Bob Kiley was boss of London Transport at the time of the London Tube Bombings.
He used to work for the CIA....and he still does...
Kiley was appointed by Ken Livingstone, when Livingstone was mayor of London. (The Truth Seeker - London Transport Network Controlled by Known ...)
Livingstone with Clinton
Ken Livingstone says that "there’s no evidence of where my maternal grandmother came from, she was called Zona. And I remember a couple of times when I was a kid, she would say to me, ‘don’t let anyone ever tell you you’re Jewish.’ Which made me think we must be, otherwise why would she raise this?" (London Mayor Ken Livingstone may be ... )
When Jean Charles de Menezes was murdered, in what appeared to be a false flag operation, Ken Livingstone supported the actions of the police. (Livingstone praises Menezes chief)
The London Tube Bombings look like a continuation of Operation Gladio, which used 'stay-behind' armies to carry out various acts, including, reportedly, the Bologna Bombing of 1980.
Reportedly, Gladio had a fascist agenda. (Operation Gladio - Wikipedia)
Gladio was run by the CIA and NATO...., and now you can add MOSSAD to this deadly equation...
After World War II, the UK's stay-behind armies were created partly using former Special Operations Executive officers. Sir Anthony Farrar-Hockley, former commander-in-chief of NATO's Forces in Northern Europe, declared to The Guardian that a secret arms network was established in Britain after the war.Website for this image
Reportedly, Gladio employed Nazis....and now it employs Neo-Nazis of CIA/MOSSAD.
Linked to Gladio is Hans Globke, who had worked for Adolf Eichmann.
Globke became German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer's national security advisor in the 1960s, and "was the main liaison with the CIA and NATO" according to The Guardian.
It would appear that after World War II, various right wing groups in Europe, the USA, Israel and elsewhere, came together.
Above: Luton station, outside London. Verint Systems, an Israeli company, is responsible for the CCTV cameras in the London Underground. No CCTV footage of the four Muslims boarding the tube-trains has been released by Verint, who claim that their cameras were not working. The police 'lied' about Jean Charles de Menezes, (De Menezes was unlawfully killed?) and they seem to be lying about the CCTV.
The CCTV cameras on the bus that blew up were not working. (CCTV - down with murder inc)
A bus employee reported: "Last saturday a contractor came to inspect the CCTV on the buses at the depot.
"According to my supervisor the person spent more than 20 hours over that weekend, 20 hours to see if the CCTV is working?
"Also that person who came was not a regular contractor.
"For security reasons the same few people always come to the depot to carry out work, this time it was different." (CCTV - down with murder inc)
"All four men were taped on closed-circuit cameras arriving at the King's Cross subway station just before 8:30 a.m., police said. The men, who had boarded a train in Luton, were carrying backpacks." (CCTV - down with murder inc)
The following comes from: CCTV of 7 July 2005 London Bombers - WhatDoTheyKnow
31 August 2010
Dear Metropolitan Police Service (MPS),
I request a copy of any CCTV footage of 7 July 2005 London Bombersat King's Cross station
I am afraid that I am not required by statute to release the information requested.
Edgware Road - Floor Plates. Website for this image
On 4 July 2009, the UK's Daily Mail newspaper has this headline: Conspiracy fever: As rumours swell that the government staged 7/7, victims' relatives call for a proper inquiry
The Mail asks: which train did the four Muslims catch from Luton to London on the morning of the bomb blasts?
The three separate Tube explosions at Edgware Road, Aldgate and King's Cross occurred together at exactly 8.50am.
The official reports said the bombers got on the 7.40am train from Luton.
However, the 7.40am train never ran that morning.
It was cancelled.
Survivors pointed out the error.
The Government then changed its mind and said the bombers caught the 7.25 am from Luton, for the 35-minute journey to King's Cross.
It was due to arrive in the capital at 8am.
However, this train ran 23 minutes late.
It arrived in London at 8.23am, say station officials.
The three separate Tube explosions at Edgware Road, Aldgate and King's Cross occurred together at exactly 8.50am.
It looks as if it would be impossible for the 'bombers' to get to their different destinations in time.
Reportedly, it takes seven minutes to walk from the Thameslink line station to the tube station at the main King's Cross station.
Police say the four men were seen on the main King's Cross concourse at 8.26am, although no CCTV footage has ever been made public.
How had the men got there in three short minutes after getting off the Luton train at 8.23am?
Controversially, no CCTV images have been released of the alleged bombers actually in London.
There is a picture claiming to show the 'bombers' in Luton.
In this Luton image "the quality is poor and the faces of three of the bombers are unidentifiable."
This photo is timed at four seconds before 7.22am.
The men would have had just three minutes to walk up the stairs at Luton, buy their £22 day return tickets and get to the platform, which was packed with commuters because of the earlier travel disruptions.
Bruce Lait - I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag.
According to Mark Honigsbaum, in The Guardian.:
1. Bridget Dunne, a 51 year-old foster carer from London, noted that the Police said the explosions occurred simultaneously at 8.50am, when they had originally been described as taking place over the space of 26 minutes.
Dunne could find nothing about the times of the tube trains in and out of King's Cross on the morning of July 7. (The Mysterious Case Of The Non-Existent Train Time)
2. A few days later, police released the CCTV image of Shehzad Tanweer, Mohammad Sidique Khan, Jermaine Lindsay and Hasib Hussain entering Luton station.
