Please sign the J7 RELEASE THE EVIDENCE Petition


SSL Scroogle J7:

J7 forum     J7 site     J7 blog     web

Pages: (27) « First ... 24 25 [26] 27  ( Go to first unread post )

 July 7th Home Office 'narrative' thread, Shredding the official document
The Antagonist
Posted: Mar 25 2007, 12:08 AM


Antagonista


Group: Admin
Posts: 8,643
Member No.: 1
Joined: 25-November 05



QUOTE
The intelligence cooperation between Pakistan and Britan has improved since 7/7 bombing largely due to the extraordinary help accorded by Pakistani authorities
Defence
12 May, 2006


Brigadier Javed Iqbal Cheema, head of the Interior Ministry's National Crises Management Cell, has Issued a following statement in response to United Kingdom's Parliamentary Committee's report on the July T [sic] attacks in Britain:

"We have seen the report released by the UK parliamentary Committee today regarding Britain's terrorist attack of July 7. The two perpetrators of this act of terrorism namely Mohammad Sidique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer were from Pakistani parentage but second generation British.

They had born, bred and educated in England.

The government of Pakistan afforded all possible help and support to the UK government in the investigation of the case.

There is no denying the fact that these terrorists visited Pakistan from 19 November 2004 to 8th February 2005 but their contact or association with any militant organisation or getting training here was not established."

The report itself says the two men probably received "operational training there (in Pakistan)." Obviously the comment is based on probability and assumption which is without any proof or evidence.

The report highlights excellent cooperation afforded by Pakistani authorities in order to further the investigations thereby revealing that two of the four perpetrators had visited Pakistan between November 2004 and 20Q5, but there is no conclusive evidence showing that their visit contributed towards the planning or the execution of the terrorist acts of July 7.


The report itself highlights that the intelligence cooperation between Pakistan and Britan has improved since the incident largely due to the extraordinary help accorded by Pakistani authorities.
Top
The Antagonist
Posted: Jul 8 2007, 10:51 PM


Antagonista


Group: Admin
Posts: 8,643
Member No.: 1
Joined: 25-November 05



A comment on the Home Office narrative by Gill Hicks and her Partner Joe Kerr, taken from the p158, Vol.III of the 7 July Review Committee Report [PDF]
QUOTE
Richard Barnes (Chair): I think we will be making no comment whatever on whether there should be a public inquiry or not; that is for others to deal with and campaign for in many ways.

Gill: Yes, absolutely.

Richard Barnes (Chair): Our role is to learn what we can improve and how we can make sure that if it happens again that more people are looked after better across the piece?

Joe: In response to that, I would argue that one reasonable conclusion is that there must be formal mechanisms for hearing evidence and testimony and a Royal Commission, a public inquiry, or an independent inquiry sometimes is the only feasible way of doing that. It’s interesting that this narrative has been written without any reference to anybody who was there as a civilian presence on 7 July. Frankly, it’s bizarre.

According to Joe Kerr, "the narrative" was "written without any reference to anybody who was there as a civilian presence". Aside from the interesting choice of "civilian presence", this raises further questions about the two people who claim to have seen Hasib Hussain and Mohammed Siddique Khan, namely Richard Jones and Danny Biddle.

Page 12 of the official Home Office narrative states:
QUOTE
Witness accounts suggest 2 of the men were fiddling in their rucksacks shortly before the explosions

So, if Richard Jones and Danny Biddle are the two eye-witnesses who claim to have seen two of the men fiddling in their rucksacks, and the narrative was written without any reference to any "civilian presence", what does that make Richard Jones and Danny Biddle?
Top
Bridget
Posted: Aug 24 2007, 08:56 PM





Group: J7 Admins
Posts: 10,869
Member No.: 2
Joined: 26-November 05



If we change the narrative to include the correction issued after our FOI request it becomes ever more absurd:

CORRECTIONS

1. Page 4. The time of 07.15 should be changed to 07:14 and the text should read
“Lindsay walks through the entrance foyer of the station, walks to the ticket hall and appears to check the departure board. Lindsay then walks back out of the station to rejoin Tanweer, Khan and Hussain at the rear of their vehicles. The 4 then put on their rucksacks and walk towards the station. They enter Luton station and go through the ticket barriers together. It is not known where they bought their tickets or what sort of tickets they possessed, but they must have had some to get on to the platform.”

2. Page 4. The time of 07.40 on the left side of the page immediately preceding the paragraph that commences, “The London King’s Cross train leaves Luton station”. The time of 07.40 is incorrect and should be replaced by 07.25 which is the correct time.

August 2007


This section would then read:

05.07: A red Fiat Brava arrives at Luton station car park. Jermaine Lindsay
is alone in this car. During the 90 minutes or so before the others
arrive, Lindsay gets out and walks around, enters the station, looks
up at the departure board, comes out, moves the car a couple of
times
. There are a handful of other cars in the car park. A few more
arrive during this period.

