7/7 CCTV has been released
After a three year Freedom of Information battle, the Press Association has got hold of the CCTV referred to in the 2006 Report of the Official Account of the Bombings in London on 7th July 2005, which slim 38-page publication, authored by an anonymous civil servant, along with the 45 page utterly discredited ISC report released on the same day three years ago is all the government has so far produced to explain what happened and how it occurred.
The Information Commissioner wrote in his judgement
57. The 7 July 2005 attacks have been the subject of conspiracy theories and the official account of the attacks has also been questioned in other ways. Such questioning of what have been presented as the facts of the events of 7 July 2005 established through the investigation carried out by the public authority, is not in the public interest. Further this is more likely to occur in a situation where there is a perceived lack of transparency about how the official account was formed. That disclosure would presumably support the official account of the time line and basic facts of the attacks and reduce any perceived lack of transparency about how this account was formed, along with removing any suspicion of ‘spin’ or ‘cover up’, is a valid public interest factor in favour of disclosure.
You can read the full judgement here. The police finally got around to releasing it at going-home-time on the Friday of a bank holiday weekend, but at least it's out; whether it will stop the wild conspiracy theories I don't know, I think the horse has well and truly bolted on that one, with all the attendant damage done.
I keep thinking that I should get round to doing a post going through all the conspiracy theories
(such as 'there is no CCTV of the bombers in London - doh!) and explaining they are wrong, but it will only attract all the nutters to my blog, and what's the point?
Some of the footage and stills can be seen here, on the Mail website. The footage shows
I don't know how long they will be up there. I wonder if any of the wack-jobs who have ranted on for three years about how 'there is no CCTV and 7/7 was an inside job' will apologise and admit they were wrong? I'm not holding my breath.
Sean O'Neill, Crime and Security Editor for the Times has a piece out today about the families wait for inquests and the continuing delay in publication of the ISC report which we are waiting for, and have paused our judicial review proceedings into the legality of the government's refusal to have an independent inquiry into the mass-murder of 52 people. It's also covered in the Guardian
He has also put up some thoughts on his excellent new crime blog. 'Time for the Whitehall foot-dragging to stop' Further stories will no doubt follow in due course.
It's been a hellishly busy week, juggling all the media stuff and my day job, and I have been helped magnificently by Oury Clark Solicitors, who have not only been acting for the 7/7 Inquiry campaign group pro bono, but have been also sending out press releases and spending hours on the phone helping, and thanks also to the wonderful Graham, Rob, Janine, Jacqui, and all the other members of the 7/7 Inquiry Campaign Group who have been talking to the media as well and putting across the message and lending support. To everyone who has emailed me and not had a reply yet, big apologies - I'll be catching up over the weekend.
Here is a selection of news coverage of the week's events where we got our message across
The Standard
The BBC ( whole section of website)
The Guardian ( front page). Whole section here
The Times (front page)
The Times - 7/7 could have been prevented
The Herald - Inquiry Needed. More here
The Scotsman
The Standard
The Mail
The Express
The Financial Times
The Independent and comment piece by Rob
The Telegraph
There's lots more if you go and look on Google news
Thank God I've got three days off - I've worked through the last 15 days straight on all the campaigning stuff. This weekend I WILL get out and look for wild bluebells and I WILL have an early night.
The Information Commissioner wrote in his judgement
57. The 7 July 2005 attacks have been the subject of conspiracy theories and the official account of the attacks has also been questioned in other ways. Such questioning of what have been presented as the facts of the events of 7 July 2005 established through the investigation carried out by the public authority, is not in the public interest. Further this is more likely to occur in a situation where there is a perceived lack of transparency about how the official account was formed. That disclosure would presumably support the official account of the time line and basic facts of the attacks and reduce any perceived lack of transparency about how this account was formed, along with removing any suspicion of ‘spin’ or ‘cover up’, is a valid public interest factor in favour of disclosure.
You can read the full judgement here. The police finally got around to releasing it at going-home-time on the Friday of a bank holiday weekend, but at least it's out; whether it will stop the wild conspiracy theories I don't know, I think the horse has well and truly bolted on that one, with all the attendant damage done.
I keep thinking that I should get round to doing a post going through all the conspiracy theories
(such as 'there is no CCTV of the bombers in London - doh!) and explaining they are wrong, but it will only attract all the nutters to my blog, and what's the point?
Some of the footage and stills can be seen here, on the Mail website. The footage shows
0454 Shehzad Tanweer at Woodall Services on the M1, buying snacks, arguing over his change and looking straight at the camera;
0507 Jermaine Lindsay arriving at Luton railway station, waiting for 90 minutes and examining departure board;
0649 All four bombers putting on 'large and full' rucksacks outside Luton station;
0826 All four bombers at King's Cross, hugging on the concourse close to the Thameslink platform, heading towards the Underground;
0855 Hussain walking out of King's Cross on to Euston Road, demeanour appearing 'relaxed' and trying to make a call on mobile phone;
0900 Hussain back in King's Cross, walking through Boots into WH Smith on station concourse, and buying a 9-volt battery;
0906 Hussain going into McDonald's on Euston Road, leaving 10 minutes later.
You can see the links at http://www.met.police.uk/pressbureau/theseus-foi/I don't know how long they will be up there. I wonder if any of the wack-jobs who have ranted on for three years about how 'there is no CCTV and 7/7 was an inside job' will apologise and admit they were wrong? I'm not holding my breath.