How had police identified the bombers so quickly?
3. And how was it that 'amid the carnage of twisted metal and bloody body parts' they had found credit cards and other ID placing the men at the scene of the crime?
4. Dunne discovered that on the morning of 7/7 a former Scotland Yard anti-terrorism branch official had been staging a training exercise based on bombs going off simultaneously at precisely the stations that had been targeted.
5. Mark Honigsbaum writes:
I asked passengers what they had seen and experienced and was told by two survivors from the bombed train that, at the moment of the blast, the covers on the floor of their carriage had flown up - the phrase they used was "raised up".
In the report, broadcast on our website, I said that it "was believed" there had been an explosion "under the carriage of the train". I also said that "some passengers described how the tiles, the covers on the floors of the train, flew up, raised up".
6. The Home Office claimed that on July 7 the four 'bombers' boarded a 7.40am Thameslink train to King's Cross.
According to Dunne, when an independent researcher visited Luton and demanded a train schedule from Thameslink, he was told that the 7.40am had never run and that the next available train, the 7.48, had arrived at King's Cross at 8.42 - in other words too late for the bombers to have boarded the three tube trains that exploded, according to the official timings, eight minutes later at Aldgate, Edgware Road and Russell Square.
7. The next problem is the CCTV picture. If you look closely at the image, Dunne says, you will see that the railings behind Khan, the man in the white baseball cap, appear to run in front of his left arm while another rail appears to slice through his head.
8. In the only other CCTV sequence of the bombers taken on June 28 (the day police believe they made a test run to London), Hasib Hussain is nowhere to be seen.
"I know people who have spoken to Hasib Hussain's family," says Dunne. "He was in the middle of his college career. He was taking driving lessons."
9. A passenger on the Aldgate train reported that the metal around the hole in the bomb carriage was "pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train".
The authorities seemed to want us to believe that innocent Brazilian Jean Charles de Menezes was a Moslem terrorist. Website for this image
Keelan Balderson reports that the 7/7 Inquest: is Causing More Questions Than Answers (7/7 Inquest: Causing More Questions Than Answers)
1. The Government states that alleged bomber Jermaine Lindsay’s car was towed away from Luton Station because it didn’t have a pay & display ticket:
“The Brava, which had been towed away because it did not have a parking ticket is later traced to Lindsay.”
It seems more has been added to this story during the inquest. It was reported by the Telegraph that:
“Lindsay received a parking ticket as he slept in his car while he waited at Luton station for the other three conspirators. The attendant feared being attacked.”
Note: this is a parking ticket fine because he didn’t have a pay & display parking ticket.
The question we should be asking here is why did the attendant fear being attacked? Did he see any bombs or the handgun? If so he obviously should have reported the incident. Or was Lindsay getting irate because he was getting a parking ticket…while he was asleep? Which would seem a little odd if he was about to go kill himself anyway; in the same way it was odd that Tanweer would argue at the petrol station early that morning for being short changed.
What really needs to be clarified is the story that was widely reported in the media after the initial investigation, which was in complete contradiction to the official government narrative.
As stated in the Times:
“Lindsay bought a pay and display ticket, and dutifully stuck it on the windshield. The DNA he left on that scrap of paper would later be used to identify what remained of his body.”
2. The Government have never been forthcoming about the DNA evidence in their official statements. The official narrative doesn’t make clear how or where it was obtained or cross referenced.
What the official narrative does state is that he didn’t buy a ticket, so his car was towed away. So media reports that investigators used this non-existent ticket to obtain his DNA, as proof that he was the bomber, is either invalid, or the official narrative itself is invalid.
As of yesterday we can now speculate that his DNA was retrieved from the parking fine ticket given to him when he was “sleeping” in his car; but something as important as DNA evidence shouldn’t be left as speculation. The whole point of the inquest is to answer questions not create more!
3. And of course this doesn’t answer why his car was towed away, because it is official Luton station policy to clamp unpaid parked cars, not to tow them away.
It seems we’re going around in circles.
4. It was revealed in the Fertilizer Bomb Plot court testimony that alleged bomber Mohammad Sidique Khan was instructed to go to a terror training camp by Mohammed Q, who funded the plot’s ring leader Omar Khyam.
As reported by the Telegraph:
Khan and Khyam both attended a terror training camp together in Pakistan two years before the 7/7 attacks on London’s transport system, which killed 56 people, including the four terrorists.
Their contact was a man called Mohammed Quayam Khan, known as Q, who was under surveillance by MI5 for allegedly providing funds, equipment and recruits to al-Qa’eda.
Khan had been in mobile phone contact with Q.
Strangely Q was allowed to walk away a free man from the Fertilizer trial while the foot soldiers went down.
Also linked to the plot was FBI asset Junaid Babar, but he was given immunity to testify against the other plotters. It came out that he ran the camp that alleged bomber Khan had attended.
As reported by the Times:
“Babar organised a Taleban terror training camp in the mountains of northern Pakistan, attended not only by himself and his friends, but Mohammad Sidique Khan, the future London 7/7 Tube-bombing mastermind.”
The BBC later reported that “Inevitably there were suspicions that he’d been an FBI agent all along.”
5. Upon their return prior to the London Bombings the widely reported mastermind of the attacks Haroon Rashid Aswat (who was allowed in to the country despite being on a terror watch-list) had telephone conversations with the men days before the attacks.
