Wednesday, May 17, 2006

Odd things about the UK government narrative of the 7/7 London Bombs

De Menezes, who was shot on a London tube train, was a dangerous terrorist?

Eventually some brave journalists revealed that the UK government officials had lied. De Menezes was an innocent Brazilian.

The UK government story about the 7/7 London bombs has kept on changing and still does not make sense.

The UK government has produced a brief 'narrative' of the 7/7 London Bomb attacks.

Originally we were led to believe that Shehzad Tanweer had met senior Islamic militants in Pakistan prior to 7/7, and that Mohammad Siddique Khan had visited Malaysia to meet al-Qaeda operatives.

Now, the UK government 'narrative' states that 'there is no reliable intelligence or corroborative information to support (these claims)'

Khan and Tanweer did visit Pakistan, but it is still unclear whom they met there and why.

Back in August 2005, one expert said that 'People like that aren't generally capable of building bombs.' The suggestion was that al-Qaeda masterminds were involved.

Now the UK government narrative claims that the four alleged bombers did make their own bombs, in the living room of a flat on Alexandra Grove in Leeds.

The flat had been rented from an Egyptian chemistry student. At one time the media suggested that this Egyptian was the mastermind of the bombings. The UK government then made it clear that the Egyptian was not involved in 7/7.

Otiginally we were told that the explosives were C4, used by the military.

The UK government narrative says that the four alleged bombers attended three different mosques irregularly, and that most of their meetings took place in a local gym or during outdoor activities.

The narrative states: 'Camping, canoeing, white-water rafting, paintballing and other outward bound-type activities are of particular interest because they appear common factors for the 7 July bombers and other cells disrupted previously and since.'

What were alleged bombers like?

According to the narrative: Khan was a 'role model' to young people; Tanweer was 'mature, modest and balanced'.

A video claiming to show Khan, viewed on al-Jazeera a few months after 7/7, does not directly mention Iraq.

Khan spoke about how 'your democratically elected governments continuously perpetuate atrocities against my people all over the world'.

The video must be fake. If Khan was really a bomber he would have mentioned Iraq, and Palestine! And he would not have praised our governments as being democratic.


~~

2 comments:

w.b. kelso said...

Very well done, young ladies and others. aangirfan is the top blog, especially for those concerned with the realm of Ukania.

You and your readers might appreciate the analysis of the London terror by impatient of Liberty Forum:

The most important thing to know about the four is that the "evidence" against them is fabricated and the fabricators are the perpetrators or their agents.

The police claimed to have video of the four at King's Cross Station where they were said to have boarded their respective trains. That "evidence" has never been produced. The only picture they have of the alleged London bombers comes from a CCTV at Luton station 25 minutes northwest of London. That picture, even if authentic, does not even support their presence in London on July 7th, 2005!

There are hundreds of miles of subway track going in all directions from King’s Cross Station. Every station has numerous CCTV cameras. It is quite likely that every train has CCTV cameras. Every camera has hours of video tape. A team looking at all the tape from every camera from every station in every direction would yield what? What would the examiners be looking for?

What evidence was available to tell the investigators that the bombs had been carried on by passengers rather than being placed beforehand? There was no such evidence.

How many passengers on 7/7 prior to the bomb detonations were carrying packages, backpacks, strollers, briefcases, were wearing clothing that could conceal a bomb, and how many obese or pregnant women boarded anywhere in the system? Are backpacks so out of the ordinary in England that they would immediately be spotted as suspicious?

What evidence led the investigators to the tapes at Luton station, and why would they bother looking so far afield if they had, as they claimed, tapes of the four at King’s Cross Station just before they boarded their trains? If indeed they were filmed together at King’s Cross Station, the question of how they got there would lead to a much wider investigation to include all methods of conveyance that could have brought them together at King’s Cross, including their own feet.

Authentic investigations proceed differently. When the culprits, their methods, and their motivations are announced before an investigation is done that is clear evidence of a lie. Anything that comes after that is a fabrication designed to substantiate the lie. To find out who did the London bombings, how and why, you must ask who planted the Luton station picture, and why they have not produced the King’s Cross tapes!

Postman said...

There is plenty they have not produced ... and plenty that "emerges" e,g nail bomb X rays etc .

Good point the timeline on the cars at Luton etc.,

Apparently they only knew about the hire car when the guy turned up after 7 days because it hadn't beren returned.

Surely the Lutobn car park is covered with CCTV ? Why did they hanf around in their for over 1/2 hour ?

Questions Questions.

 
Site Meter