Evidence Bombs were planted beneath trains on 7/7

[Halibut]

Then you probably accept the government's key piece of evidence in all of this--the single frame time stamped photo taken outside Luton station-- wasn't photo-shopped despite the fact that it is FULL of flaws and has OBVIOUSLY been doctored.

 

 

 

You obviously haven't been paying attention, to the facts surrounding 7/7 or to what has been written. The reason for presenting the TATP/TCAP information is to show just how ridiculous the government's official cover story really is. There is absolutely no way that the 4 alleged 7/7 bombers made their way through a crowded train station at Luton in less than 3 minutes carrying these highly unstable explosives.

We were originally told, by military explosive experts no less, that the bombs used in 7/7 were MILITARY GRADE HIGH EXPLOSIVES which would NOT be available to suicide bombers. They found traces of C4 at the blast locations to confirm this.

 

When the government discovered this flaw in their story they then changed from the explosives being military grade high explosives to TATP/TCAP. They then had their propaganda machine, the mainstream press, start delivering stories like the one in the Times that was posted.

 

Just like when the government learned that the 7:40A train from Luton station was canceled they had to change their official story about that too, after sticking to that lie for over a year. The only problem with that story was that their key piece of evidence--the single frame time stamped photo that they fabricated--boxed them into a corner where none of the other train times that morning worked either.

 

Wake-up Halibut.

There quite plainly is - and you haven't provided any reliable information to contradict it.

[vResistance]

Yes, I do indeed accept those ideas. The bombers would have been well aware of the naure of TATP and of the possibility of premature detonation.

 

I still find it odd though that you can express two directly contradictory opinions as fact within the same week whilst claiming some kind of expertise or insider knowledge.

 

You seem to be missing the point.

The claim is (officially) the bombers used homemade bleach bombs but there are conflicting reports.

Something like that should be investigated.There shouldn't be any confusion about what was used.

What we are saying is the alleged bombers were not bombers and were not carrying any explosives.

[Nagel]

Yes, I do indeed accept those ideas. The bombers would have been well aware of the naure of TATP and of the possibility of premature detonation.

 

I still find it odd though that you can express two directly contradictory opinions as fact within the same week whilst claiming some kind of expertise or insider knowledge.

 

I was in Algeria the week after 9/11. I was amazed at how the people there could simultaneously hold two contradictory views.

 

The first was that the 9/11 attacks were a Mossad plan and all the Jews working in the Twin Towers had been told not to turn up to work that day. Yes, that rumour appeared that soon after the attacks.

 

The second view was that Osama Bin Laden was a hero for launching such a successful attack on the USA. I was amazed that people could hold both these views simultaneously.

[Kaimani]

I was in Algeria the week after 9/11. I was amazed at how the people there could simultaneously hold two contradictory views.

 

The first was that the 9/11 attacks were a Mossad plan and all the Jews working in the Twin Towers had been told not to turn up to work that day. Yes, that rumour appeared that soon after the attacks.

 

The second view was that Osama Bin Laden was a hero for launching such a successful attack on the USA. I was amazed that people could hold both these views simultaneously.

 

this is strangely common the world over. the osama hero/villain situation, the west greedy and debouched/we want our children to have what they have... very strange.

[vResistance]

I was in Algeria the week after 9/11. I was amazed at how the people there could simultaneously hold two contradictory views.

 

The first was that the 9/11 attacks were a Mossad plan and all the Jews working in the Twin Towers had been told not to turn up to work that day. Yes, that rumour appeared that soon after the attacks.

 

The second view was that Osama Bin Laden was a hero for launching such a successful attack on the USA. I was amazed that people could hold both these views simultaneously.

 

Did each person hold both views ? or were some of one view and some of another ? or perhaps they didn't really know what to think.

Same as anywhere else then really.

[Nagel]

Did each person hold both views ? or were some of one view and some of another ? or perhaps they didn't really know what to think.

Same as anywhere else then really.

 

Most people held both views simultaneously. It was a forewarning that a lot of people are incapable of rational thought when it comes to huge terrorist atrocities.

[RobFr]

Regarding the explosives, here is what we were originally told before the government changed its official story:-

 

 

independent | 12th July 05 | original url: http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/article298515.ece

 

The bombs used in Thursday's terrorist attacks were of "military origin" , according to a senior French policeman sent to London to help in what has become the biggest criminal investigation in British history.

