de Menezes Murder: IPCC report leaks more evidence of a cover up

Three arrests already in connection with the August 2005 leaks from the IPCC investigation into the Mossad-style execution of innocent Brazilian electrician Jean Charles de Menezes. The most recent arrest was that of an ITN journalist and news producer on suspicion of theft. Ironic perhaps that the story hailed as one of the biggest scoops in the history of British television news, entered by ITV for the Royal Television Society awards, should result in the arrest of three people involved with making it happen.

Eleven days ago, the report from the IPCC investigation into the killing was issued to a select few people. Yesterday, some aspects of the report gained slightly wider recognition with leaked information providing yet more damning evidence of a cover-up, the scale of which appears to be much more elaborate than before.

Recall the original IPCC leak in which the officer in charge of watching the block of flats, apparently for Hussain Osman / Hamdi Isaac, was 'relieving himself' at the time de Menezes exited the flats and that no positive identification was made at that time. The officer recommended someone else check out the man in question and de Menezes was then followed on his journey to Stockwell tube station.

The leaked report seems to suggest that not only did someone check out de Menezes but that de Menezes was positively identified as Hussain Osman, the bomber with no bomb from the previous day, July 21st.

No doubt an easy mistake to make as these pictures of de Menezes and Osman clearly show:


The leak reveals that crude attempts were apparently made by Special Branch to fake the log of events at a debriefing session held later that day. The aim of the tampering was to make it look as though no positive identification of De Menezes had been made. Perhaps this was done once the error had been realised, or perhaps it was done precisely according to plan. Either way, removing the notion of a positive identication of the suspect - presumably determined by a member of one of the surveillance teams - would have the desired effect of shifting blame for the murder to those who would appear to have murdered someone who had not been identified as being a threat, and/or those responsible for operating the shoot to kill policy.

Some revelation indeed.

Alex Pereira, the cousin of Jean Charles de Menezes said, "Yet again, we the family have to rely on the Press as we have been treated as if we do not matter by the police. They never tell us anything. We have not been allowed to look at the IPCC report. I am not at all surprised by these revelations in the report. We have known all along that the police were lying."

Metropolitan Police Commissioner Ian Blair, who only last week created yet another stir for no discernible reason at all by expressing his wonderment at why anyone might care about the kidnap and murder of two young girls, claimed that he didn't know the wrong man had been shot on July 22nd until 24 hours after the event. This is despite having attempted to delay the start of the IPCC inquiry with a letter to the Home Office that was curiously dated July 21st, the day before de Menezes was shot, the day of the 'attack on London' when the 'bombers' carried no bombs.



Through his quick thinking and actions Ian Blair managed to delay the start of the IPCC investigation into the murder of an innocent man until some six days after de Menezes was executed. In this time the IPCC's access to crucial evidence such as CCTV, event logs, radio communications recordings and eye witnesses, such as they may all have been, was prevented.

The de Menezes family is demanding to see a copy of the full IPCC report and that the report be made public. There are also renewed calls for a public inquiry into the killing as the latest leaked information hints at quite why there might be a vested interest in ensuring that little else from this report makes it into the public domain.

The initial doubts over the usefulness of an IPCC inquiry haven't gone away and the latest revelations show, yet again, quite why an independent public inquiry into the killing of Jean Charles de Menezes is absolutely essential if any justice is to be had for the innocent man who was killed in increasingly suspicious circumstances by persons hitherto unknown.

As time goes on a clearer picture of what happened that day is building up and as the power battles continue, the question must be asked about the murder of Jean Charles de Menezes: Who is framing who?

Syphilitic Viral Marketing

Syphilitic Viral Marketing: Just like ordinary viral marketing, only this time you know you're really being fucked.

In the event of a major terrorist attack on a day like July 7th - for arguments sake, let's call it 7/7 - when the battle to beat down stories of independently verified facts about train times, train numbers, the movements of the alleged perpetrators, non-existent drivers of non-existent trains - you know, all the sort of niggly little details that matter quite a lot to an investigation into such an incident - what would YOU do to reclaim lost territory in the information battle for hearts and minds?

When all versions of the loosely tied-together 'official' story all fall apart from the very beginning of the narrative and when this information is out there, in the public consciousness, solidifying and polarising opinion and gaining greater and greater support from public figures that include film writers and directors, whistleblowers and those few high profile individuals that have the balls to tackle such things, what else is left in the great war of information suppression?

How would YOU go about increasing the noise surrounding an incident on the day of July 7th to drown out anything that vaguely resembles a signal?