He then disappeared.
It was later revealed by former federal prosecutor John Loftus that Aswat was strongly suspected of being an MI6 double agent.
So a suspected asset Q, instructs the alleged ringleader of 7/7 to attend a terror training camp ran by an FBI asset Junaid Babar, and upon their return an MI6 asset instructs the bombers further before the attacks?
6. High grade, possibly military explosives were used (not homemade),
7. An exercise was being run by Peter Power which envisaged almost the exact same scenario as the real attacks,
8. TheCCTV evidence is inconsistent,
9. Finding ID at all of the blast sites (Khan’s at 3 of them) is bizarre.
10. There were numerous prior warnings about attacks from the US, Pakistan, France, Spain and Saudi Arabia;
11. Britain knowingly harbored radicals and terrorists, and used them for conflicts in the Balkans during the 90s.
The Curious Case of the Jag That Parked in the Day...
Behind the Scenes of the Aldgate Explosion, at 11 minutes to 9.
Don't Mention The Fifth (or Sixth?) Man
The Final Curtain - "CCTV rich" to "CCTV FAIL!"
A CCTV Fuss About Nothing?
7 July Inquests: It's A Conspiracy, Stupid!
J7: News Archive
Overview of Events
The 7/7 Terror Rehearsal
July 7th Timeline
J7: The People's Inquiry
Articles, letters & interviews
Mind the Gaps
J7: Operation Crevice
J7: Alex Cox Forum Archive
7/7 Incident Analysis
The Train Times
Liverpool Street / Aldgate
King's Cross / Russell Square
Edgware Road / Paddington
30 Bus, Tavistock Square
Luton Hire Cars
The CCTV 'Evidence'
J7: London Bombings Dossier
Mohammad Sidique Khan
Hasib Mir Hussain
J7 Truth Activism
J7 Truth Activism FAQ
Challenge the Media
J7 Truth Leaflet
July 7th Links
....It looks like the London Tube Bombings were an inside-job....
It looks like the London Tube Bombings were an inside-job....
We believe that military-grade explosives were placed under the trains.
The evidence backing up the official story looks as weak as the evidence in the Lockerbie trial.
Tony Gauci was a key Lockerbie witness.
According to The Herald, on 20 February 2009, previously undisclosed documents show that Scottish police recommended to US authorities that both the main witness in the Lockerbie trial (Gauci) and his brother should be paid up to $3m. (aangirfan: LOCKERBIE DISASTER)
Tony Gauci was the owner of the Maltese shop where Megrahi was said to have bought the clothing reportedly placed around the bomb.
At the trial, Tony Gauci was uncertain about the date he sold the clothes in question, and was not sure that it was Megrahi to whom they were sold.
Gauci gave two earlier statements in which he identified convicted Egyptian terrorist Abu Talb as the person who bought clothing.
Gauci gave earlier statements saying he did not sell a shirt to the man but six months later remembered selling shirts and the man.
Two of Gauci's statements are missing.
A babygro said to have been wrapped around the bomb and shown to the court blown to pieces was recovered intact, according to a statement from the woman who found it.
Five years after the trial, Lord Fraser allegedly described Gauci as a “simple” man who might have been “easily led”. Lord Fraser was the lord advocate (1989-92) who initiated the case against Megrahi.
Shehzad Tanweer was allegedly one of the London Tube bombers.
Some people believe that Tanweer and his friends were being employed by MI5.
A noted terror expert, Charles Shoebridge, told the BBC that Mohammed Siddique Khan, the alleged ringleader of the 7/7 London bombings, was working for British intelligence agency MI5 as an informant at the time of the attacks.
Charles Shoebridge is a 12-year veteran detective of the London Metropolitan Police, a former graduate of the Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst, and now a broadcaster and writer on terrorism in the UK.
Edgware Tube Bomb.
77 inquest blogspot looks at the evidence concerning Shehzad Tanweer, one of the alleged London Tube 'bombers.'
This is worth reading to the end.
We quote from the blog:
The first evidence for the presence of Shehzad Tanweer (at the bomb site) has emerged.
The evidence didn't come in the form of CCTV footage, as we now know it was claimed that the last sighting of Tanweer was made at around 08.26.32 at the King's Cross Thameslink end of the entrance tunnel to the London Underground.
Nor did the evidence come in the form of witness testimony.
Not one witness on carriage two claimed to have seen Tanweer on the carriage.
Bruce Lait, for example, who had given interviews to the press in the days after July 7th 2005, and who had claimed he hadn't seen anyone where the hole in the floor of the carriage was, was not asked whether he had seen Tanweer on the carriage before the explosion.
Michael Henning, who entered the train on carriage 3, was asked this question by Hugo Keith QC:
Q. Did you, in fact, tell the police that you did recollect -- and you had an image in your mind to this effect -- a male standing inside the rear set of doors in that second carriage?
A. I do indeed, and it puts a shiver through me to remember that. However, I couldn't say with great detail his features, etcetera. It's more those soft focus of the people that you normally see on the Tube and haven't paid attention to.
Q. Could we have, please, on the screen INQ00008352, page 2? Did you prepare, in fact, a sketch map for the police showing the rear of the second carriage towards the top of the page, towards the front of the train,towards the front, and the platform side which you boarded, and then the third carriage, and you went on,and do the two crosses indicate respectively the person whom you thought you might have seen as being significant in the second carriage and then your place in the third carriage?