Christophe Chaboud, head of the French Anti-Terrorism Co-ordination Unit, told Le Monde newspaper that the explosives used in the bombings were of " military origin", which he described as "very worrying". " We're more used to cells making home-made explosives with chemicals," he said. "How did they get them? Either by trafficking, for example, in the Balkans, or they had someone on the inside who enabled them to get out of the military establishment."

He added that the victims' wounds suggested that the explosives, which were " not heavy but powerful", had been placed on the ground, perhaps underneath seats.

Up to 400 extra police are being drafted in to help with the bombing inquiry. Many of the additional officers will be helping with analysis of thousands of hours of video recordings from cameras on and around the Tube lines and bus struck by the terrorists. Police have so far taken 2,500 videotapes and are expected to examine many more during the inquiry.

Senior detectives said that the analysis of images from surveillance cameras was the biggest CCTV trawl ever. Scotland Yard was renting extra video suites to view the tapes. Detectives are hoping that among the tens of thousands of hours of footage will be pictures of the terrorists.

As well as examining cameras on the three Tube trains hit in the blasts, police have been recovering every camera in the stations that the trains travelled through, and cameras outside the entrance of every station. The Tube bombs were on the southbound Piccadilly line and the Circle line, which means that there were 40 Underground stations where the bombers could have got on board.

As well as examining cameras on shops, banks, and other businesses, the police will also look at speed cameras. The camera on board the No 30 bus that was blown up in Tavistock Square is thought to have been faulty.

A police source said of the CCTV task: "It is a massive job that is very time-consuming; it sounds impossible - but it's not." Between 200 and 400 extra officers from the Metropolitan Police are being deployed on the investigation. This comes on top of the 400 officers in the anti-terrorist branch and many of the 800 in the Met's Special Branch.

The important role that CCTV can play in a criminal investigation was highlighted in the case of David Copeland, the "nail bomber" who staged attacks in Soho, Brixton and Brick Lane, east London. A team of police officers had 26,000 hours of surveillance footage from the dozens of cameras in Brixton, south London. They spent 24 hours a day scrutinising busy street scenes in their effort to spot the attacker.

The first sighting of the bomber was made from cameras filming the doorway of an Iceland food store. Copeland was identified by his boss and a cab driver after police released an image taken on the day he planted his first bomb in April 1999.

Forensic science specialists and anti-terrorist officers were continuing yesterday to examine the four crime scenes for traces of the bomb and a possible suicide bomber. This includes X-raying bodies to see if any bomb parts or timing devices, which could be vital clues, are embedded in them. It remains unclear if a terrorist died in the bus bomb, which went off an hour after the Tube explosions.

Detectives are checking all the victims from the bomb scene. An anti-terrorist source said they had recovered useful pieces of evidence, but were keeping an open mind as to whether a suicide bomber had been involved. Sir Ian Blair, commissioner of the Met, described the areas of investigation as "the biggest crime scenes in English history".

James Hart, commissioner of the City of London Police, added: "We can't possibly assume that what happened on Thursday was the last of these events ...We have to be vigilant."

Jason Bennetto

[RobFr]

And this:-

 

IHT | 13th July 05 | original url: http://www.iht.com/bin/print_ipub.php?file=/articles/2005/07/12/news/london.php

LONDON British investigators believe that the bombs used in the coordinated terrorist attacks here contained "military quality" high-grade explosives, British and European counterterrorism officials said.

 

Investigators said they still did not know whether the explosives contained plastic materials, or were made some other way. But they said the material used in the bombs was similar to the kind manufactured for military use or made for highly technical commercial purposes, such as dynamite used for precision explosions to demolish buildings or in mining.

 

Because of the small size of the bombs - estimated at 4.5 kilograms, or 10 pounds - some investigators initially said last week that they were relatively crude.

 

On Tuesday, the police searched five locations in West Yorkshire, in northern England, in the first known raids in Britain in connection with the bombings, Agence France-Presse reported.

 

"There are no arrests at this stage," a police spokesman said. "The searches are in connection with the terrorist attacks in London on July 7. The operation continues."

 

West Yorkshire includes former industrial hubs like Leeds and Bradford with large Muslim populations of South Asian origin.

 

On Monday, a senior European-based counterterrorism official with access to intelligence reports said the new information on the explosives material indicated that the bombs were "technically advanced."

