Who bombed London on 7/7?

Neutronale

I dont normally go in for conspiracies but I find this pretty convincing :eek:

Its a documentry by David Shayler a former MI5er, about the 7/7 bombings in Britain and points the finger at MI6 who run agents among such groups and who may have been running MS Khan as an agent and an Al Quida guy called Aswat.

Anyway see what you think...

http://youtu.be/9Giy7AesLis

Jonny7

David Shayler now believes he is the messiah.

Neutronale

Jonny7 wrote: »

David Shayler now believes he is the messiah.

If you were DS and someone put a gun to your head and told you to make out you were JC in order to discredit legitimate questions about 7/7...

What would you do?

Leaving that aside, he raised some interesting questions on the vid, what do you make of Mind the Gap?

Jonny7

Neutronale wrote: »

If you were DS and someone put a gun to your head and told you to make out you were JC in order to discredit legitimate questions about 7/7...

He openly believes he is the Messiah. Enough said.

Leaving that aside, he raised some interesting questions on the vid, what do you make of Mind the Gap?

Don't know how far I made it in, 6 mins maybe? Past all the Blair is evil and Iraq war stuff. Sorry, couldn't last 42 mins.. I am guessing it just goes on to highlight some discrepancies and oddities from the day to cast doubt on the official version of events, then make it's own unsubstaniated claims about who might have been responsible without naming names of contacts, suspects, trainers, coordinators, planning, etc

Neutronale

Jonny7 wrote: »

He openly believes he is the Messiah. Enough said.

As I say, if you were DS and someone put a gun to your head and told you to make out you were JC in order to discredit legitimate questions about 7/7...What would you do?

don't know how far I made it in, 6 mins maybe? Past all the Blair is evil and Iraq war stuff. Sorry, couldn't last 42 mins.. I am guessing it just goes on to highlight some discrepancies and oddities from the day to cast doubt on the official version of events, then make it's own unsubstaniated claims about who might have been responsible without naming names of contacts, suspects, trainers, coordinators, planning, etc

ok, you're not interested no prob.

Jonny7

Neutronale wrote: »

As I say, if you were DS and someone put a gun to your head and told you to make out you were JC in order to discredit legitimate questions about 7/7...What would you do?

Did you just make that up or is it based on evidence?


As far as 7/7 goes, well if someone can come up with a list of names of those involved who orchestrated it, how many and who in government knew, etc.

Neutronale

Jonny7 wrote: »

Did you just make that up or is it based on evidence?

I believe he made some interesting observations and was very eloquent in doing so. Then some years later he makes this crazy claim; I think it's reasonable to ask the questions he did and to investigate the issues. His later claims are a seperate issue and dont imo invalidate his earlier investigation. It's fair to say if MI6 or whoever have something to hide they were only too happy to see DS make his later crazy claim.

As far as 7/7 goes, well if someone can come up with a list of names of those involved who orchestrated it, how many and who in government knew, etc.

There is no point discussing this with someone who is unwilling to look at exhibit "A"...the questions/issues etc are there..

Jonny7

Neutronale wrote: »

There is no point discussing this with someone who is unwilling to look at exhibit "A"...the questions/issues etc are there..

Fair enough. Exhibit A's on this forum are often long videos which are all eerily the same.

If there is an actual list of suspects with their names and substantiated allegations of what they did in this plot.. I am all ears.

It's the standard requirement for the most basic of trials. Several years since 7/7 happened, if there's any case whatsoever for a conspiracy, there should be a consensus including names, dates, details and evidence at the very least.

If that is asking too much, and I have to watch a 40 minute video, then my suspicions are raised.

Regarding David Shayler, yes I was following it when the news broke of his whistle-blowing. However he has had some sort of descent into possible mental illness and definitely paranoia. He claimed that some sort of invisible planes flew into the twin towers.. for ****'s sake. I'm not going to listen to what he has to say about 7/7.

Daithi 1

Here is 7/7 ripple effect 2. Not a lot of people know it exists. Brilliant documentary.

Muad'Dib's latest film about the July 7 2005 London bombings.

After being unlawfully jailed for 157 days based on trumped-up charges, and the BBC making a dedicated hit-piece on the original 7/7 Ripple
Effect, the film-maker Muad'Dib expands upon the original film and has added over 60 minutes of new material connecting the dots of what most
likely really did happen in London on July 7th 2005, when 3 tube-trains and a double-decker bus were exploded.

Watching this film should leave the viewer no doubt that the crimes and murder committed in London were done by other organizations than by
claimed by the official and corporate media.

"I must say, in my opinion this is a masterpiece. In less than an hour, the film explains how this whole event was planned, how it was
staged, what went wrong, how the authorities sought to cover it up and the failure of the press to cover it adequately. I think it is as
marvellous a microcosm for understanding the nature of inside-jobs as anyone has ever produced, so I must congratulate you and tell you how
much I admire your work."

- James H. Fetzer, professor emeritus at the University of Minnesota about the original 7/7 Ripple EFfect.

"It is an example of critical journalism thatdraws wholly on public news sources to formulate a controversial, but plausible, theory. After
deploying three different theories of truth to develop insights into new and existing evidence, it is the BBC / Government theory that has a
lower level of correspondence with known .facts., is incoherent to the point of being implausible, and is more likely to distort its reports
because of institutional controls and political pressures."

- Rory Ridley-Duff Ph.D., senior lecturer in human resource management
and organisation behaviour, Sheffield Hallam University.

