretender, the graffiti artist Banksy, unveiled a new piece of artwork that passes comment on Britain's surveillance society. It is the second piece of Banksy artwork to appear in as many months. Last month the piece below appeared on the wall of a London chemist shop:

Banksy celebrates 60 years of Israel

There are many ways in which the image of children raising and pledging allegiance to the plastic bag flag of Israel Tesco could be interpreted, but it takes a touch of real genius to dumb commentary down to the level that the mainstream media did. News stories reporting on the appearance of the graffiti held that, "It was interpreted as support for the growing campaign to ban free plastic bags." Of course it was. Banksy 'backs ban on plastic bags'. What else could it be?

In a book displaying some of his work, Banging Your Head Against a Brick Wall, Banksy writes how "We can't do anything to change the world until Capitalism crumbles." Whether Capitalism crumbles, or destroys itself -- as it is in the process of doing via a global economic crisis that requires the robbery without limit of the taxpayer, in tandem with 'wealth' creation through the invention of endless yet worthless money -- or whether Capitalism is smashed by the greater mass of humanity that seizes the enduring moment of Capitalism in crisis to overthrow once and for all the system that enslaves it, remains to be seen. Either way, it is clear to all that the personal and private interests of States and Corporations no longer offer any viable or tangible solutions for people or the planet.

Yet the daily diet of mass media mental floss has deleted from history Banksy's wealth of work that contains an inherent anti-capitalist bent and perverts his artistic statements to conjure a world view where there is nothing to worry about other than the annihilation of plastic bags. In the world of media darlings and art snobs Banksy has recanted his anti-Capitalist stance. He is committed to ridding the world of the plastic bags Capitalism produces in order to render the world a better place. Which is, unsurprisingly, utter rubbish, even if Banksy's work, which he donates freely to communities, is changing hands in private monied circles for stupid amounts of cash.

Banksy's latest work rails against what the media term the Big Brother society. Like the 'Nanny State' before it, the familial tag of Big Brother somewhat nullifies the harsh reality that the unbounded implementation of technologies of political control by State and Corporate entities represent. Even if you've read Orwell. The omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent tools of oppression, the prospect of which Hitler would have salivated at, are no longer invasive, intrusive and offensive monstrosities, but instead are divested of their true horrors.

Hello and welcome to Britain. It's only subliminal if you don't notice it.

Below is a similar sized piece that Banksy never quite got around to finishing.

Perhaps he might have finished it if he hadn't given up on anti-Capitalism.

American Idiots

A little light relief in Red, White and Blue.

Fast fame for losers

10 April 2008

Spring/Summer 2008 Terror Season is Open - Updated!

The Spring/Summer 2008 terror season is officially open for business. All the old classics are back with a vengeance. The Spring/Summer 2008 terror season features such old favourites as the much loved but chemically impossible 2006 Lucozade/Tang air 'terror' plot right alongside a 7/7 'terror' trial in which the State is endeavouring to prosecute three men for a sightseeing trip to London.

As Darshna Soni's Channel 4 News piece last year and the public response to it proved, a large majority of the public does not buy the official 7 July 'conspiracy theory' touted by the State, its propagandists, Security Services and a number of private security firms, all of whom are profiting very nicely -- official 'conspiracy theory' 'misery memoir' book deals and all -- from anyone's fears, founded or otherwise. Consequently, the State now appears to be endeavouring to legitimise the illegitimate through the prosecution of three people, Mohammed Shakil, 31, Sadeer Saleem, 27 and Waheed Ali, 24, for visiting landmarks (London Eye, Natural History Museum and London Aquarium, none of which exploded on 7/7) in London.

Neil Flewitt (up the flagpole to see who would salute it) QC, regarding Shakil, Saleem and Ali in the 7/7 'terror' trial case for the prosecution, is reported to have said:
"They were not directly involved in the London bombings in the sense that they were responsible for making or transporting the bombs...."
Despite this, the prosecution's case alleges a malicious conspiracy to cause explosions under the Explosive Substances Act 1883:
Prosecutors say that between November 17, 2004 and July 8, 2005, the defendants "unlawfully and maliciously" conspired with the four bombers and others unknown to cause explosions likely to endanger life or cause serious harm and injury.