Sean O'Neill, Crime and Security Editor for the Times has a piece out today about the families wait for inquests and the continuing delay in publication of the ISC report which we are waiting for, and have paused our judicial review proceedings into the legality of the government's refusal to have an independent inquiry into the mass-murder of 52 people. It's also covered in the Guardian
He has also put up some thoughts on his excellent new crime blog. 'Time for the Whitehall foot-dragging to stop' Further stories will no doubt follow in due course.
It's been a hellishly busy week, juggling all the media stuff and my day job, and I have been helped magnificently by Oury Clark Solicitors, who have not only been acting for the 7/7 Inquiry campaign group pro bono, but have been also sending out press releases and spending hours on the phone helping, and thanks also to the wonderful Graham, Rob, Janine, Jacqui, and all the other members of the 7/7 Inquiry Campaign Group who have been talking to the media as well and putting across the message and lending support. To everyone who has emailed me and not had a reply yet, big apologies - I'll be catching up over the weekend.
Here is a selection of news coverage of the week's events where we got our message across
The Standard
The BBC ( whole section of website)
The Guardian ( front page). Whole section here
The Times (front page)
The Times - 7/7 could have been prevented
The Herald - Inquiry Needed. More here
The Scotsman
The Standard
The Mail
The Express
The Financial Times
The Independent and comment piece by Rob
The Telegraph
There's lots more if you go and look on Google news
Thank God I've got three days off - I've worked through the last 15 days straight on all the campaigning stuff. This weekend I WILL get out and look for wild bluebells and I WILL have an early night.
Labels: 7/7 inquiry, 7/7 trial
posted by Rachel at 6:43 pm
Hi Rachel,
Good work, conspiracy nutters will always find a way to argue out of the evidence presented.
I saw your churlish comment on GoogleVideo (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4943675105275097719)regarding the 'Ludicrous Diversion' presentation. I would like to reiterate here what I said over there - that the CCTV images to which you refer show the timestamps have been blurred or cropped out.
Some of the images are from their supposed 'dummy run' on 28th June, such as the image of them together on a train platform.
One image has clearly been faked (entering Luton station at 7.22 on 7/7). Look at the metal railing across one of the men's chest, for example. In others (crossing the road, and in the car park), the person(s) shown could quite literally be anybody.
Did you actually watch this film?
Sorry, the metal railing runs across the lower portion of Khan (in the white cap) - over his left arm, not his chest, as I said in my last post. This, by the way, is not the only discrepancy in the CCTV images supplied.
Exactly, Andy.
Some of the images are from their supposed 'dummy run' on 28th June, such as the image of them together on a train platform.
Nope. Wrong.
It's them on the day.
One image has clearly been faked (entering Luton station at 7.22 on 7/7). Look at the metal railing across one of the men's chest, for example. In others (crossing the road, and in the car park), the person(s) shown could quite literally be anybody.
Nope, wrong again. LD was made before the 7/7 CCTV was shown at public trial. That was why it was being held back by the way - trial evidence.
You're out of date and misinformed, and unless you Want To Believe a conspiracy theory and have some emotional need to do so or a vested interest in following a lie, I suggest you familiarize yourself with the facts.
Or watch BBC2 on 30th June at 9pm and someone will show you and explain it all to you. I can't be arsed these days
Okay, thanks, Rachel! I'm possibly out of date. I was referring to the pics you posted in your link to the Mail Online. I'll watch that programme. Cheers.
7 questions about 7/7:
1). Why have none of the drivers of the 3 trains that were involved that day been interviewed, named or honoured. On the contrary, the driver of the Piccadilly Line train, Tom Nairn, was refused compensation on the grounds that the 'police had no record of him'.
Ref: http://antagonise.blogspot.com/2006/01/london-77-information-event-horizon.html
2). Why did Scotland Yard deny that a second controlled explosion occurred on the Number 30 bus? (as reported by Miss Marie Oates-Whitehead, employee at the BMA and who was described as a herione who assisted the injured after the explosion, and who died unexpectedly at her home 11 days later).
3). Why did the £100 million spent on Operation Theseus fail to establish the nature of the explosives used on 7 July 2005? Ref: http://j7truth.blogspot.com/2009/05/nature-of-explosives-from-c4-to.html
and why were mobile detonators reported to have been found on the trains? Traces of military grade explosives (c4) were found at all 4 locations (source: UPI, 13/07/05), yet the bombs were reported to be homemade explosives, which would not cause the same amount of damage (testimony of French anti-terrorist expert Christophe Chaboud, brought in the advice Scotland Yard).
4). Why is there evidence that the bombs which detonated at Edgware Road and Aldgate East were underneath the train?
