"When injustice becomes law,
resistance becomes duty."
"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can't take part; you can't even passively take part, and you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you've got to make it stop. And you've got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you're free, the machine will be prevented from working at all!" -- Mario Savio
It has to start somewhere. It has to start sometime. What better place than here? What better time than now?
Welcome to Anything that defies my sense of reason.... Class antagonism of a New World Order.
....because words will always retain their power, offer the means to meaning and, for those who'll listen, the enunciation of truth, and because being sleepwalked into fascism is not an option.
To confront ideas that radically alter our perception of the world is one of life's most unsettling yet liberating experiences.
Throw away your ambitions for membership to the socially acceptable position of wage slave.
"Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; the right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers." -- Article 19
Posts
All Comments
"Although the plotters plainly designed their plot in a way that would add the fuel of worldwide publicity to their aims, these inquests have at their heart, however, the single fact that there was a conspiracy to murder. Each of these 52 inquests is concerned with an act of murder. We have found no evidence to the contrary. It is also clear from the evidence that is available that the four men who detonated the bombs were Mohammed Sidique Khan, Shehzad Tanweer, Jermaine Lindsay and Hasib Hussain. To reflect the reality of the position and to avoid legal sophistry, I intend to call them "the bombers". [page 13, lines 9-20]
...
"But again, I must emphasise it is not a proper function of an inquest to attribute blame or apportion guilt, or a proper function of mine to express opinions on impermissible areas. [page 15, lines 2-7]
...
"Some of the questions may never fully be answered and some may of course also fall outside the scope of these inquests, but what we can say is that a great deal of time, energy and resources has been devoted to finding out what happened to each deceased. Thus it is to be hoped that these inquests, however unpleasant and distressing, as they will be, will assist in answering the families' questions in allaying some of the rumours and suspicion generated by conspiracy theorists." [page 22, lines 8-16]
-- Hugo Keith, Counsel to the 7 July InquestsIt's the end of the first week of the 7 July Inquests process. It's been a long and busy week for the J7 research collective as we endeavour to look beyond the largely throwaway headlines the mainstream media are happy to churn out to fill the spaces between adverts -- as cunningly crafted for them by Counsel to the Inquests, Hugo Keith* -- and examine the minutiae of the proceedings.Each day the Inquest sits results in approximately 200 pages of transcripts and a varying amount of evidential submissions that need to be diligently worked through and examined in light of the research work that J7 has been conducting during the five years that have passed since the events of 7 July 2005. And, quite frankly, if J7 doesn't perform this function, it's probably not going to happen in any other public forum.Followers of J7's work -- which, if this week's activities at the inquests are anything to go by, undoubtedly include the counsel to the inquests -- will know that we recently published our submissions to the inquests. Our apparently "voluminous" submissions, as Hugo Keith described them on Day 1 of the inquests proper, outline many of the outstanding discrepancies, anomalies and inconsistencies of the still unproven 7/7 "narrative". The evidence on which this narrative of 7/7 is said to be based has, prior to the inquests, received absolutely no judicial scrutiny in over five years, although it has repeatedly been taken at face value, including in courts of law, and the contents of the "narrative" being taken at face value has been extended by the counsel to the inquests to the actual inquests themselves.
It is perhaps opportune to note at this stage quite what the definition of a "narrative" is:Narrative; -noun
1. a story or account of events, experiences, or the like, whether true or fictitious.
2. a book, literary work, etc., containing such a story.
3. the art, technique, or process of narrating: Somerset Maugham was a master of narrative.So, a "narrative" of any sort may, or may not, by its very definition, be true, and is equally as likely to be fictitious. In this particular regard, if no other, the official Home Office report covering the events 7 July 2005 is very clear indeed and openly refers to itself as a "narrative", rather than what many presume or perceive it to be, a factual account of events. As such, the burden of proof lies with the narrative's hitherto anonymous story-tellers to make the case, not with anyone else to prove it to be false, as is commonly argued by the "conspiracy theorists" who champion the conspiracy theory touted by the Home Office.
Judicial Scrutiny?