 

The official added: "There seems to be a mastery of the method of doing explosions. This was not rudimentary. It required great organization and was well put together."

 

Counterterrorism and law enforcement officials interviewed for this article said they would only speak on the condition of anonymity because of the nature of the investigation. They said it was still unclear whether the attacks were carried out by local terrorists, a group from outside Britain or a combination of the two.

 

According to news reports Tuesday, the 13 people killed in the bombed-out bus in Tavistock Square may have included whoever was carrying the device.

 

"There are two bodies which have to be examined in great detail because they appear to have been holding the bomb or sitting on top of it," a senior police source said.

 

The quality of the explosives has led many investigators to theorize that the bombs were assembled by at least one technically savvy bomb maker, who might have come to Britain to build the devices for use by a local "sleeper cell," officials said.

 

"People assume you can look up a bomb-making design on the Internet and put one together without any training," said one senior counterterrorism official based in Europe. "But it's not that simple or easy."

 

Investigators say that determining the physical origin of the explosives is crucial to helping them determine the origin of the bombs the terrorists used last Thursday on three subway trains and the bus.

 

It was Britain's worst terrorist attack, killing at least 52 people. So far, only two victims have been formally identified.

 

British intelligence officials have asked their counterparts elsewhere in Europe to scour military stockpiles and commercial sites for missing explosives, three senior European-based intelligence officials said.

 

Senior officials are concerned that the terror cell that carried out the attacks might have a stockpile of more explosive material and could strike again, in Britain or in another European country.

 

"I really pity my British colleagues," a senior European intelligence official said. "It's a very difficult situation. Every hour that passes diminishes the probability to catch those people and increases the chances that this cell might try to strike again."

 

Britain's terrorism alert was raised immediately after the attacks to "severe specific," the second-highest level over all, and the highest that it has been since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States. It has remained at that level since then, reflecting the continuing anxiety of the police and intelligence officials that another attack may occur in London.

 

In the attack on commuter trains in Madrid in March 2004, the industrial dynamite used for the bombs had been stolen from a quarry in northern Spain.

 

A month after the attack, investigators found the terrorist cell that was responsible. But the men blew themselves up in an apartment before the police moved in. Spanish officials said the members of that cell had obtained 230 kilograms, or 506 pounds, of Goma 2 Eco dynamite and had intended to build more bombs for additional attacks.

 

A senior Spanish official said Monday that roughly 130 kilograms of the explosive were used in the Madrid attacks, with about 30 kilograms of that in unexploded bombs.

 

The remainder is believed to have exploded when the terrorists blew themselves up.

 

A follow-up investigation last year determined that the police in Spain were informed in early 2003 that someone in northern Spain had been trying to sell a large quantity of explosives, but that the police had not done anything with the tip.

 

On Saturday, Andy Hayman, who is in charge of Scotland Yard's antiterrorism unit, announced that the four bombs set off in London each contained less than 4.5 kilograms of explosive material.

 

Hayman said investigators had determined by the shape of the twisted metal that the bombs had most likely been placed on the floor of the trains, near doorways. He said it was unclear whether the bomb on the bus was on the floor or on a seat.

 

British investigators believe the London bombs were equipped with timers, but they have not determined if the bombs were set off by synchronized alarms on cellphones or some other timing device, officials said.

By Don Van Natta Jr. and Elaine Sciolino The New York Times

[RobFr]

Then there are the train times, which don't work no matter which version of the government's official stories you choose to believe:-

 

 

http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/july-7-luton-kings-cross-train-times.html

 

 

Computer records of the train timetables were kindly made available both by Marie Bernes at Customer Relations at King's Cross, and from Chris Hudson, Communications Manager of Thameslink Rail, at Luton station.

That gave the following Luton to King's Cross timetable for the morning of July 7th:

Thameslink Trains

Luton to King's Cross, 7-8 am on July 7, 2005

Booked

Departure Actual

departure Due in at

King’s X Actual Arrival

King’s X Delay

(minutes)

07.16 07.21 07.48 08.19 31

07.20 07.20 08.08 08.15 7

07.24 07.25 08.00 08.23 23

07.30 07.42 08.04 08.39 35

07.40 Cancelled Cancelled Cancelled Cancelled

07.48 07.56 08.20 08.42 22

It is evident from this table, that this 07.48 train did not arrive in King’s Cross until after the two of the underground trains involved had already departed King's Cross underground station.