The group, all from Beeston, Leeds, deny the single charge under the Explosive Substances Act 1883.
Cleverly, the inclusion of the expression "others unknown" leaves the State with a free reign to bring similar ludicrous charges in future.

So desperate is the State for the propagandistic coup of a conviction of someone -- anyone -- for something, -- anything -- in some vague way related to the events of 7th July 2005, as long as they're Muslim, that the jury has been shown exclusive CCTV footage and still images from the day of 7th July 2005. This footage had previously never before been seen by the public, despite endless references to it, and despite three years of continued efforts to obtain the release of CCTV footage and other 'evidence' by J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign.

Confused? That's the idea.

Update: According to Associated Newspapers, the picture below is "CCTV footage of Hussain cooly buying a battery form the King's Cross WH Smith minutes before he detonated his bomb" and "CCTV footage of Hussain cooly buying a battery form the King's Cross WH Smith minutes before he detonated his bomb".

Update: 14/04/2008 - Day 2 of the "7/7" "terror" show-trial

Latest news from the courtroom featuring the 'magic trick' and 'sleight of hand' of the prosecution has it that the 7/7 accused -- not the people on trial -- ran gaily through packed rush-hour commuter trains as, "The bombers scattered identity and bank cards around the Tube carriages they targeted before placing their rucksacks on the floor and setting off the explosives."

Testing. Testing.

The clever ploy of scattering identification documents far and wide ensured that identification material remained intact, just in case it might ever be needed to bring a prosecution against Muslims for visiting London.
"Although they were damaged to some extent, they [personal materials and documents, such as ID cards relating to the 'bombers'] 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."
No, no, don't test any longer.
"The bombers were not wearing the rucksacks at the time of the explosions, but had instead put them down on the floor of the bus and Tube trains."
In summary: The explosions occurred on the floors of the trains, a detail which has been known for some time, and they occurred "some distance" from the ID which was scattered all over the place 'deliberately separated by some distance" from the explosions.

The case for the prosecution, on the face of the limited reporting that Day 2 of the showtrial received (Channel 4 News didn't touch the story, nor did Newsnight), thus far, bears more resemblance to a case for the defence. Much to look forward to in the coming days as the prosecution has lined up the 'testimony' of supergrass and American prisoner Mohammed Junaid Babar.

Update: 15/04/2008 - Day 3 of the "7/7" "terror" show-trial

Get your BBC Age of Terror head on, which is nothing at all to do with at least three 'terror' trials going on in British courts, or the 60th anniversary of Israel's malignant eruption in Palestine. David Miliband suggests we should celebrate Israel's genocidal inception, ongoing apartheid, collective punishment achievements.

News from Kingston Crown Court is virtually non-existent today, but....

BBC - 7/7 friend 'had 9/11 photographs': "Waheed Ali, 24, had photographs of the destroyed World Trade Center and the damaged Pentagon on his hard drive".

The damaged Pentagon pictures may have looked something like this. Or any one of these. Download them at your terror trial peril.

Artists impression of what the newly reinforced wing of the
Pentagon might look like after it was hit by a missile plane.
Ten bonus points for spotting any plane parts.

Photographs of the destroyed World Trade Center may have looked a little like this. Download it at your terror trial peril. Especially if you have the condiment of mass destruction in your kitchen, black pepper.

World Trade Center tower impersonating a controlled demolotion

Update: 24/04/2008 - Crevice / 7/7 who's who by another name

Precious little is being reported from the first trial in three years resulting from Sir Ian Blair's "largest criminal inquiry in English history", ignoring for now the testimony from U.S. prison provided by FBI supergrass, Mohammad Junaid Babar and the conclusive proof of guilt provided by undercover surveillance footage of men walking past a kebab shop and a photo of the inside of Omar Khyam's bedsit. "Reporting restrictions" imposed by the State are the reason for the dire lack of coverage because, if the fullness of the events were to be reported, people's minds would boggle that a prosecution was even being brought.