A. Indeed. The cross circled is obviously where I perceived Tanweer to be.
Q. You obviously didn't know him to be Tanweer then. Did you tell the police that you saw a man you described as an Asian man wearing some sort of white or cream light-coloured clothing in any event?
A. That's what I recall, yes.
Q. Can you recall any more about the person that you saw in outline as you boarded the train?
A. I would be hesitant to say more because of all the subsequent information I've seen.
Q. Of course. Do you recall whether he was carrying anything, the person that you recall seeing?
A. I remember him holding something, but how he was carrying it, again, it would be wrong of me to try and put detail on that.
Whether Tanweer was wearing what could be described as "some sort of white or cream light-coloured clothing" is questionable as CCTV shows his clothing to be predominantly dark:
Of course the 'suicide-bomber' meme has always tacitly implied that explosives are carried on the body.
Although, uniquely it appears, as the story of the London bombings evolved, rucksacks on the body became solely the mode of transportation of the explosives, not the method of delivery.
At the time of the attacks the Metropolitan Police were clearly stating that the explosions happened on the floors of the carriages, with early reports claiming the explosions came from under the trains, yet this did not dispel the 'suicide-bomber' meme once the four accused were identified.
This is important to bear in mind when examining any witness statements or evidence which originate from the period immediately after the events of 7 July 2005.
On the penultimate day of the Aldgate scene evidence, a witness statement was read to the Inquest by Hugo Keith, detailing evidence that apparently linked Shehzad Tanweer to the site of the explosion:
My Lady, the final statement is that of Richard Hall, dated 6 June 2006, again with the usual declaration of truth.
Statement of DC RICHARD HALL read:
"I am a detective constable attached to the Anti-terrorist Branch at New Scotland Yard where I performed the role of Terrorist Forensic Scene Examiner and Exhibit Officer.
"On Thursday, 7 July 2005, I was on duty when a series of incidents took place in London. I was aware that initially there had been explosions on London Underground trains at Russell Square,Edgware Road and Aldgate Underground station. A further explosion had occurred on a London Transport bus at Tavistock Square.
"I was tasked by DS Michael Jolly to act as the Deputy Scene Examiner to DC Andrew Meneely, who had been tasked earlier in the day to attend the scene at Aldgate London Underground station.
"I went to the scene where I was met by DC Meneely,who was carrying out tasks in relation to the initial survey of the scene. DC Meneely had devised a zone plan which had been used to structure the search. This was later drawn by DC Neil Fretwell of theAnti-terrorist Branch Bomb Data Centre and exhibited at NF/7.
"During the course of DC Meneely's initial examination of the scene, he seized exhibit AM/11, selected debris from zone 5, the open area to the left of carriages 1, 2 and 3 of the train.
"The exhibit contained part of a wallet which appeared to have been close to an explosion. I examined the contents of this wallet and found that it contained fragments of plastic cards, fragments of Bank of England notes, business cards, and other correspondence.
"I recorded the following details in the 'Remarks' column of the exhibit book and passed them to the control vehicle for transmission to the ATBIU.
"On Monday, 11 July 2005, I conducted a closer examination of exhibit AM/11. A decision had been taken to submit the wallet to the Forensic Explosives Laboratory for explosive trace work to be done. I therefore opened the exhibit and removed all of the fragmented parts from it. I then resealed the exhibit. As a result of this examination, I created the following eleven exhibits:
"RABH/1. Fragmented HSBC credit card in the name of Mr Sidique Khan ...
"RABH/2. Fragments of a £10 and £5 note split from AM/11 ...
"RABH/3. One Excelsior Snooker Club membership card in the name of S Tanweer
"RABH/4. 1. Two receipts ... One PC World receipt for plantronic audio 15 microph 12.99.
"2. B&Q receipt. Print has faded but can be read in part. (H)Eeston Ring Road, Leeds ...
"RABH/5. One Northern Snooker Centre membership card in the name of S Tanweer ...
"RABH/5A. One Nasim Property Investor business card...
"RABH/7. One Halifax Current Account Switch Card in the name of Mr S Khan ...
"RABH/8. One Optimum Fitness card in the name of Yasser HALEED ...
"RABH/9. One business card ... "Dr GREENTHUMBS Hydroponics Store ... Wakefield ...
"RABH/10. One business card in the name of James Squires ...
"I also produced exhibit RABH/11 - one nylon bag - for control purposes for the Forensic Explosives Laboratory."
Source: Transcripts 3 November 2010Afternoon Session, page 17 Lines 25 on
RABH/1. Fragmented HSBC credit card in the name of Mr Sidique Khan
As stated in Mr Hall's testimony this wallet was seized from 'selected debris from zone 5, the open area to the left of carriages 1, 2 and 3 of the train.'
This exhibit shows Zone 5 - the area in and around carriages 1 2 & 3:
Zone 5, where it is claimed the wallet was found, does not include the actual area where the initial explosion is said to have occurred and where the Inquest were told persons were thrown from the train by the blast.