Was any train feasible? Let us consider an earlier train, which left Luton station at 07.25, and arrived into King’s Cross Thameslink at 08.23 am; thus, its journey took 58 minutes. This scenario would give the four young men barely three minutes to walk up the stairs at Luton, buy their tickets in the morning rush-hour and then get to the platform. Some have suggested that Lindsay German from Aylesbury had arrived early and bought the four tickets in advance (day-returns at 22 pounds each), to make this feasible. But, from King’s Cross Thameslink, it takes a good seven minutes to walk through the long, Underground tube passage which includes a ticket barrier, to reach the main King’s Cross station, in the morning rush-hour with large rucksacks – in no way could they have been captured on the 08.26am alleged CCTV picture.

Thus, no train that morning is capable of getting a passenger into both of the CCTV images. This could be part of the reason why the police can never release the images they claim to have, of the four at King’s Cross.

This major breakdown of the official story came about through the testimony of a commuter who wished to remain anonymous: she arrived at Luton station that morning at 7.25am, and testified that she had no train to catch until 7.58am, because the 7.30am and 7.40am trains from Luton were cancelled on July 7th. She could only get a slow train at 7.58am from platform 3 to King's Cross, which didn't arrive there until 8.43am. It was so packed that many could not get onto the train at Luton*. (The 07.30 was delayed in arriving into Luton that morning and came into platform 4, whereas the London trains normally come to platforms 1 or 3, which is why she believed it had been cancelled.)

[RobFr]

And this:-

 

(Sorry that the train schedule format did not transfer well in the previous post)

 

 

 

7/7 Inquest: Government offers new (still unbelievable) version of train times

October 20, 2010 NK 10 comments

http://terroronthetube.co.uk/latest-77-articles-3/77-inquest-government-offers-new-still-unbelievable-version-of-the-train-times-timeline/

 

It needs to be understood that the government have created a new narrative for the bombers journey for this Inquest.

 

They had to.

 

The old one – promoted for a whole year after the event, written up in the Government’s Official Account (2006), and then by Andy Hayman, in his 2009 book “The Terrorist Hunters” - had become simply untenable.

 

The original narrative has them leaving Luton at 7.40, and then hopping into a CCTV frame at 8.26 at King’s Cross. The trouble was, I and James Stuart checked out the actual train times that day, which turned out all to have had massive delays (see the Table below) – the Four would have arrived at King’s Cross far too late to board the relevant trains.

 

Let us look at a few details relating to the train times from Luton that morning.

 

The ‘so-called’ bus bomber’, Hasib Hussain, appeared at King’s Cross station wandering about alone on the morning of 7/7. CCTV footage of this was shown to the Inquest on Wednesday October 13th. They showed almost continuous footage spanning 8.55am to 9.22 am, i.e. he started appearing on various King’s Cross CCTV cameras at five to nine. Watching this, I was convinced for the first time ever that Hasib Hussein had really and truly been in London on that morning.

 

I suggest this indicates that he and his colleagues did not arrive at 8.23, as the police are trying to maintain – that would have Hasib hovering about invisibly for half an hour. This video footage in itself becomes strong evidence that the Four arrived in London too late to be present on the bombed carriages.

 

June 28th 2005 ‘Dry Run’ timings

Three of the Four came to London ten days earlier on June 28th, and the Inquest was shown CCTV with timestamps of them entering Luton station (See ‘Bridget’, here). They took exactly five minutes from the lower-ground entrance door to go through the station, get their tickets and go onto the platform:

 

08.10.07 Enter Luton station (and buy tickets), 08.14.26 Go through barriers, 08.15.07 Enter platform

 

July 7th New ‘Official Narrative’ timings

Then the court showed similar CCTV sequence of July 7th with the Four carrying (alleged deadly-bomb) rucksacks. Now they only took one and a half minutes to complete exactly the same movements:

 

07.21.54 Enter Luton, 07.22.43 Go through barriers, 07.23.27 On platform.

 

IT IS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY TO THE NEW OFFICIAL NARRATIVE, FOR THE FOUR TO HAVE BEEN ON THE BOMBED TUBE TRAINS, THAT THEY CAUGHT THIS EARLIER TRAIN THAT LEFT LUTON AT 7.25 .