So, instead, for research purposes and anyone following the so-called "7/7 trial", here are the handles of various people ensnared by the crack Crevice sting, many of whom feature in the "7/7 trial", even though you might not have known it until now. Courtesy of J7 and S over at Eco Postie:
  • "Abdul Haleem / Halim" = Kazi Nurur Rahman
  • "Abdul Rahman" = Anthony Garcia
  • "Abdul Waheed" = Waheed Mahmood (Also known as Abdul, Esmail or Javed)
  • "Ausman" = Omar Khyam
  • "Azhar", previously referred to as 'Unidentified male 3' = Azhar Shazad Khan, the brother-in-law of "Ausman" / Omar Khyam.
  • "Hamza" = Jawad Akbar (cousin of Nabeel Hussain, found not guilty)
  • "Imran" = Zeeshan Siddique
  • "Ibrahim" = Mohammed Siddique Khan
  • "Khalid" = Salahuddin Amin (tortured in Pakistan while British authorities turned a blind eye)

09 April 2008

A Libyan human being known only as Detainee DD

You can lock people up, you can take away their freedom, you can take away their names, their identity and their nationality. You can even remove the most basic vestiges of subsistence existence, but the human spirit is a wonderful thing. The human spirit abides even the most heinous travesties of justice.
I’m not allowed to disclose my name or any information that could lead to my personal identification. I am not allowed to disclose this information to anyone no matter who he may be, even a police officer.
Artwork by a Libyan human being known only as Detainee DD.

Words, addressed to us all, by a Libyan human being known only as Detainee DD:
If you stand back and do nothing then your silence in such difficult times will be recorded in history. So once again I appeal to all you listeners to break the silence, be it with an influential letter, article, protest, or through condemning and denouncing the government’s policies. Do anything you can to help those who are held indefinitely without charge. Indefinite detention without charge is found only in dictator countries like Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, Egypt etc.

If this country is to maintain democracy we must put a stop to indefinite detention without charge. The government should not be allowed to use 07.07 as a pretext to justify indefinite detention or to buy our silence. Only because the real culprits of 07.07 have not been found the government is using us as scapegoats so that the people can extinguish their anger on us.

08 April 2008

BBC Conspiracy Files, MI6, Milosovic, 7/7 & Jill Dando

Following yesterday's revelation about the startling similarities between the murder of Dodi Fayed and Lady Diana Spencer and a proposed methodology ascribed to an MI6 assassination plan for Serbian President Milosovic that involved "disorienting Milosovic's chauffeur using a blinding strobe light as the cavalcade passed through one of Geneva's motorway tunnels", BBC2 will shortly be screening (7pm tonight) what they refer to as a 'Conspiracy Files Special' on How Diana Died.
As the High Court jury return a verdict of unlawful killing on the death of Princess Diana, a special programme explores how the conspiracy theories into her death emerged over the past 10 years and grew ever more elaborate.
Whether tonight's Conspiracy Files is merely a re-run of last year's shameful masquerading of what was once known as 'investigative journalism' is unknown but, if nothing else, it does provide an excellent opportunity to republish the response issued to the BBC Conspiracy Files team by J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign following a somewhat underhanded approach last year.

Notably, the Conspiracy Files web site fails to mention the planned episode which purports to address the events of 7th July 2005 but, no doubt, one can expect to see the usual suspects and cast of nasties comprising at least one media and blog darling with a flair for shameless self-promotion and self-publicity, a couple of equally laughable 'experts', a smattering of 9/11 Truthling Campaigners and anyone else whose arms the BBC could twist with the promise of 15 minutes of fame.