This area was described as being where carriage 4 eventually came to a halt, as shown in this Inquest exhibit, which would place it in Zone 6:
The graphic above had been described by Hugo Keith in his opening statement to the Inquest [p35 13-23] as follows:
Richard Gray was tragically blown out of the right-hand side of the second carriage, that's to say the right-hand side of the carriage if you were standing in that carriage looking forward in the direction of travel on the side away from the bomb and on to the track, so from this diagram away from the location of the bomb down towards the bottom of the page and through double door D8.
Because the train carried on moving for a short while, as I've said, his body was found adjacent to carriages 3 and 4 when the train finally stopped.
Rather strange then that Zone 5 didn't include at least part of carriage 4.
Only 7 bodies recovered
The total number of deceased from Circle Line train 204, according to all witness testimony and evidence was seven - a figure which does not allow for the presence of Shehzad Tanweer.
We also know that no victims of the Liverpool Street/Aldgate incident had died in hospital.
As the Aldgate scene evidence neared its conclusion, it became apparent that Shehzad Tanweer's body was not identified as being amongst the dead.
The official "narrative" of the explosion on Circle Line train 204 at Aldgate holds that eight people died, with Richard Gray's body recovered from the track:
BTP Inspector Robert Munn was the last person to leave the site before investigators took over.
In this exchange with Hugo Keith, Munn confirms the total number of dead as seven:
Q. (Hugo Keith) At 10.18, you made your final call, for these purposes - you updated BX, in fact, for the rest of the morning, but for our purposes, you made your final call at 18.47, [BTP170-55]:
"BQ10 ... for your information, Aldgate, I'm the last police officer to leave and I've got the last Fire Brigade with me ... the station's now evacuated to the front gate. I can confirm 7 ... dead bodies left on the train, over.
"Sorry, say again?
"Have you got any persons trapped, over?
"None that's still alive, over."
That was at 10.18. Before you left, had a doctor appeared trackside?
A. (Inspector Robert Munn) Yes, I think it was the - I think it was the HEMS doctor that I referred to earlier, I think.
Q. Dr Lockey?
A. I didn't - I can't recall his name, sir.
Q. You didn't catch his name. Did he formally confirm to you that there were seven dead?
A. Before we left, sir, I waited by the doctor and the lead fire officer, while the doctor checked all the remaining bodies that had been left behind, and confirmed the number of dead.
LAS paramedic Steven Jones:
"When all known live patients were removed,the HEMS doctor pronounced life extinct the seven patients left..."
The HEMS doctor described by Steven Jones.
Dr David Lockey, gave his evidence on 2 November and featured this interesting if somewhat leading, exchange with counsel representing the family of victim Lee Baisden, which could have possibly been describing Tanweer:
Q. [MS SHEFF] Can I just repeat that? I just want to clarify that, when you describe seeing a body under the doors near X, that's the one that you've marked on as C on your plan.
A. [DR LOCKEY] Yes, I think so.
Q. In your witness statement, you described that body as a black or dark-skinned male of Somali appearance.
A. That is not the statement that I wrote.
That was a statement that a police officer wrote for me, although I obviously agreed it afterwards, and I wouldn't describe anyone as coming from a particular country.
However, in the discussion, he asked me about the colour of the man's skin and whether I thought he was Asian or whatever, and that's how we got to someone of slightly more North African appearance than perhaps Asian appearance. But it was not something that I would have stated myself, if I'd written the statement.
Q. Okay, so thinking about that now, can I ask you this: have you previously seen victims of explosions with blast injuries?
Q. You are aware, are you, that those close to the site of the explosion can very often suffer very severe burns and even charring of the skin --
Q. -- which can turn the skin black.
A. I work in a Burns Unit as well.
Q. Yes, indeed. So you might not have been aware, then,that this particular male who
A. Was white?
Q. -- was white, he was, in fact, Lee Baisden, whose family I represent, and at his post-mortem he was found to have flash and deep burn injuries over his body. Would that have been consistent, therefore, with theappearance of somebody with black skin?
A. I believe not.
Q. So are you suggesting that this could have been somebody who was of black skinned appearance, originally black --
A. Yes, I felt that that was the case, and I recall seeing a head underneath the window of a door, the door had been blown on to it, and I may have been mistaken, but I didn't feel that that patient was white and I am used to seeing patients with blast injuries.
Q. So that was the impression that you had?
Q. I suggest that you were mistaken about that. The X actually does mark the site of the explosion and the fact that the body was so close to that explosion does indicate, we believe, that the body received those juries from the charring of the skin as a result and that Lee Baisden was that man who was close to the original site of the injury. You don't take that view, I suspect?
A. I can't be certain either way. I have thought about it since and I came back to my original conclusion.
Q. It was, however, a scene of total carnage and body parts were all over the place, and it must have been quite traumatic just taking in the scene when you first saw it. So is there a possibility that you are mistaken about that?
A. There is a possibility.
Dr Lockey then continues in his testimony to state that he certified five dead on the train and that there were two deceased on the tracks.
Forensic medical examiner, Dr Morgan Costello, giving his witness testimony via video link from Eire on the afternoon of 3rd November, stated that he had been asked by the MPS to pronounce life extinct at two sites, Edgware Road and Aldgate, and attended Aldgate on 8 July 2005 at 08.40:
A. You could tell how many bodies were there, but it was quite difficult to tell exact, you know, body parts from each other due to clothes being on the area, blast matter, and the positioning of the bodies. It was quite easy to assign how many individuals were there, but just picking out exact details was difficult.
