View Full Version: J7 Respond to the Guardian G2 article

July 7th People's Independent Inquiry Forum > J7 Press/Media Coverage & Complaints > J7 Respond to the Guardian G2 article


Title: J7 Respond to the Guardian G2 article
Description: Guardian 4/07/06


Bridget - July 3, 2006 11:58 PM (GMT)
QUOTE
Response

Inconsistencies and errors mar the July 7 narrative

An independent public inquiry into the London bombings is long overdue, says Beverley Martin


Tuesday July 4, 2006
The Guardian

As one of the editors of the July 7 Truth Campaign website, I would like to thank Mark Honigsbaum for listening to our concerns and for presenting a balanced view (Seeing isn't believing, June 27). Our website is not a "conspiracy" site with a theory to promote and, as Mr Honigsbaum himself saw, we have taken the time to outline all the proposed theories in our search for the truth; we do not subscribe to any one of them. We are not affiliated to any political or religious movement, and our only agenda is to establish the facts of the events of July 7 2005.

We all feel very strongly that we needed to raise awareness of exactly how riddled with anomalies and flaws the reports of this event are.

When referring to the 7.40 train from Luton to London that was cancelled on the morning of July 7, the article reported Rachel North, who stated: "Train timetables rarely bear any relation to real life. Where conspiracy theorists go with this is that the train never ran ... They just take these small anomalies ... and make it into evidence of a conspiracy."

The purpose of our site is not just to highlight the inconsistencies and errors in the media reporting of the London bombings, but also in the report of the official account of the London bombings - the narrative - from the Home Office, which was supposed to offer a definitive account of the events of that day.

In the case of this train, which the narrative stated the four suspects caught, the cancellation was confirmed by the communications manager for Thameslink Rail, who supplied the actual times the trains ran that morning. This information was not obtained from a train schedule, which, of course, would be unlikely to be accurate on any given day. This is merely one of numerous oddities in the narrative that we have documented on the website.

It should also be made clear that we do not endorse the "vitriolic abuse" of survivors; I acknowledge that there have been some quite outlandish accusations against Rachel North by a few people unconnected to our campaign, but we at J7 Truth have never suggested that Ms North is anything other than a genuine survivor. We have certainly never entered into speculation regarding Paul Dadge or Davinia Turrell. With an issue such as this, there will be different approaches by all who are questioning it, but the views expressed by a few should not be taken to represent the whole.

We would like to see an independent public inquiry into the London bombings of July 7, in line with the campaign by Amnesty International, the Law Society of England and Wales, the Finucane Family Campaign, and many other legal, human and civil rights organisations. They all oppose the Inquiries Act 2005 - a piece of legislation that renders all public inquiries subject to state approval and, therefore, not independent. The public have so far been denied any kind of inquiry and the narrative only served to raise more questions than it attempted to answer in the first place. There should not be this level of discrepancy and incongruity in the official account almost a year on from this terrible event.

Beverley Martin edits the July 7 Truth Campaign website http://www.julyseventh.co.uk


Guardian 4/07/06

This Response column was in reply to the

Seeing Isn't Believing article printed in the Guardian G2 on 27/6/06

The Antagonist - July 4, 2006 11:24 AM (GMT)
The comment published in the Guardian is also on Guardian's Comment is Free site. Have your say here on the forum, or on Comment is Free using the link below:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/st...1812074,00.html

Bridget - July 4, 2006 02:21 PM (GMT)
I posted the following comment in response to a point made about 21st Jully.
QUOTE
Nolan makes a valid point about the July 21st 'no-bombs' bombers.

Just on a cursory compare & contrast:

21/7 - No-one died, yet 43 arrests were made & 17 people await trial

7/7 - 56 people died, yet no arrests have been made & to date, no-one will stand trial.

Of course we can never hear evidence against anyone involved in 7/7 because the official report states that these were '4 lone bombers' acting independently, therefore there will be no judicial process to ascertain their guilt. No trial and no independent public inquiry? How will we ever see or hear the evidence in such as way as to be able to make up our own minds of what transpired that day.

By calling for the Release of the Evidence, we can insure that at least something more compelling and conclusive than one CCTV image of the 4 accused, taken outside Luton Station, 30 miles from London, is in the public domain to prove their guilt.