While the inquests may count, technically, as judicial scrutiny, it is judicial scrutiny that is occurring without the benefit of a jury. This apparent judicial scrutiny is in turn being orchestrated and funded by the State, overtly to appease the concerns of bereaved families who feel they have not yet had the truth regarding the deaths of their loved ones. From the outset, it must be understood that the State cannot in any way find itself to be culpable for anything that would reflect badly upon it, and history is littered with countless examples of the State absolving itself of responsibility, illegality, or immorality in all degrees.
Further, if these concerns aren't by themselves sufficient to sound alarm bells, the Counsel to the Inquests has quite a history of forcefully defending the interests of Queen and State in many instances where these entities have been deemed to be under attack. High profile examples of Keith's work include defending The Queen, no less, at the inquest into the death of Diana; the DPP in the case of a judicial review brought by a member of the family of the mercilessly savaged Jean Charles de Menezes and, more recently, the "merciless savagery" of the Metropolitan Police in relation to the inquest into the murder of the barrister Mark Saunders.
Evidently, Mr Keith has no qualms defending "merciless savagery" when it suits the interests of the highest levels of the State, so one might be prompted to wonder quite why a counsel so wedded to the staunch legal defence of the realm against all-comers might be required for what, superficially at least, is an open inquest into the deaths that occurred on 7 July 2005.
Keith also specialises in extradition and his notable extradition cases include "Abu Hamza, the Natwest 3, David Mills and Silvio Berlusconi in Italian mutual legal assistance proceedings and the Secretary of State in the cases of Ian Norris [PDF] and Gary McKinnon."
The Inquest Process
An intrinsic and vital part of any inquest process is to not prejudge any aspects of the factors leading up to and involved in the cause(s) of death. It would appear, given the contents and areas for further examination listed in the Provisional Index of Factual Issues, that the causes of death have already been pre-judged to be linked in some way to explosions occurring on three underground trains and a bus and, further, that these explosions have been prejudged to have been made to occur by the four accused, Khan, Tanweer, Hussain, and Lindsay. Indeed, over 60 percent of the contents of the Provisional Index of Factual Issues relates to the area of 'Preventability'; that seemingly being the potentiality for the preventability of an attack by four young, British, Muslim men, these specifically being Khan, Tanweer, Hussain and Lindsay. Therefore, the bulk of the Inquest's Provisional Index of Factual Issues is based around a substantial deviation from the core purpose of the inquest process, seemingly in favour of using the brutal and horrific deaths of 56 people, and the inquest to which they are entitled, as a cynical stick with which to beat the police and security services. While there may well have been significant involvement and failings on the parts of the various organisations, and while some of these areas may well be touched upon as evidence is presented and connections are made during the inquest process, having such activities comprising the bulk of provisional inquest investigation before the inquest has even started seems somewhat counter-intuitive to the notion of not having prejudged any aspects relating to the manner in which the deceased came about their deaths.
With these concerns about the narrative and the structural arrangements of the inquest process recognised and stated, in addition to the overwhelming lack of evidence that has been released and the great many concerns outlined by J7 in the five years since 7/7, it appears that the judicious aspect of judicial scrutiny that passes even the media by, falls to the general public.
Thanks to the Internet the 'ordinary' people of the general public no longer need to rely entirely on sneaking the odd letter past lowly editors into low-circulation newspapers, or the efforts of what were once known, and are now sadly lamented, as investigative journalists. Ordinary people have at their fingertips their own means of production and dissemination of information, along with the ability to produce analysis and content at least on a par with, if not far in excess of, that which the media and all its corporate interests foist upon us. This is what J7 have been doing for over five years now, and we have been doing so with sufficient vigour, transparency and credibility that the Counsel to the Inquests feels the need to make repeated, if indirect, references to the research we have conducted and the information we have published.
And so the next phase of this process, the J7: 7/7 Inquests blog, has been born, following on from the J7 web site, blog, petition, Facebook campaign, and research forum, established specifically to provide coverage and examination of the inquest proceedings, along with analysis of the evidence that is being released as part of the inquest process.Contributions to the blog will be made by various members of the core J7 research team and the blog will be updated as regularly as possible during the duration of the inquests. As always, we welcome contributions from non-J7 affiliated parties who are taking the time and making the effort to follow the inquest proceedings.Inquest Resources* "Merciless savagery" is one of Keith's descriptions of the events of 7/7 that springs immediately to the fore, and one which received a great deal of coverage after the first day's proceedings. Without doubt all acts of premeditated murder are acts of "merciless savagery" and this applies equally to the victims of 7/7 as it does to any other murdered human beings. However, when the words are uttered by someone who has repeatedly and steadfastly defended for personal profit the actions and the interests of a Monarchy and State that is itself responsible, in just the last decade alone, for in excess of a million acts of "merciless savagery", orders of magnitude greater in number than those that occurred on 7/7, it could reasonably be argued that Keith's words are bereft of meaning.