Dr Costello is then taken through the names of the seven victims, minus Shehzad Tanweer.
DC Andrew Meneely, bomb scene examiner at Aldgate, gave his testimony on the morning of the 3rd November describing his role as "to do the forensic recovery of any evidence at the scene and to deal with any body recovery of bodies that may be there" (p67, 12-14).
(NB. At this point Hugo Keith reminds the Inquest that "the issue of the bodies and their recovery and their treatment is outside the scope of these proceedings by order of my Lady earlier in these proceedings" (ibid. 15-17)).
Presumably the DC in charge of body recovery would identify the body of Shehzad Tanweer?
Questioned by Mr Saunders, after a warning by Lady Hallett on whether it would touch on matters she had deemed were not issues, only seven bodies were identified for removal from the scene:
Q.(MR SAUNDERS) I think there was also a problem with the obtaining of a correct vehicle that had sufficient refrigeration to ensure the proper removal of the bodies?
A. (DC MENEELY) Refrigeration units were called for.
Q. I think there was a difficulty - it may be somebody else deals with that, but there were difficulties as to when they could be provided on the scene.
A. I understand that the vehicles arrived some time on the Saturday.
Q. I think the formal removal of Fiona Stevenson was --
A. Some time on the Friday, actually.
Q. -- on the Friday, I think.
Q. So I think there were those two that were outside, Carrie and Richard Gray were removed initially, and then Fiona Stevenson on the Saturday.
A. Yes, that's correct. Ms Stevenson - there was four bodies removed on the Friday, two on the trackside and two males in the rear carriage part and then the three other women on the Saturday.
It doesn't appear to be the case, even by 8th July 2005, that any discernible body parts from Shehzad Tanweer had been identified.
A wallet, some damaged plastic, paper receipts, and membership cards all remained, but nothing identifiable as the head, torso, or limbs of Shehzad Tanweer, appear to have been present, resulting in several confirmations of the total number of dead as 7.
Note: 'Suicide bombers' do not generally vapourise themselves (Warning: Graphic image of the remains of a 'suicide-bomber' with explosives strapped to the body, not in a rucksack on the floor).
So how did Shehzad Tanweer come to be identified given this total lack of discernible body parts?
Over to DC Meneely for an answer to this one:
Q.[HUGO KEITH] The process continued, as you've told us, for, in your case, some ten days, but it wasn't until, I think, Saturday, 9 July that a significant piece of bone, a piece of a backbone, was discovered in the front of a rear bench seat in carriage 2?
A.[DC MENEELY] That's correct. Officers were searching that part of carriage 2 and, about 9.30 at night, I was told that a piece of backbone had been recovered.
Q. Why was that significant?
A. Because all of the bodies I'd seen so far had no real upper body trauma to that degree.
Obviously there was a lot of injuries, but everybody was relatively intactin relation to the upper body.
Q. No doubt, the discovery of that piece of bone was relevant to the investigation of the crime and information about it was passed to your colleagues?
A. Yes, it was.
Presumably an upper body trauma would be significant if the explosion had occurred on the body, as is understood to be the case with 'suicide-bombers', but not if the explosion had occurred on the floor of the carriage, as no other victim had this type of injury.
As we can see from this graphic, Lee Baisden whose severely burned body was described above by Ms Sheff, was very close to the centre of the explosion, as were both William Walsh (second degree burns and lacerations from climbing out of the window) and Greg Shannon (a total unknown - no press reports), neither of whom were called as witnesses or had their testimony read.
(At this stage we cannot discount the possibility that Hugo Keith will summon them when 'factual issue 9: The presence at the scenes of MSK, Tanweer, Hussain and Lindsay, and their proximity to the explosions' are covered in early 2011. J7 will of course further examine the detail of these issues in due course).
It would appear from evidence to the Inquest that the DNA extracted from Shehzad Tanweer by West Yorkshire Police on his arrest for a Public Order offence in April 2004 was used to identify this spine along with some other tissue samples taken from undisclosed body parts. [Transcripts 3/11/10 pm, page 11 lines 3 on]
It is also a mystery how this 'spine' had only been found on the 9th July, given that it was first mentioned in the witness testimony of DI Kemp, one of the first responders to the scene, on 27 October:
Q.(HUGO KEITH) I think also in that area you noticed what seemed to you to be a part of a body. In fact a human spine?
A.(DI KEMP) That's what it looked like, yes.
Q. From all that, because there was devastation, destruction, debris, a hole, a piece of spine, as well as a body that you realised was dead, and another severely injured person, you knew you were in the immediate vicinity of the bomb?
A. I believed that, yes.
DI Kemp had previously described the scene as dark and that he had only the use of a bicycle lamp which he had acquired from a passing passenger [ibid. page 37, lines 18-129].
The forensics report into Shehzad Tanweer was read to the Inquest by Hugo Keith, no evidence was published and neither are the actual body parts that tissue for DNA sampling were taken from, named.
(Again, these issues may be examined when the forensics evidence is adduced in early 2011).
Statements of MR ANDREW McDONALD read
"I hold degrees of Bachelor of Science in Zoology and Master of Science in Forensic Science ... I have been a forensic scientist since 1992. During the course of my career, I have examined many cases using DNA analysis techniques.