I expect comment will be made about the 'Khan' confession tape. This tape which, remains unverified to my knowledge, appears to be the deciding factor in all 4 mens guilt. This tape was released around the time that the 'suicide-bomber' theory was first being challenged in the press, due to anomalies such as return train tickets and pay & display tickets left in cars. It certainly does not stand as evidence that either all 4 men were involved or that Khan intended to 'suicide-bomb' the underground on 7/7 as he makes no reference to this action.

truthseeker - July 5, 2006 02:42 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Bridget @ Jul 4 2006, 02:21 PM)
I posted the following comment in response to a point made about 21st Jully.
QUOTE
Nolan makes a valid point about the July 21st 'no-bombs' bombers.

Just on a cursory compare & contrast:

21/7 - No-one died, yet 43 arrests were made & 17 people await trial

7/7 - 56 people died, yet no arrests have been made & to date, no-one will stand trial.

Of course we can never hear evidence against anyone involved in 7/7 because the official report states that these were '4 lone bombers' acting independently, therefore there will be no judicial process to ascertain their guilt. No trial and no independent public inquiry? How will we ever see or hear the evidence in such as way as to be able to make up our own minds of what transpired that day.

By calling for the Release of the Evidence, we can insure that at least something more compelling and conclusive than one CCTV image of the 4 accused, taken outside Luton Station, 30 miles from London, is in the public domain to prove their guilt.

I expect comment will be made about the 'Khan' confession tape. This tape which, remains unverified to my knowledge, appears to be the deciding factor in all 4 mens guilt. This tape was released around the time that the 'suicide-bomber' theory was first being challenged in the press, due to anomalies such as return train tickets and pay & display tickets left in cars. It certainly does not stand as evidence that either all 4 men were involved or that Khan intended to 'suicide-bomb' the underground on 7/7 as he makes no reference to this action.

Oddly enough I have never even considered this.

Bridget - July 5, 2006 02:53 PM (GMT)
Hi Truthseeker

21/7 is fascinating.

Another compare & contrast is that despite the police stating that they cannot release evidence from 7/7 in case there is a trial, this has not held back images from trains, subways and buses from the 21/7. Even to the point of showing images of the bombs 'containers' (large plastic rice containers).

All those cctv images compared to 7/7.

Strangely, no one else, at the height of summer in London, is in the subway or on the bus, but then they can't be fake, can they?

It will be an interesting trial later this year.

Not on this thread though! We have a dedicated 21/7 thread here:

http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh/in...hp?showforum=30

The Antagonist - July 5, 2006 04:52 PM (GMT)
Here's the full list of the 43 arrested in connection with the 21 July events where the 'bombers' had no 'bombs', as Hamdi Isaac (aka 'Hussain' G. 'Osman'), told us during his extradition trial in Rome.

What's going to be especially interesting about the main protagonists in the events of July 21st, is that they stand charged of such things as:
  • Conspiracy to murder London Transport passengers,
  • possessing an explosive substance and attempting to murder passengers,
  • conspiracy to cause explosions likely to endanger life or cause serious injury
  • conspiracy to damage property (the no-no of all no-nos)
All of which, given the information imparted to the world by Isaac/Osman as part of his extradition trial - that they had no bombs, intended only a 'demonstrative act' and that he was warned by the 'bomb' maker to take care else he might burn himself (an odd consideration if he was about to die in a suicide attack), would seem rather unlikely to stick in any court, unless 'not having any bombs' and 'not killing anyone' somehow become illegal before their trial makes it to court.

If it's kangaroo courts you want, any trials that might ever materialise in relation to July 21st, along with the ongoing saga of one Mr Harry Maurice Roberts, are definitely the ones to watch.

Kier - July 5, 2006 04:59 PM (GMT)
Here's what it looked like in the paper yesterday; sorry, only just got around to scanning it. Now you know what Kier looks like - aren't you the lucky ones!
I do find it interesting to be accused of paranoia by a survivor on the comment thread, when allowing my real name and picture to be published surely clearly suggests otherwise.

user posted image

brian123 - July 21, 2011 01:25 PM (GMT)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/jul/13/7...-last-operation

Some of the confidence the US officials expressed about Bin Laden's involvement in the attacks is based on analytical judgment rather than ironclad proof. Two of the officials said there was no "smoking gun".

More a smoking pile of poo!





* Hosted for free by InvisionFree