Don something that resembles a thinking cap for a few moments, remember that 7/7 is the event that you now wish to bury in a dirge of unrelated drivel, shit and nonsense and see what clever little ruses you come up with.

If you're extremely wily indeed, one of those ruses might just involve a syphilitic viral marketing technique that revolves around making a whole series of normally quite sensible people waste valuable moments of their existences writing and publishing seven list of seven things that nobody - other than themselves - could ever really care about, before 'tagging' a bunch of other people and making them repeat the same arduous and pointless process.

Seven lists of seven things. 7 lists of 7. 7/7. Ad nauseam.

From here-on in, all references to the events of July 7th, 2005 will be referred to as such, or in the abbreviated forms 'July 7th' or '7th July'.

Not Dead Yet!

It's been a little quiet on the posting front here since London 7/7 : The Information & The Event Horizon but rather a lot has being going on in various other places.

Normal service is now being resumed here at Anything that defies my sense of reason.... and those interested in what has been going on during the periods of blog silence should check out the Forum of the Antagonised.

For those that can't be bothered, here's a quick update....

On Christmas Day, cult writer and director Alex Cox [he of BBC Moviedrome fame, the director of Sid and Nancy, Death & The Compass and the writer and director of Repo Man] wrote an entry on his blog entitled '7/7 - OUR 9/11?' in which he discussed various perspectives on the horrific events in London on July 7th.

The article followed Alex's reviews of three books on the subject of 9/11 and information from a leaflet collected at a peace march in London in September 2005. The article makes reference to a number of sources of information on the subject of July 7th including none other than The Antagonist's very own musings on the subject.

The article resulted in a discussion on the Alex Cox forum about the very many inconsistencies in what is generally held to be the official narrative of events on July 7th. Such was the response that Alex Cox was once again moved to write about the subject of July 7th, replacing the article he originally had planned for his blog with an article about 7/7 - THE MOVIE.

In it he writes:

Who cares? some may ask. Why bother with this stuff when we could be blogging about our favourite movie, or our next trip to Sundance? Because this stuff is much more important. The right wing (which includes New Labour and the US Democrats, in case you've just woken from a long, long sleep) is hell-bent on depriving us of what civil liberties we have. In the US, the Bill of Rights and Habeas Corpus no longer exist. Blair, Clarke, and their clones in the Tory and Lib Dem parties all seek to ape the New American Totalitarian Way. Bearded pundits such as Timothy Garton Ash (who the fuck is this guy? Why do we have to read his pompous drivel in The Guardian?) say it's now necessary to sacrifice freedom for security.

The Antagonist heartily recommends readers to read both the Alex Cox articles: 7/7 OUR 9/11 and 7/7 - THE MOVIE and the discussions taking place on the Alex Cox Forum.

And, as if being written about by a cult/writer and director wasn't enough (and appearing on Big Brother's radar), hot on the heels of those articles comes a second confirmation from Transport For London that the Piccadilly Line train affected in the incidents on July 7th was in fact train 331, not train 311 as was originally reported.

The driver of train 311 who spent 40 minutes with his train and passengers in almost total darkness tending to the injured in the aftermath of what happened on his train and of whom the Metropolitan Police had no record after interviewing him for three hours, has apparently been acknowledged as being involved in the incidents and is now on the way to receiving compensation for his horrific experience.

However, this leaves the small issue of train 331, the train that Transport for London issued as the corrected number of the affected Piccadilly Line train on July 7th.

In a response to an email by an independent public researcher seeking to clarify precisely which Piccadilly Line train was involved on July 7th, Tranport for London gave the following response:

Our ref: 1084546

17/Jan/2006

Thanks for your further email.

As stated in my previous email, the Piccadilly train involved on 7 July was the westbound train no 331. The initial reports that we received immediately at the time were incorrect and have now been subsequently updated.

Thank you for taking the time to contact us. Please get in touch if I can be of any further help.

Yours sincerely

Fola Olafare
Customer Service Centre

The 311/331 July 7th Piccadilly Line train saga continues.

London 7/7: the Information & the Event Horizon

The event horizon is the boundary of a black hole, the gravity field of a black hole where space-time is so bent that nothing can escape it. Once inside an event horizon the gravitational attraction of the singularity, the black hole, is so strong only that which can generate the required escape velocity, a speed greater than the speed of light, can ever escape, including light itself.

After becoming enveloped by the event horizon, not even the emissions that traced an object's existence will escape the black hole. No record, no information, nothing other than memory of the object remains.

Today is the sixth day of '06 and it is six months to the day since the day before the seventh day of the seventh month of '05, the day the bombs came to London. Upon closer inspection July 7th appears to be some sort of event horizon for information about the day, behind which there exists a big, black hole sucking up space and time and, more importantly, information about what happened.