For anyone interested in more from the source of the alleged plot to assassinate Slobodan Milosovic, 'ex' MI6er Richard Tomlinson, you may wish to download a PDF copy of his book The Big Breach - From Top Secret to Maximum Security.

Over to J7 for their rejection and rebuttal of the BBC's Conspiracy Files and its flawed, facile and formulaic methodology:
J7 refuse to participate in BBC's Conspiracy Files

Shortly after the second anniversary of 7th July 2005, J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign was contacted by Chris Alcock of the BBC who advised us of plans for a BBC documentary covering the events of 7th July 2005. No detail about the nature of the 'documentary' was provided until five months later, in December 2007, when another BBC employee, Assistant Producer Susan Prichard, advised us by email that the BBC production in question, rather than being a serious documentary effort for which the BBC was once well known, was in fact an episode of BBC2's risible Conspiracy Files series.

For anyone that missed out on the 'privilege' of watching the first four episodes of the Conspiracy Files, previous programmes have covered the events of 11th September 2001, the death of weapons inspector Dr David Kelly, the murder of Dodi Fayed and the Oklahoma bombing. Some episodes of the first Conspiracy Files series are available to view online and links are provided below:

Upon learning that our assistance was being requested in connection with the production of an episode of the formulaic Conspiracy Files rather than a serious, honest, open-minded and in-depth documentary that examined the official Home Office account of events -- the original 'conspiracy theory' about what happened -- the lack of evidence to support it, the errors exposed by J7's ongoing research and the numerous anomalies and inconsistencies in the story the government has endeavoured to fob the British public off with in place of a full and independent public inquiry outside of the Inquiries Act 2005, J7 issued a response to the BBC declining to participate in the programme and outlining our reasons for reaching this decision. What follows is a full copy of the J7 response to the BBC request to participate in its Conspiracy Files series. Much of what is written below is equally applicable to other broadcast and print media:

Date:     Wed, 12 Dec 2007
From: J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
To: Susan Prichard
Subject: Re: BBC Documentary
Dear Susan,

As you will be aware, earlier this year, J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign was contacted by Chris Alcock with regard to our participating in a BBC programme, although the programme in question was never identified. We cooperated fully with Chris, providing him with links to further information and avenues of investigation and Chris also took it upon himself to directly contact several of the highly respected authors and academics who have written articles for J7 that are published on our web site. In none of these communications was the nature of the programme in question mentioned, although all those contacted were primed for a possible appearance in a BBC documentary examining the events of 7th July 2005.

It is difficult to express how appalled and disgusted we felt when we learnt, as we did from your email of last week, that the 'documentary' for which Chris Alcock was soliciting participants is in fact an episode of BBC2's risible Conspiracy Files series.

For the sake of clarity, it is worth establishing precisely, according to dictionary definitions, what the term ‘conspiracy theory’ means. While the definition of what a ‘theory’ is requires little or no clarification, in law, for it is under the law which alleged criminals are charged for their crimes, a conspiracy is defined as, “an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act.” Therefore, by the very definition of the term ‘conspiracy theory’ any theory about how the events of 7/7 came to be that involves two or more people making it happen, is in fact a ‘conspiracy theory’. As such, the official government narrative, which is based on four, young, British Muslim men conspiring to kill themselves and others is, technically, by the legal and dictionary definitions of a ‘conspiracy’, a ‘conspiracy theory’. As there has been no due legal process – recall the phrase “innocent until proven guilty” – by which the four accused have had their guilt established beyond reasonable doubt, nor has there been an Independent Public Inquiry held outside of the constraints of the Inquiries Act 2005, the official version of events remains precisely a 'conspiracy theory'.