"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.Cleverly, the inclusion of the expression "others unknown" leaves the State with a free reign to bring similar ludicrous charges in future.
The group, all from Beeston, Leeds, deny the single charge under the Explosive Substances Act 1883.
"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.
Artists impression of what the newly reinforced wing of the
World Trade Center tower impersonating a controlled demolotionI’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.
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.
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.
J7 refuse to participate in BBC's Conspiracy FilesShortly 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 2007Dear Susan,
From: J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
To: Susan Prichard
Subject: Re: BBC DocumentaryAs 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:
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 ProletariatThe 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
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign March 2008 Update
Greetings from J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign,
In the slightly tardy J7 March 2008 update: Details of two new articles on the J7 site covering the results of the 7/7 investigation, including details of the recent conviction of Khalid Khaliq and the launch of the FREE KHALID KHALIQ campaign; the overturning of the ‘Bradford 5’ convictions; a J7 petition update; and further expressions of J7 support and solidarity with other campaigns and activist groups.
THREE YEARS OF 7/7 INVESTIGATION - 7 ARRESTS, 3 CHARGES
============================================================
J7 are pleased to announce the publication of two new articles covering the results of nearly three years of the police 7/7 investigation, the arrests made and the charges brought. The official Home Office narrative claimed that the four alleged suicide bombers acted alone in the financing and execution of the attacks, yet seven people have been arrested in connection with the events of 7/7. Of these, charges have been brought against three people. With the trials starting in early April of the alleged 7/7 co-conspirators that the Home Office report claims didn’t exist, now is the time to get informed:
http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/july-7-article-the-7-7-investigation-7-arrests-part-1.html
http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/july-7-article-the-7-7-investigation-7-arrests-part-2.html
J7 LAUNCH FREE KHALID KHALIQ CAMPAIGN
============================================================In July 2005 Khalid Khaliq came forward to voluntarily to assist with the 7/7 investigation. Nearly three years later, on Tuesday March 11th 2008 Khaliq, 34, was sentenced to sixteen months in prison for possession of information that is freely available from an American website set up by the US Ministry of Justice. Khaliq stated in court that the disc "had been brought to his home by "others", whom he refused to identify." Furthermore, it appears Khaliq had not even viewed the material on the disc. The court heard how the CD had originally been produced in the Iqra learning centre and it is common knowledge that CD and DVD production, along with other IT issues at the Iqra, were undertaken not by a Muslim but instead by a jobbing former Hells Angel and "IT man", Martin Gilbertson. Full details in another new article, Justice Defiled - the conviction of Khalid Khaliq, on the J7 blog:
http://j7truth.blogspot.com/2008/03/justice-defiled-conviction-of-khalid.html
‘BRADFORD 5’ THOUGHTCRIME CONVICTIONS OVERTURNED
============================================================
The convictions of four Bradford University students, Awaab Iqbal, Aitzaz Zafar, Usman Ahmed Malik, and Akbar Butt and a London schoolboy, Mohammed Irfan Raja have been overturned in a landmark appeal court ruling. The accused, described ‘impartially’ by the judge as "intoxicated" by radical Islamist propaganda originally received sentences ranging from 27 months to three years for what lawyer Imran Khan called "thought crime". Within weeks this ruling was overturned and the accused were freed. The Crown Prosecution Service is not challenging the appeal court actions of the Lord Chief Justice claiming it did "not see any necessity to clarify a point of law". For further details please see the J7 People’s Inquiry Forum thread:
http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh/index.php?showtopic=1773
J7: RELEASE THE EVIDENCE PETITION
============================================================
The J7 RELEASE THE EVIDENCE Petition has raced past 2,000 signature mark, exceeding signatories to the official Downing Street web site petition for a Public Inquiry by a factor of four. The petition has already been signed by some notable individuals and organisations including the Patrick Finucane Centre and representatives from the Omagh Support & Self Help Group. If you’ve already signed the J7 Petition, thank you. If you haven’t signed the J7 Petition yet please do so here:
http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth/
J7 SUPPORT AND SOLIDARITY
============================================================
J7 expresses support for and solidarity with the Patrick Finucane Centre and the Omagh Support & Self Help Group. J7 also supports the Truth and Justice for Richard Chang Campaign.