More and more information is disappearing ever more rapidly into the place where space, time and information are so bent that unless a few more minds start travelling a little quicker than 'drip, drip, drip', nothing and no-one will ever escape the intense gravitational attraction of the singularity ever again and nothing and no-one will be left to prove that anything had previously existed in the first place.

Since the July 7th event horizon countless documentaries have been made, stories have been written, public inquiries have been refused by the government -twice - and while much is known about the aftermath, little is known about what actually happened.

And then something which defies your sense of reason happens....

If you were to find out that the driver of Piccadilly Line train 311 on July 7th - the originally reported blast train - was refused compensation after spending 40 minutes in almost total darkness tending to the injured because, according to the Metropolitan Police, "We have no knowledge of this person having been involved in this incident and therefore will not be processing his claim further", would it concern you?

If you then found out the driver of train 311 had also been interviewed by Metropolitan Police for around three hours, along with his Train Operator passenger in the cab that morning, and still the Metropolitan Police have “no knowledge of this person having been involved in this incident”, would it concern you then?

On July 9th, Transport For London reported the following blast timings and locations:

Explosions were as follows (in succession):

• Circle line train number 204 heading eastbound from Liverpool Street station to Aldgate station.
• Circle line train number 216 travelling westbound heading from Edgware Road station to Paddington station.
• Piccadilly line train number 311 travelling from King's Cross St Pancras to Russell Square southbound.

Source: Transport For London

Note the number of the Piccadilly Line train, 311.

This was later changed to Piccadilly Line train 331, which was confirmed by Transport For London's customer services after an email from an independent researcher:

19/Nov/2005

Thank you for your email dated 5 November.

I can confirm that the Piccadilly train involved on 7 July was the westbound train no 331. The initial reports that we received immediately at the time were incorrect and we updated our records accordingly as soon as we were advised.

Thank you for taking the time to contact us. Please let me know if you have any further queries or if you need any help in the future.

Yours sincerely

Fola Olafare
Customer Service Centre

Transport for London made a mistake in reporting that Piccadilly Line train 311 was involved in the events of July 7th, corrected the original announcement and then confirmed that it was Piccadilly Line train 331 on which the carnage occurred.

Granting TFL the benefit of the doubt, let's say that they made a mistake and it was indeed train 331 involved in the blasts. So far, so good, train 331 it is.

Except, in the last few days, comments were left on a July 7th related blog by a Train Operator who travelled in the cab along with the driver of Piccadilly Line train number 311 - the original train that was 'corrected' to train 331 – which seemed to indicate that train 311 had indeed been involved in the events of July 7th. The comments by the T/Op passenger have since been removed from the blog on which they were posted and are reproduced here for the information they contain about what happened that day:

Not wishing to denigrate any of the actions of police on the day, not ONE WORD has been said about the driver of Train 311, Tom *****.

I joined Tom's train at Kings Cross, travelling in the cab with him on my way to work as a fellow driver, based at Acton Town. I took the first couple of batches of walking wounded to Russell Square and was probably the first member of staff to meet any colleague at the station.

Tom stayed behind in the first car, doing what we as drivers are paid to do, looking after his train and his passengers on it. He helped some by applying tourniquets and reassuring others. He saw things that even trained police officers found themselves unable to cope with, but most importantly had to face it on his own before help arrived probably 40 minutes later, a scene of utter devastation in almost total darkness.

He has never been mentioned or praised, he has remained dignified and quiet, and has never returned to drive a train.

Recently he applied for some compensation through his union. The response from the Met Police was "We have no knowledge of this person having been involved in this incident and therefore will not be processing his claim further."

Rather odd because Tom and I were interviewed by police for around three hours after the incident.

The press coverage of the other 'heroes' has left him feeling completely empty and devalued. Pity when the the reaction of Police and certain members of station staff are lauded he has been completely forgotten.

Ray Wright,
Train Operator
Acton Town Depot

With these comments it now appears we have a non-existent train - the original Piccadilly Line train, train 311 – which, unsurprisingly for a non-existent train, also has a non-existent driver of whom the Metropolitan Police have no record and who cannot claim any compensation after spending forty minutes in almost total darkness attending to the injured in the aftermath of what happened on his train.

No conspiracy, no speculation, no hypothesis, just a train and a driver – Piccadilly Line train 311, the originally reported train - that, as far as the Metropolitan Police are concerned, do not exist in Sir Ian Blair's 'largest criminal inquiry in English history'.