06.49: The Micra arrives at Luton and parks next to the Brava. The 4 men
get out of their respective cars, look in the boots of both
, and appear
to move items between them. They each put on rucksacks which
CCTV shows are large and full. The 4 are described as looking as if
they were going on a camping holiday.

One car contained explosive devices of a different and smaller kind
from those in the rucksacks. It is not clear what they were for, but they
may have been for self-defence or diversion in case of interception
during the journey given their size; that they were in the car rather
than the boot; and that they were left behind. Also left in the Micra
were other items consistent with the use of explosives. A 9mm
handgun was also found in the Brava. The Micra had a day parking
ticket in the window, perhaps to avoid attention, the Brava did not.

07:14: Lindsay walks through the entrance foyer of the station, walks to the ticket hall and appears to check the departure board. Lindsay then walks back out of the station to rejoin Tanweer, Khan and Hussain at the rear of their vehicles. The 4 then put on their rucksacks and walk towards the station. They enter Luton station and go through the ticket barriers together. It is not known where they bought their tickets or what sort of tickets they possessed, but they must have had some to get on to the platform.

user posted image
CCTV of the 4 entering Luton station

07.21: The 4 are caught on CCTV together heading to the platform for the
King’s Cross Thameslink train. They are casually dressed, apparently
relaxed. Tanweer’s posture and the way he pulls the rucksack on to
his shoulder as he walks, suggests he finds it heavy. It is estimated
that in each rucksack was 2-5 kg of high explosive. Tanweer is now
wearing dark tracksuit bottoms. There is no explanation for this
change at present.

07.25: The London King’s Cross train leaves Luton station. There are
conflicting accounts of their behaviour on the train. Some witnesses
report noisy conversations, another believes he saw 2 of them
standing silently by a set of train doors. The 4 stood out a bit from
usual commuters due to their luggage and casual clothes, but not
enough to cause suspicion. This was the beginning of the summer
tourist period and Luton Station serves Luton Airport.

1. Did Lindsay enter the station and look at the departure board during the 90 minutes whilst waiting for the others to arrive and then again at 7.14?

2. Did they put their rucksacks on at 6.49 or after 7.14?
Top
numeral
Posted: Aug 24 2007, 11:00 PM





Group: J7 Forum Team
Posts: 4,094
Member No.: 5
Joined: 4-December 05



Nice work, Bridget.
Top
The Antagonist
Posted: Aug 25 2007, 12:11 AM


Antagonista


Group: Admin
Posts: 8,643
Member No.: 1
Joined: 25-November 05



QUOTE (numeral @ Aug 25 2007, 12:00 AM)
Nice work, Bridget.

Seconded! And thirded!
Top
justthefacts
Posted: Aug 25 2007, 01:24 AM





Group: Members
Posts: 1,985
Member No.: 598
Joined: 5-July 07



user posted image

These are large rucksacks, and appeared to be heavy.

QUOTE
Tanweer’s posture and the way he pulls the rucksack on to
his shoulder as he walks, suggests he finds it heavy. It is estimated
that in each rucksack was 2-5 kg of high explosive.


Yet each of the bombs we were told about was said to have contained somewhere between 2 and 5 kilograms of explosive matter, unspecified with any certainty. You wouldn't need a huge rucksack for that sort of load, you could carry it in hand luggage.

So what else was in the rucksacks to make them full and heavy? One report spoke of banknotes at the scene of an explosion. Since only those closest to the blast in each instance would have lost clothes or possessions, would that cause enough banknotes to be released to be worth commenting on?
Top
cmain
Posted: Jan 31 2008, 10:32 PM





Group: J7 Forum Team
Posts: 1,094
Member No.: 16
Joined: 19-January 06



QUOTE
12 July

By lunchtime, police working on the theory that there is a King's Cross link to the 3 train bombs, all being broadly equidistant from there at the time of the explosions, identify a CCTV image of 4 men with rucksacks at King's Cross. They recognise Tanweer first from a DVLA photograph.


All the contemporary news media reports (ie in July 2005) claimed that the breakthrough came on the evening of 11th July, and that Hasib Hussain was the one recognised.
Top
0 User(s) are reading this topic (0 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
« Next Oldest | J7 Public Research, FOI requests & Official Reports | Next Newest »


Topic OptionsPages: (27) « First ... 24 25 [26] 27 



Hosted for free by InvisionFree (Terms of Use: Updated 7/7/05) | Powered by Invision Power Board v1.3 Final © 2003 IPS, Inc.
Page creation time: 0.1617 seconds | Archive
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike2.5 License.
Comments on this forum do not necessarily represent the views of the July 7th Truth Campaign, the July 7th People's Independent Inquiry Forum, or even the position of their author. J7, the July Seventh Truth Campaign, the July 7th People's Independent Inquiry Forum, nor its administrators or contributors are liable for any of the forum content. Any and all information is reproduced on a 'fair use' basis which allows reproduction of material for research and study purposes, criticism and news reporting.