The July 7th Truth Campaign has never posited an alternative theory of what happened on 7/7, ‘conspiracy theory’ or otherwise. Therefore, the July 7th Truth Campaign cannot be defined, nor dismissed, as ‘conspiracy theorists’ in the traditional, pejorative sense, nor even the legal sense, of the term for the simple reason that, unlike the ‘conspiracy theorists’ which you are no doubt seeking for your programme, we do not promote any alternative ‘conspiracy theory’ about what might have happened that fateful day. Instead, the basis of the July 7th Truth Campaign has, since its inception, been that of endeavouring to uncover real, tangible evidence about the events of 7/7 and to challenge the official government narrative in instances where evidence proves the falsehoods in this narrative.

Furthermore, there exists in the public domain absolutely no evidence to support the Home Office narrative, much less evidence which proves it beyond reasonable doubt. Rather, there is evidence in the public domain that directly contradicts the version of events outlined in the Home Office story, evidence that has twice resulted in the Home Office amending the highly flawed narrative that was ten months in the making. It is worth noting that as a result of these two amendments forced by J7’s questioning, the official Home Office narrative has become more convoluted and even less coherent than it was originally, featuring as it now does, a scenario in which the four accused allegedly don their rucksacks on two separate occasions outside Luton station, once at 0649 and then again at 0714.

The BBC is an organisation funded by the licence-fee paying British public and the State, which itself is funded by the tax-paying British public. The BBC and the State are both public service organisations and, as such, should serve the public who fund their existences. Yet, with regard to the events of 7/7, neither the government nor the BBC can be described to have served the public in any respect, unless promulgating factually inaccurate, unsubstantiated speculations is considered to be a public service. In fact quite the opposite of serving the public has occurred, and both organisations have repeatedly performed a shameful disservice.

The events of 7th July 2005 resulted in the single biggest loss of life in London since the Luftwaffe bombings of the second World War and, in the two and a half years that have passed since, the behemoth that is the BBC has never yet found within itself the resources, time or inclination to address -- with the level of detail, gravitas and import that such an event deserves – precisely what happened on 7th July 2005, how it happened, or who was responsible for making it happen. Further, the BBC has never endeavoured to tackle the many unanswered questions, anomalies and inconsistencies in the official version of events outlined in the Home Office report dealing with the subject, despite the plight of the bereaved families whose questions about their loved ones have yet to be satisfactorily answered, and despite the continued efforts of the July 7th Truth Campaign to analyse the validity, or otherwise as is more often the case, of the official version of events. Where is the BBC programme championing the cause of the bereaved families and assisting them to obtain the truth from the authorities about how their loved ones died? As one bereaved family member summed up when they contacted us by email, “Yes, we do need the truth to come out (personally speaking I don't believe it has yet) but truth is what it has to be for proper closure.” Indeed, the father of 18 year old Hasib Hussain, accused of perpetrating the explosion on the number 30 bus, when doorstepped by a BBC journalist and TV crew, despaired at having never been shown any evidence of his son’s involvement or guilt.

It is beyond comprehension that the BBC is not endeavouring to hold the State to account – a state which is already proven to be mendacious, to have lied about Iraq’s WMD, and that has been complicit in the slaughter of over a million Iraqi civilians -- for its production of a speculative, unsubstantiated and entirely evidence-free 'narrative' that is little more than an egregious insult to the victims, their bereaved relatives, and those who survived the event. That the BBC's approach appears instead to be one that will endeavour to portray the July 7th Truth Campaign, or anyone with perfectly legitimate and unanswered questions to which we all deserve answers, as 'Conspiracy Theorists' is still less comprehensible. This approach is as distasteful as it is abhorrent.

We also noted with extreme interest the following line in your email with regard to your proposed episode of the Conspiracy Files:

"Throughout our focus will be on establishing the evidence and building up as definitive an account as possible of what happened."

To the best of our knowledge, "building up as definitive an account as possible of what happened" on 7/7 is not the function of the BBC, for the task of piecing together the story behind what Sir Ian Blair termed, “the largest criminal inquiry in English history”, is the job of the State in the form of the government and police. If you are indeed interested in building up such an account we can only suggest that you, the bereaved families, the survivors who have been all but forgotten as far as the media is concerned and your viewing public would be far better served by an episode of the Conspiracy Files which features representatives from the government and police who have access to information that has hitherto not been made public. After all, it was the Home Office branch of government that produced the official ‘conspiracy theory’ about what happened on 7th July 2005 in the form of a 'narrative' – a story -- that the July 7th Truth Campaign has proven to be based on information that was neither factual nor truthful.