 

What we see here is a crucial and necessary new reworking of the timeline.

 

……BUT THESE NEW TIMINGS FOR THE FOUR ENTERING, BUYING TICKETS AND CATCHING THIS TRAIN ARE UNREASONABLE AND TRULY UNBELIEVABLE.

 

Remember that for a whole year all of the government sources and the media were singing from the same hymn-sheet, claiming that the Four had caught the 7.40 train from Luton.

 

If perchance we wanted to see the well-known Luton CCTV image as genuine, then would be easy to see how the government made its ‘mistake’ with the early train boarding time: it would not be a mistake at all, but rather it would be the only reasonable narrative for the train the Four actually could have caught: that which left at around 7:40.

 

We should also understand that the witnesses they have produced at this Inquest, swearing they saw the Four on that very Thameslink train (the 7:25) can not have presented their ‘evidence’ before 2006 – because, until 2006 the Government, the police, the BBC and national newspapers were all agreeing that the Four had caught either the 7.40 or the 7.48 train from Luton . These were the two options we were originally given. They could not have believed this had such ‘evidence’ already existed.

 

The anonymous authors of the original Official Account who told the government’s story in May 2006 alluded to witnesses who saw the Four on the 7:40 train.

 

Bearing in mind that the old ‘evidence’ has been scrapped, why should we believe any of the new evidence?

 

I suggest Andy Hayman is a fairly honest cop. His book more or less just reiterated the ‘Official Account’ story – unaltered. As head of the ‘Counter-Terror Command’ he had to. He did not want to get pulled into the murky quagmire of claiming the Four had caught the earlier train – as if all of the ‘witnesses’ and ‘evidence’ for the later train could just be erased: so he stuck to the non-existent 7.40! He has now moved on, and writes for Murdoch’s news empire, which seals him (to digress) into silence…

 

It is likely that the Four more or less caught the train which they had been told to get, i.e. the 7.40. They caught the delayed 7.30 which left Luton station at 7.42. The actual CCTV of the Four in London could never be shown because, unfortunately for the planners, there were serious delays on the Luton/King’s Cross line on the morning of 7/7 so their train arrived too late for them to have participated in the terror-drill. The timing of the explosions had been preset (in the tunnels) and could not, like the ‘bombers’ themselves, be delayed.

 

Even if new time-stamps were put on the thousands of minutes of CCTV footage that undoubtedly did exist, this footage would remain unusable because the Four would, at all times, have been surrounded by crowds of people all of whom presented an uncontrollable danger that they might come forward and testify against the accuracy of any such footage used by the state.

 

This is why we have only ever been shown a few dodgy images of the Four alone … and the most crucial picture to the government narrative (at King’s Cross, 8.26 am) is dark and blurred, with a time/date- stamp right across its centre quite different from any other CCTV time/date stamp we have seen for the July 7th (or June 28th) pics. Has it been added on afterwards? Is a trace of the original timestamp visible on the right-hand side? Why could this image not be shown to the public for three years? These questions won’t go away.

 

Summarising, if you want to believe the Four entered Luton Thameslink at 7.22 – as the famous photoshopped picture shows – they would have then had no intention of catching the 7.24 (which left at 7.25). They would have proceeded at their leisure to catch the 7.40, as instructed. A glance at the pictures available shows that the Four looked, at all times, very relaxed indeed. They certainly do not look like men rushing boldly forward for a meeting with Allah.

 

Considering the evidence so far presented at the 7/7 Inquest it is ever clearer that the new official story does nothing to quell the doubts and anomalies raised by previous narratives and timelines. Rather the reverse.

 

Luton – King’s Cross Thameslink timetable for the morning of July 7th, 7-8 am

 

Booked Actual Due in at Actual arrival Delay

Departure Departure King’s Cross King’s Cross (mins)

07.16 07.21 07.48 08.19 31

07.20 07.20 08.08 08.15 7

07.24 07.25 08.00 08.23 23

07.30 07.42 08.04 08.39 35

7.40 Cancelled Cancelled Cancelled Cancelled

07.48 07.56 08.20 08.42 22

 

08.35 : The Eastbound Circle line train that exploded, leaves King’s Cross.

 

August 2008: the image of the Four at King’s Cross Thameslink, on July 7th, stamped with the time of 8.26, is for the first time released.