http://www.patfinucanecentre.org
http://www.omaghbomb.co.uk
http://www.justice4richard.co.uk
Here ends the J7 update for March 2008. We’ll be in touch again soon.
In solidarity, for truth and justice,
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign Team
--
Web: http://julyseventh.co.uk/
Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth
Email: julyseventh@fastmail.net
This is a picture of BBC journalist extraordinaire, Nasreen Suleaman. She is the roving BBC reporter who presented a Radio 4, Koran & Country programme 'Biography of a Bomber' in November 2005, which professed to provide an insight into the life of alleged 7/7 bomber Mohammed Sidique Khan. The BBC Koran & Country web site described the programme thusly:What turns a British-born Muslim into a suicide bomber? Nasreen Suleaman talks to those who knew Mohammad Sidique Khan, the eldest of the July 7 bombers. She tries to unravel the mystery of what turned this well integrated, popular and intelligent young man into a terrorist.For some reason (take a wild guess) this particular episode of the BBC's Koran & Country series is not available via the BBC web site Listen Again service. Prior to its broadcast Suleaman's show was listed in The Times' Entertainment section:
BIOGRAPHY OF A BOMBERSo the myth goes. Maybe The Times journalist listened to a different show to the one that was broadcast.
Nasreen Suleaman has been a journalist with BBC News for 11 years. Here she presents a strong case for being groomed as the service’s next celebrity reporter as she tells the most detailed story I’ve yet heard of a man who, like her, was born in Britain to Pakistani parents and brought up in Yorkshire. On July 7, though, Mohammad Sidique Khan and three other men caught a train to London, where they blew themselves and 52 innocent people to bits. Why? It is a question asked a thousand times ever since — and Suleaman goes a long way towards answering it.
In a radical departure from her staple fare, Suleaman has also contributed to the ongoing and entirely baseless demonisation of the 21st century's new Jews, Muslims, while superficially appearing to do the exact opposite. Prior to Biography of Bomber, Suleaman worked on a BBC television documentary called "Don't Panic I'm Islamic", which was shown in June 2005, a month before the Islamic panic began to be manufactured from thin air in earnest. The documentary featured none other than Mohammed Hamid, the man who jokingly referred to himself as Usama bin London.Ms Suleaman told the court that Mr Hamid was keen to appear in the programme. She said: “He was so up for it. We took the decision that paintballing would be a fun way of introducing him.On 17th November 2005 Ms Suleaman claimed in her Radio 4 'documentary' that paintballing is "for some, a guerilla warfare like activity". Yet two years later she is happy to state, under oath, that paintballing is "harmless", "fun" and not "terrorist training activity", which smacks a little of disingenuousness at the very least, if not perjury.
“There are many, many British Muslims that I know who for the past 15 or 20 years have been going paintballing. It’s a harmless enough activity. I don’t think there is any suggestion, or ever has been, that it’s a terrorist training activity.”
The tale of Mohammed Hamid and Nasreen Suleaman features yet another intriguing twist. Following the non-events of the no-bombs 'bombers' of 21st July 2005, Hamid recognised two of the suspects, Muktar Ibrahim Said and Hussain Osman (aka Rome-Runner Hamdi Isaac) and contacted Suleaman to tell her as much. Suleaman said that she informed "senior BBC managers" of the contact but was not told to approach the police with this information. Suleaman told the court, “I got the sense that he was already talking to the police. I referred it to my immediate boss at the BBC. I wasn’t told that there was an obligation. In fact it was referred above her as well. It was such a big story.” She added: “I don’t think it’s my obligation to tell another adult that he should go to the police.”