(several eye witnesses gave that account, including original report by the Guardian's Mark Honigsbaum who spoke to several eye witnesses to the Edgware Road tube bomb, and Bruce Lait, injured by the Aldgate East tube bomb, who was interviewed on the 11th July by a reporter from the Cambridge Evening Standard).
5). Why is there a mysterious lack of CCTV footage at any of the tube locations, but more so, from the no.30 bus which was bombed? What explanation is there for the fact that Stagecoach bus employees claimed that a different group of contractors inspected the CCTV cameras in the days before the bombings and that they took two entire days to carry out tasks which normally take just hours to complete? Ref: http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2005/150705busbombing.htm
6). Why did a man named Richard Jones, who was on the bombed No.30 bus and got off the bus shortly before it exploded, give a very misleading description of the bomber in his witness statement to the police and the media about the clothing and facial characteristics of the person he claimed had the backpack bomb on the bus - which didn't corroborate with clothing or facial likeness (colour of skin) of the alleged bomber Hasib Hussain.
7). How did Mossad have advance knowledge of the bombs? 'Stratfor Intelligence Agency' reported that the Met Police gave Benjamin Netanyahu warning the bombs were going to happen 10 minutes before they happened. The Met police then denied they had informed Mr Netanyahu and that they had prior knowledge of the attack, and 2 weeks after, Mossad Chief Meir Dagan admitted he had informed Mr Netanyahu of the bombs 10 minutes before they exploded at 08.40am on 7/7/2005. (source: Mossad chief Meir Dagan, in an interview with the German newspaper Bild am Sonntag on 10th July 2005).
Altogether, the British Brainwashing Corporation's 'Conspiracy Files' show that you recommended still leaves a good deal of vitally important questions unanswered.
Natural Selection, if you are going to C&P off the BBc blog comments you might want to thank the person you copied it off, and you might want to think about your final para
Altogether, the British Brainwashing Corporation's 'Conspiracy Files' show that you recommended still leaves a good deal of vitally important questions unanswered.
Yes, it certainly hasn't answered the questions - because it isn't broadcast until tomorrow night!
DOH!
I really can't be bothered with this - and why should I have to bother to refute every cut-and-paste conspiracy theorists every imagining?
But, you get 3 minutes.
1. Why do you assume they want to be interviewed, pestered by conspiracy theorists or otherwise go public? How do you know they haven't been thanked and honoured but requested no publicity?
2. It's Richmal, not Marie. The bomb squad removed a suspicious box which turned out to be a microwave oven in a biox, carried by a passenger.
3. Clifford Todd gave full forensic analysis in public court as to the nature of the explosions in 2008, when Theseus evidence held back until the trial ( CCTV etc) was finally shown to the jury as part of the trial of 3 men accused of helping the 7/7 bombers.
4.There's no evidence that the bombs were under the train, and I have gone through Mr Lait's remarks elsewhere. I'm not doing it again, you can read it for yourself.
5. CCTV footage was shown at the trial mentioned earlier. If you want CCTV footage of the bombs exploding, then you are sick.
6. A random passenger, when asked by people waving cameras, said he thought he saw someone who was a bomber. It wasn't, it was someone else. You are talking about a man asked to comment by TV crews, not someone on oath. Eyewitnesses can get confused, make mistakes, form the wrong impression and frequently do...this isn't proof of anything other than human nature.
7. Is nonsense, I'm afraid - and I think that's opne of the ones that gets debunked in the programme.
The programme can't disprove every negative nor is it there to reiterate the events which have already been set out in trials and by the police. It is there to examine some of the more common CTs and see if there is any truth in them: this is what it sets out to do and you can judge it for yourself tomorrow night.
And anyone linking to prison planet - that's not a credible source, any more than David icke is.
Don't 'DOH!' me, young lady. I didn't say I saw the show.
I thought I'd missed it (I don't have a TV) so I copied what I think are good questions posed by another seeker of truth, which I found on the BBC Conspiracy Files 7/7 web page - and I only credit people who use their names.
I'm not going to pay attention to anything else you write and shall'nt be visiting your little blog again, you'll be happy to hear. Your head is so deep in the sand that you probably believe in 'God' as well, don't you?
The multitude of abusive and defamatory statements you've made aimed at 9/11ers and J7ers on other sites are abhorrent and your praise of the 'Official 911 Commission Report' shows the depth of your ignorance.
Ha! Your plagiarism was discovered - you weren't expecting that were you? so what follows is, of course, denial, wriggling and personal abuse - absolutely par for the conspiraloon course and general modus operandi. And why the bloody hell are you commenting on a show you haven't seen and won't see anyway? How ridiculous.
I'm not surprised you're running away - you're up against someone who can see through bullshit, knows her stuff and has zero time for lying, lazy, plagiarising fantasists disseminating their paranoid nonsense and calling it 'research'. Yeah, right, it's 'research', what a joke. If you want to cut and paste evidence-free unsubstantiated plagiarised drivel off other CT sites and go have a circle jerk about how spooky it all is, Prison Planet, 9/11 truth, J7 truth and David Icke are all >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that away.
Bye!