The July Truth Campaign has been consistently appalled by the fact that, with regard to coverage of anything 7/7 related, the efforts of the BBC have been disingenuous, deceitful and downright dishonest and that no effort has been made to rectify this. There are countless examples where the BBC has, either wittingly or unwittingly, placed misinformation into the public domain, whether this be in ‘news’ items or ‘documentary’ programmes. We outline below a few of the more blatant examples of the BBC’s wilful ignorance of the few facts that are known, or dubious tactics employed:

  • Just one week after 7/7, the BBC broadcast an episode of Real Story with Fiona Bruce which gave considerable time to the eye-witness testimony of Richard Jones, an individual who has given many and varied versions of what he claims to have seen aboard the number 30 bus which means that, at best, he is an extremely unreliable witness. Furthermore, none of his accounts bear any relation to Hasib Hussain. The BBC has never revisited the testimony of Richard Jones.

  • On the afternoon of 7th July 2005 information came to light via BBC Radio Five Live’s Drivetime programme about a private company running a terror rehearsal operation at the time that real explosions were reported to have occurred on the London transport network. This information was revealed by the Managing Director of Visor Consultants, Peter Power who, in his own words, was rehearsing, “simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened.” Since the day of 7/7, the BBC has used Peter Power as an ‘independent’ security consultant with monotonous regularity across its entire broadcast media yet, curiously, he has never been questioned about his activities on the day of 7/7 while strenuously making the case for 90 days internment and how the British people must live in fear of another attack as part of what he calls ‘new normal’. Mr Power has also revealed ‘mock broadcasts’ were used as part of his operation and that, “there was a few seconds when the audience didn't realise whether it was real or not.”. Mr Power also featured in a Panorama programme broadcast in May 2004 in which a fictional attack on the London Underground took place, with three explosions occurring on underground trains, followed by another explosion above ground about an hour later. It was the BBC that put together ‘mock broadcasts’ featuring a bona-fide newsreader, Kirsty Lang, who, no doubt coincidentally, just happened to be the ‘relief presenter’ for BBC World on the day of 7/7. This is an irregularity on a par with the efforts of another BBC World presenter, Jane Standley, who announced on 11th September 2001 that WTC Building 7 had collapsed despite it not being hit by a plane, yet the building could be seen standing proudly in the background of her report before the feed fizzled out. WTC7 Building 7 went on to collapse 23 minutes after Jane Standley’s premonitory collapse report announcing it had already done so. Standley and BBC World’s amazing, prophetic foresight was never mentioned during the 9/11 Conspiracy Files and would have made for far more relevant and compelling viewing than the interview with a writer of the X-Files.

  • BBC news stories about the events of 7th July 2005 have regularly and shamefully been presented with a backdrop that deceitfully shows footage of three of the accused taken from 28th June 2005, some 9 days before 7/7. The severity of this deception is further amplified by the fact that this footage has often appeared in edited form so that the actual time and date stamps are not visible. The lack of any CCTV footage from the day of 7/7 has never been questioned by the BBC, nor has the fact that, in the one CCTV image allegedly showing all four perpetrators outside Luton station, three of the faces are completely unidentifiable.