"Between 13 July 2005 and 28 July 2005, 80 recovered body part samples associated with the bombings of a London Underground Tube train at Aldgate on 7 July 2005 together with 20 reference control samples from individuals known to have been present at the time of the explosion were received at the laboratory. All items were received in sealed packages.
"I was asked to carry out STR profiling tests to determine whether any of the recovered body part samples received in this case could have originated from Shehzad Tanweer. STR profiling is a sensitive DNA analysis technique. An STR profile obtained from a human body fluid, such as blood or saliva, or human body tissue can be compared with an STR profile of a given person. If the profiles are different, then the body fluid or body tissues cannot have originated from the person in question.
"If, on the other hand, the STR profiles are the same, then that individual, and anyone else who shares the same STR profile, can be considered as a possible source of the body fluid or body part. The significance of finding such a match can then be assessed.
"Reference control sample. The tissue sample taken from Shehzad Tanweer was used to determine his STR profile.
"Recovered body part samples:
"Tissue analysed from the following recovered body part samples generated full STR profiles which matched at of Shehzad Tanweer."
And, my Lady, Mr McDonald then goes on to list 48 tissues which were analysed from recovered body part samples:
"This means that the body parts could have originated from him. I estimate that the probability of obtaining this profile, if the tissue tested from the body parts did not originate from Shehzad Tanweer, but came from another unrelated person who, by coincidence,had the same profile, is less than 1:1 billion. In addition to these body part samples, the following recovered body part samples generated incomplete STRprofiles which matched that of Shehzad Tanweer."
My Lady, four are listed.
"This means that these body part samples could also have originated from him. I estimate that the probability of obtaining these profiles, if the tissue tested from the body parts did not originate from Shehzad Tanweer but came from another unrelated person who, by coincidence, has the same profile, is less than 1:1 billion ..."
My Lady, he lists three of the body part samples.
"... and approximately 1:9 million", in respect of the final body part sample: "These body part tissue samples could not have originated from any of the other individuals for whom reference control samples were analysed. None of the other recovered body part samples that were analysed could have originated from Shehzad Tanweer. In my opinion, the STR profile results provide extremely strong scientific support for the assertion that all of the recovered body part samples listed above originated from Shehzad Tanweer."
This piece of spine alleged to be the remains of Tanweer was examined by pathologist, Mr Nathaniel Cary, and in a statement dated 29 April 2007, again read by Hugo Keith, he claimed:
Statement of MR NATHANIEL CARY read
"Recovered body fragment: Operation Theseus URN60021972 (Shehzad TANWEER).
"Date of death: 7 July 2005 ...
"This body part was recovered from the Aldgate scene. This is a fragment consisting of the lower part of the thoracic spine and the upper lumbar spine weighing 1.852 kilograms. There are some signs of decomposition and charring. The specimen is contaminated with glass. It is associated with a piece of cloth.
"Measurements: 30 centimetres longitudinally.
"Up to 14 centimetres wide.
"Up to 10 centimetres deep.
"There are attached pieces of posterior rib associated with posterior spinal muscles. It consists of part of the sixth thoracic vertebrae, the seventh thoracic to the second lumbar vertebrae in continuity and part of the third thoracic vertebrae ...
"I have subsequently seen a copy of a form entitled 'Matched body parts'. This relates to scene 1 Aldgate.Through DNA analysis, this body part, URN 60021972, has been matched to multiple other body parts identified as having come from Shehzad Tanweer.
"The nature of this body part and the extreme level of disruption implied by the nature of the other matched body parts is typical of a deceased person having been either in direct contact or very close to an explosive device.
"The level of exposive disruption associated with this deceased, when compared with other bodies, both from this scene and other scenes of explosions also occurring on July 7, is entirely in keeping with this deceased having been in possession of the explosive device at the time it exploded.
"Cause of death:
"A cause of death for this deceased person may be recoded as 1A injuries due to an explosion."
How Tanweer could possibly have been 'in possession" of an explosive device that exploded on the floor of the carriage, and how he managed to virtually disintegrate to the point where no discernible body was identified, only adds to the many questions which existed before the 7 July Inquest resumed.
Questions which this Inquest is failing to answer.
As for the injuries associated with strapping the explosives to the body check out the graphic image linked in the post. Does hydrogen peroxide mixed with either black pepper or masala powder (this hasn't been clarified yet) cause a human body to virtually vapourise yet leave a paper receipt in a wallet intact?
The Antagonist said...
Also worth remembering that while Danny Biddle may say whatever he might say when called at the inquests, it will not negate the complete lack of eye-witness corroboration of the official story at Aldgate.
Nor will Danny Biddle's testimony negate the fact that various medical body counts of the deceased totalled 7, a figure which doesn't include (the apparently almost entirely vapourised) Shehzad Tanweer.
Today Danny Biddle said "Khan" was seated with a small rucksack on his lap. He did not have a large rucksack. Danny Biddle also said that he had always said this to the media.
Bridget said of DNA evidence...
Gareth Peirce ...in her recent speech: "Another dying man in a British prison years before, Giuseppe Conlon, wrongly convincted on the evidence of the same discredited scientists who provided the forensic case against al-Megrahi, was forced to wait for such a decision until the day of his death, when the home secretary, fearful of a political backlash, agreed too late to his release on humanitarian grounds."Are British making same mistakes with Muslims they made with Irish? Irish News IrishCentral
Bridget refers to...