Armed with this information, one might be tempted to ask why Nasreen Suleaman and "senior BBC managers" aren't being charged with "withholding information and assisting an offender" and, further, why they aren't also being charged with financing terrorists by paying for the "guerrilla warfare like" training activity of paintballing and donating £300 to Mohammed 'Usama bin London' Hamid, now a convicted terrorist for having done precisely nothing that could be constituted as terrorism."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."Also omitted from this article, a link to a rather contrived and badly managed interview with Nasreen Suleaman plugging Biography of a Bomber and a link to Gonzo Terrorism. Watch out in Nas's interview clip, yet again, for the standard practice of showing CCTV footage from 28 June 2005 as the voiceover talks of 7th July, some 9 days after the footage being shown and from which no CCTV footage has ever been released.
"No one understood better than Stalin that the true object of propaganda is neither to convince nor even to persuade, but to produce a uniform pattern of public utterance in which the first trace of unorthodox thought immediately reveals itself as a jarring dissonance." -- Alan Bullock
"[For] it emerged yesterday that the big, bubbly lady with the brave smile and the most heart-rending of tales may have invented the entire story. Consciously or unconsciously, disaster victims will sometimes confuse a few details but the enormous question mark hanging over Head is whether she was ever in the Twin Towers at all when the planes struck.
Multiple inconsistencies in her story emerged after the New York Times said it tried to interview her in recent weeks about her experiences to coincide with the sixth anniversary of the attack."
"What became clear yesterday was that no one has ever bothered to verify the key details of Head's remarkable WTC story or asked her to elaborate on others...."When an event of such significance occurs, the verification of key details is of the utmost importance. Yet, as the case of Tania Head amply demonstrates, this verification is not something that mainstream news and media organisations can be trusted to perform, not even with an event often billed as 'the day the world changed'. Consequently, a liar can become the president of a prominent survivors group, despite their story never having been verified by anyone, and with no questions being asked for a good number of years.
Another bout of cognitive dissonance came when another man announced on BBC Radio Five Live (MP3) that, at the time of the explosions, he was, "running an exercise" for "a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning". He later confirmed somewhat dismissively of his exercise, "it was based on bombs going off, to the time, the locations, all this sort of stuff." The source of these quotes was Peter Power, the Managing Director of a private 'crisis management' firm, Visor Consultants, and a former Metropolitan policeman for 19 years.PETER POWER
Crisis management specialist & government adviser
Visor consulting 1995- present
Director BET Group Security 1992-1994
Senior Officer Metropolitan Police 1971-1992
However, the sterling cooperative research efforts of the July 7th Truth Campaign have uncovered quite an anomaly in what would otherwise be a fairly standard CV for a senior Metropolitan Policeman.This digital-age deception has a name, “sock-puppeting,” and a precise definition — the act of creating a fake online identity to praise, defend or create the illusion of support for one’s self, allies or company.
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign January 2008 Update
Greetings from J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign,It’s the start of the New Year and time for a long overdue J7 update. We would like to take this opportunity to thank you all for your continued support and to wish all J7 supporters a very happy Gregorian Calendar New Year and all the best for 2008.
In the J7 New Year round-up: J7 turns down the offer of a BBC ‘documentary’; Gordon Brown again refuses a public inquiry into 7/7; Peter Power breaks his silence; J7 reject and dismiss a new 7/7 film by someone who claims to be the new messiah; a review of Daniel Oba Chike’s book and J7 launch an updated and redesigned flyer.
J7 & BBC2’s CONSPIRACY FILES
=================================================================
Shortly after the second anniversary of 7/7, the July 7th Truth Campaign was approached by representatives of the BBC and asked to participate in a forthcoming 7/7 documentary. Nearly six months later, the BBC revealed that the ‘documentary’ in question was an episode of the BBC’s risible Conspiracy Files series. Having seen each of the previous four episodes of the formulaic Conspiracy Files, J7ers were unanimously against participating in the show. J7 put together a detailed response to the BBC declining to participate in the programme and explaining our reasons why. Much of the response, while specifically addressed to the BBC, is equally applicable to all broadcast and print media. Read the full J7 response to the BBC here:
http://julyseventh.co.uk/j7-refuse-bbc-conspiracy-files-offer.html
THE STATE REFUSES 7/7 PUBLIC INQUIRY – YET AGAIN
=================================================================
A year long petition on the Downing Street web site calling for a 7/7 Public Inquiry has closed and received a response from the government that has, once again, refused an inquiry. J7 has always stated that any public inquiry must be held outside of the Inquiries Act 2005 and, despite the inquiry petition making no mention of the Inquiries Act, the demands of the petition were, unsurprisingly, still refused. The inquiry petition was widely publicised online and in various mainstream media outlets, yet was only signed by a paltry 525 people, clearly demonstrating the British public’s complete lack of faith in a state-run public inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005.