  • On 27 October 2005, a BBC Horizon programme aired, “The 7/7 Bombers – A Psychological Investigation: What makes someone want to blow themselves – and others - up?", featuring forensic psychiatrist Marc Sageman and Dr Andrew Silke, which claimed to offer a psychological profile of the suicide bombers. The programme stated that the accused caught the 0748 train from Luton to King's Cross and that they arrived at King’s Cross at 0826. This was not the case and yet no amendment or apology for the inaccurate version of events outlined in that programme has ever been issued by the BBC. In response to a complaint about these factual inaccuracies, the laughable explanation was that while “re-tracing the journey of the 4 bombers, he [Silke] was not re-enacting it so there are some bits of his journey that do differ from the journey of the bombers.” Quite what the point of re-tracing steps that obviously weren’t taken by the accused remains a mystery. That the train times had been supplied to the programme makers by the Metropolitan Police Specialist Operations office was also worthy of comment and investigation.

  • There are several documented examples demonstrating the BBC’s guilt in editing stories on the BBC News web site where phrases implying details about the alleged bomber’s journey, such as, “Passengers on the 0748 Thameslink from Luton to King's Cross”, have been edited out, yet the ‘last edited’ date and time has, rather disingenuously, not been updated to reflect these amendments. This is in direct contravention of the Press Complaints Commission guidelines which specify, “A significant inaccuracy, mis-leading statement or distortion once recognised must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence, and - where appropriate - an apology published.”

  • The BBC, along with the Metropolitan Police, claimed that the explosion on the Piccadilly Line train occurred by the first set of double doors on carriage one. The BBC web page containing this information was accompanied by a graphic showing this as the alleged seat of the explosion. Without any explanation, the BBC then changed this information to say that the explosion occurred by the second set of double doors and the graphic was updated accordingly. Curiously the Metropolitan Police – whom one might think would be the source for such information – have never amended or updated their account of the explosion being by the first set of double doors.

While the following information will serve little or no use in the production of an episode of the Conspiracy Files dealing with 7/7, as ‘researchers’ and/or ‘journalists’ you may be interested to note that, while the July 7th Truth Campaign is the only organisation that has been openly and publicly challenging the government on their flawed and inaccurate story of 7/7 since the day the incidents occurred, the government is also being privately challenged by families of the bereaved and survivors with regard to the accuracy of the report. In particular, the government has been taken to task over discrepancies in the alleged locations of the blasts on the underground trains. Another fact that the BBC has failed to investigate is that in August 2006, the then Home Secretary, Dr John Reid, responded that, over a year after the events occurred, a final forensics report had not yet been received.

More recently, after Coroner Dr Andrew Reid sent, unsolicited and without warning in early December, post-mortem reports to the bereaved, at least one family member has noted that there were "fundamental" differences between what they saw when they viewed their son's body and what the post mortem report said. This too has received no further comment or investigation from the BBC.

By way of conclusion to this communication, the magnitude and importance of the events of 7/7 and the repercussions of those events must not be underestimated. The official yet unsubstantiated story has been seared into the public consciousness as the 'first suicide-bombings' on British soil, a concept only trumped by the fact that this also qualifies the official story of 7/7 as the first 'suicide bombings' in the whole of Western Europe. The Home Office narrative of 7/7 is repeatedly used as unquestionable justification by the State and its corporate advisor apparatchiks to institute increasingly repressive legislation, including the widely abused 28 days detention without charge while the authorities struggle to uncover the evidence required to bring charges in a court of law. It wasn’t that long ago evidence was required before arrests were made.

To understand a little more about the wider context of 7/7 and everything that has happened since, one need only look to the words and wisdom of the Ministry of Defence who, on page 81 of a March 2007 report entitled, "The DCDC Global Strategic Trends Programme 2007-2036 (Third Edition)", noted what the State considers to be a core threat in the foreseeable future:

The Middle Class Proletariat

The middle classes could become a revolutionary class, taking the role envisaged for the proletariat by Marx. The globalization of labour markets and reducing levels of national welfare provision and employment could reduce peoples’ attachment to particular states. The growing gap between themselves and a small number of highly visible super-rich individuals might fuel disillusion with meritocracy, while the growing urban under-classes are likely to pose an increasing threat to social order and stability, as the burden of acquired debt and the failure of pension provision begins to bite. Faced by these twin challenges, the world’s middle-classes might unite, using access to knowledge, resources and skills to shape transnational processes in their own class interest.