... DNA evidence commonly understood as indisputable evidence of guilt or innocence is intrinsically a highly subjective and value-laden ‘science’. DNA matches are done by identifying ‘peaks’ which indicate the presence of human DNA. The higher the peak, the greater the quantity of DNA present. However, whether a peak can be identified, or how high or low the peak is, is relative to the baseline which is subjectively drawn.
As such, DNA assessment is an essentially subjective and a potentially risky process, particularly where the amount of DNA available is of a minute quantity. Similarly, in ‘mixed-DNA’ cases involving mixtures of at least two different DNAs, it is almost impossible to conclude who, or how many people may have contributed the respective DNAs. Without calculations of the probabilities of false inclusions, little inferences can be drawn in such scenarios.
The most significant message of Allan’s session, is perhaps the need for a healthy skepticism in our treatment of forensic science evidence and the caution that needs to be undertaken in taking science as the objective truth. The need for radical changes in the way scientific evidence is approached in the pre-trial/police investigation and trial stages is evident, but this change can perhaps only be driven by a public inquiry evoked by a miscarriage of justice where science is the culprit. United Against Injustice
We do, of course, have a piece of evidence at our disposal that was not presented at today’s (Monday) session and almost certainly will not appear at all – unless someone realises its value.
I am referring to the photograph of the Edgware Road train, which was leaked to ABC News and subsequently found its way into the British media for one day only.
It can be found on the July 7 site, almost at the end of:
For comparison purposes, a picture of an undamaged Refurbished C Stock carriage can be found here in Figure 2: http://www.trainweb.org/tubeprune/C%20Stock%20refurb%20photos.htm#Fig%202
Search for Exhibit INQ10282-8.pdf for the plan view graphic of the carriage where the explosion took place, and look at Exhibit INQ10282-9.pdf, which shows the position of some of the deceased after the explosion.
Look at the point marked X where the explosion is said to have occurred.
The damage photograph appears to have been taken through double door D3, looking towards double door D4.
Passing vertically through the ‘U’ of the word EXCLUSIVE is the edge of the right hand side of the door aperture for D4.
That can be confirmed by comparing the floor pattern with that in the photo of the undamaged carriage.
Note that the pattern is across the carriage between door sets and along the carriage between the seats.
We can now see where Danny Biddle said he was standing when the explosion occurred.
DB said, in his inquest testimony, that he saw the young Asian man reach to the small rucksack on his lap, at which point the explosion occurred.
The man was sitting in Seat 28, making it impossible for the detonation point to be where the X has been placed on the floor plans.
INQ10282-9.pdf shows that Kahn is alleged to have ended up in the door area, on the other side of Point X.
That is going to take some explaining, no doubt with some pretty fancy physics.
There is a wealth of information in the photograph that shows that the explosion did not occur at Point X, but just forward of the wheels on the trailing end of the front bogie – the train was moving to the right.
You can see a wheel through the hole in the floor, and the axle joining it to its companion on the opposite side of the bogie.
Passing in front of the wheel in the picture, and over the axle appears to be one of the main floor bearers that runs along the length of the carriage.
It is bent upwards and metal has been torn away from the top.
It is clearly bent upwards, as can be verified by holding a straight edge (paper or ruler) along the bottom edge of the main floor support.
Protruding through the damaged floor, at the point where the right hand side of the D3 aperture meets the floor, is a large piece of what looks suspiciously like ‘U’ channel, which has a torn end facing the tunnel wall.
Taking the position of the photographer into account, there is no doubt that the bent-horizontal part of the channel is above floor level.
Moving back to where the channel begins to bend downwards, there is a piece of torn metal pointing vertically upwards, looking as though it has been peeled back from the severed end of the channel.
In the right foreground can be seen the seat framing on the non-tunnel-wall side of the train.
The seat framing on the damaged side is not where it should be but seems to have been moved to the right.
It has also rotated upward, as can be seen from the piece of flooring still attached to the bottom of the frame.
That flat piece of metal, visible a foot or so above normal floor level, is, in fact, a view of the underside of part of the floor.
Note that the left hand end of that piece of metal is torn and bent upwards.
I think I’ll stop there, although there is more that could be said - and even more if the photo had been of higher resolution.
What we are seeing are the results of an underfloor explosion, not the result of an explosion occurring inside the carriage, even if the device had been on the floor.
The high forces necessary to form metal, in the way that can be seen, have to be very close, almost in contact - not sourced from a small bag balanced a couple of feet above the floor on someone’s lap.
Think about it: the explosion was inferred by Danny Biddle to have been originated by the young man sitting in Seat 28, not more that three feet away from where he was standing.
The explosion was powerful enough to cause a large part of the floor to be removed and shred his lower legs; yet, his upper body did not sustain similar damage, even though his only protection had been the Perspex draft screen adjacent to Seat 27.
The explosion cannot have taken place on the lap of the young Asian man.
If it had, Danny Biddle would not have been present at the Inquest and many more people would have died.
The young Asian man, if he was there, seems to have been in the wrong place at the wrong time.It would seem that the Edgware Road photograph, leaked to ABC, is sufficient to cast doubt on the entire direction of the Inquest.
Have all the train carriages involved in the bombings been destroyed?
Yes according to the response from TfL to this FOI request they were all scrapped:FOI request TFL