The now-closed inquiry petition can be viewed here:
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Bombings/?ref=bombings
The government’s response to the petition is here:
http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page14132.asp
Meanwhile, the J7 RELEASE THE EVIDENCE petition continues to go from strength to strength and has been signed by almost 1900 people. If you haven’t signed the J7 petition yet, please do so here:
http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth/
7/7 TERROR REHEARSAL MAN PETER POWER BREAKS HIS SILENCE
=================================================================
For only the second time in two and half a years the Managing Director of Visor Consultants, Peter Power, has broken his silence about the exercise he was running the day of 7th July 2005. The latest comment comes after Peter Power was briefly confronted in a hotel lobby by a group called We Are Change and, for some hitherto unknown reason, rather than contacting We Are Change directly, Peter Power chose instead to leave a comment on the J7 web site. You can read the updated Terror Rehearsal article, which includes a link to the We Are Change video and Peter Power’s latest comment here:
http://julyseventh.co.uk/july-7-terror-rehearsal.html
J7 REBUT AND REJECT NEW FILM – 7/7 RIPPLE EFFECT
=================================================================
A video was released on 5th November 2007 entitled '7/7 Ripple Effect' which appeared via a website called JforJustice. Both the video and website are authored by Muad'Dib (the name of a fictional character from Frank Herbert's Dune) who believes he is the Sheffield-born messiah and demands 'that he be acknowledged as the Rightful British-Israel King.' He also appears to hold rather offensive, anti-Muslim views and the film is littered with unsubstantiated speculation in a manner not entirely dissimilar to the official Home Office narrative. Find out more:
http://julyseventh.co.uk/j-for-justice-77-ripple-effect.html
J7 BOOK REVIEW: THE 4TH BOMB
=================================================================
A number of books have been released by people connected, or claiming to be connected with the events of 7/7, and J7 will be reviewing as many of these as possible. The first review has gone live on the main J7 web site and is a review of Daniel Oba Chike’s book, The 4th Bomb. Read the review here:
http://julyseventh.co.uk/j7-book-review-daniel-obachike-the-fourth-bomb.html
J7 FLYER UPDATED AND REDESIGNED
=================================================================
The July 7th Truth Campaign flyer has been updated, redesigned (by a proper designer!) and re-published and printed copies are available on request for anyone that wishes to distribute them at meetings, protests and gatherings. As ever, copies of the new flyer can be viewed online and print-quality PDFs can also be downloaded.
View the flyer online:
http://julyseventh.co.uk/july-7-truth-campaign-flyer.html
Download Black & White PDF:
http://julyseventh.co.uk/pdf/j7.flyer-v4.0-bw.pdf
Download Red & Black PDF:
http://julyseventh.co.uk/pdf/j7.flyer-v4.0-rw.pdf
J7 EXPRESSION OF SUPPORT AND SOLIDARITY
=================================================================
Today, 7th January 2007, would have been the 30th birthday of Jean Charles de Menezes, who was extra-judicially executed by two unnamed State marksmen in July 2005. Our thoughts are with the de Menezes family and J7 supports the quest for justice of the Jean Charles de Menezes family campaign (http://justice4jean.com). J7 also supports the cause of the National Campaign Against Anti Terror Powers.
That’s about all for now. J7 will be in touch again soon and, if all goes according to plan, 2008 will be the year that sees the start of more regular updates from the J7 team.
In solidarity, for truth and justice,
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign Team
--
Web: http://julyseventh.co.uk/
Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/j7truth
Forum: http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh
MySpace: http://myspace.com/j7truth
Email: julyseventh@fastmail.net---===[ Message Ends ]==---