The official story of 7/7 has been used to demonise and dehumanise the Muslim community, in much the same way that the Jewish community was demonised in 1930s Nazi Germany following a similarly questionable and catalysing event, the Reichstag fire, and has proved to be the enabling factor for the rapid and unchallenged institution of more Draconian laws that impose unprecedented restrictions on the civil liberties of everyone. It is worth remembering that the far-reaching scope of the law, "anti-terrorist" or otherwise, is applicable not just to the Muslim community but to each and every one of us and the State has no qualms about using its laws against anyone and everyone from whom it perceives a threat to what State actors refer to as, “our way of life”.

These factors are testimony to just how seriously 7/7 requires honest, principled and open-minded investigation to get to the facts and the truth about what happened. Only the truth will stand up to rigorous investigation and questioning yet, to date, this questioning and investigation has fallen to ordinary members of the public who have taken it upon themselves to do so, ordinary members of the public like J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign.

The July 7th Truth Campaign would be more than happy to participate in any serious programme that honestly examines 7/7 in its correct historical and political context, the government narrative, the lack of evidence to support it, the nonsensical amendments that have been made to the narrative, and the ever increasing list of unanswered questions that engulf the events of 7/7.

However, we do not feel that the Conspiracy Files is the vehicle that will facilitate this, nor will it treat the event or issues arising from it with the level of seriousness that they demand, and nor will it further the cause of the July 7th Truth Campaign’s quest for the truth about what happened on 7th July 2005. As such, the July 7th Truth Campaign has no intention of participating in the proposed episode of the Conspiracy Files and can only hope you will take on board the points we have raised in this communication in consideration of your public service duty to the people of Britain, a people that includes at least 56 families whom, through your continued refusal to honestly address the events of 7/7, you have hitherto failed abysmally.

For truth and justice,
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign

07 April 2008

An insight into MI6 assassination techniques

From tonight's Snowmail:
As I write the Diana inquest verdict has just been announced. I suppose the central question is whether if Mr al-Fayed had been a poor man if there’d ever have been such a case. In other words, if money can’t buy you love can it create enough pressure to get you an inquest in which every known fantasy is tested and generally found wanting? Anyway the outcome was predictable: unlawful killing by a combination of the reckless driving of Henri Paul and the pursuing paparazzi.

One of the really interesting things that has come out of the case has been the appearance of an MI6 boss who rubbished the claims that the secret service had been involved in Diana’s death, but whose evidence also stood up earlier claims that a proposal had been drawn up by an intelligence official for an MI6 plot to bump off a Balkan leader. That’s an avenue we’ve been exploring further...


Which probably relates to this snippet from the excellent Web of Deceit: Britain's Real Role in the World by Mark Curtis:
Former MI6 intelligence officer, Richard Tomlinson, revealed that MI6 also planned an assassination attempt against Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosovic. Conceived in 1992, MI6 put forward three options in a report entitled 'The need to assassinate President Milosovic of Serbia'. These were: to train a Serbian paramilitary group to carry out the assassination; to send in an SAS team to kill him with a bomb or sniper ambush; or to kill him in a road crash to be staged during a visit to Geneva, such as by disorienting Milosovic's chauffeur using a blinding strobe light as the cavalcade passed through one of Geneva's motorway tunnels. It appears that the plan was not carried out.

Chapter 6 of the book does however detail how NATO aircraft specifically targeted Milosovic for assassination during the Kosovo war.

For anyone looking for a little insight into the story of one Harry Maurice Roberts, Chapter 16 of Web of Deceit, 'Malaya: War in Defence of the Rubber Industry', provides good background information into the activities Roberts would have undertaken during the Malaya 'Emergency' (read: Crisis of Capitalism) on behalf of the State that is now holding him in jail, with no reason given, twelve years after his 30 year life sentence tariff expired.