After being unlawfully jailed for 157 days based on trumped-up charges, and the BBC making a dedicated hit-piece on the original 7/7 Ripple
Effect, the film-maker Muad'Dib expands upon the original film and has added over 60 minutes of new material connecting the dots of what most
likely really did happen in London on July 7th 2005, when 3 tube-trains and a double-decker bus were exploded.

Watching this film should leave the viewer no doubt that the crimes and murder committed in London were done by other organizations than by
claimed by the official and corporate media.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwyzpzEgUWE

asherbassad

Jonny7 wrote: »

David Shayler now believes he is the messiah.

Usual shabby attempt at avoiding critical discussion for fear it might reveal something.

Brown Bomber

Jonny7 wrote: »

Did you just make that up or is it based on evidence?


As far as 7/7 goes, well if someone can come up with a list of names of those involved who orchestrated it, how many and who in government knew, etc.

I've narrowed it down to two suspects.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tH9y9HU-gQg

&

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52zHaO4hdLo

gibraltar

Neutronale wrote: »

If you were DS and someone put a gun to your head and told you to make out you were JC in order to discredit legitimate questions about 7/7...

What would you do?

Leaving that aside, he raised some interesting questions on the vid, what do you make of Mind the Gap?

They put a gun to his head and made him claim he was Christ instead of just shooting him?, why?

maybe this is what he/she actually believes, check out some of his/her claims over the years before posting I suggest.

Brown Bomber

gibraltar wrote: »

They put a gun to his head and made him claim he was Christ instead of just shooting him?, why?
.

If you take a moment to think about it yourself it's really not too hard to figure out.

Daithi 1

Insanity can exist within the rational mind. So just because the feller has some frindge beliefs doesnt mean he cant make perfect sense too.

Here are some examples. Read it then maybe we can discuss the theory and not the theorist.

Is it possible to be too smart? Maybe. History is full of insane geniuses, humans who mentally put the pedal to the metal--and sometimes through the floor.
Here are seven brilliant men who seemingly over-revved the neurological engine, who watched as the gearbox and chassis of their brains flew off onto the roadside...and kept on accelerating.

Read more: http://www.cracked.com/article_16559_7-eccentric-geniuses-who-were-clearly-just-insane.html#ixzz2HVlM9JE2


And here....THE TOP 10 CRAZY BASTARDS WHO ACTUALLY CHANGED THE WORLD (FOR THE BETTER)

http://www.spike.com/articles/5xmj4e/the-top-10-crazy-bastards-who-actually-changed-the-world-for-the-better

Jonny7

asherbassad wrote: »

Usual shabby attempt at avoiding critical discussion for fear it might reveal something.

Reveal the details then..

And no, don't point to some hole-poking video. Something tangible.

Jonny7

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I've narrowed it down to two suspects.

I'm not joking, that's the best evidence I've seen so far

gibraltar

Brown Bomber wrote: »

If you take a moment to think about it yourself it's really not too hard to figure out.

Honestly it makes no sense,

Optiont A: take someone who most people have no concern for and force them to do something that will draw attention to the very fact that your trying to hide.

or

Option B: do nothing and let an already discredited person continue to talk.

I'd go with B as the best option.

Neutronale

gibraltar wrote: »

They put a gun to his head and made him claim he was Christ instead of just shooting him?, why?

maybe this is what he/she actually believes, check out some of his/her claims over the years before posting I suggest.

If you dont know why they would get him to make a crazy claim rather than murder him...i cant help you :rolleyes:

I knew of his crazy claim ...as I say this does not invalidate his documentary imo...

Neutronale

Jonny7 wrote: »

I'm not joking, that's the best evidence I've seen so far

There's no way round it jonny, I'm afraid you'll have to brave the DS vid...so get the

Neutronale

Daithi 1 wrote: »

Here is 7/7 ripple effect 2. Not a lot of people know it exists. Brilliant documentary.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwyzpzEgUWE

Great vid, thanx :cool:

Sixtus

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/meet-delores-the-exmi5-officer-now-living-as-a-woman-6801922.html

David now goes by Delores.

As for 7/7 Ripple Effect. It' creator Muad'ib proclaims he's the king of England.

Neither one of them presents a coherent rational argument.

As for their evidence, a friend Rachel North was injured in the bombing and her dealings with David and other 7/7 conspiracy theorists is detailed extensively in Jon Ronson's "The psychopath test". Their theories are spurious nonsense and if you wont come out and raise a rational coherent argument as to why you agree with them, I don't see why I need to bother re watching two idiotic documentaries.

Daithi 1

Sixtus wrote: »

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/meet-delores-the-exmi5-officer-now-living-as-a-woman-6801922.html

David now goes by Delores.

As for 7/7 Ripple Effect. It' creator Muad'ib proclaims he's the king of England.

Neither one of them presents a coherent rational argument.

Ok lads close the thread, that does it. Sixtus has spoken. :rolleyes:

Sixtus

Daithi 1 wrote: »

Ok lads close the thread, that does it. Sixtus has spoken. :rolleyes:

So nothing to add then?

Daithi 1

Sixtus wrote: »

So nothing to add then?

I added about as much as you.

Why don't you pick something from the docu and debunk it to prove your point that there is no "coherent argument".

~Have you watched ripple effect 2 ?

Coz if you aint, your not exactly in a position to make judgement on it. Even when using someone else opinion.

Sixtus

Daithi 1 wrote: »

I added about as much as you.

Why don't you pick something from the docu and debunk it to prove your point that there is no "coherent argument".

Fine. The claim about drills. They were a paper exercise that had no control over any actual emergency services so are completely irrelevant and spurious.

Next?

Daithi 1

Sixtus wrote: »

Fine. The claim about drills. They were a paper exercise that had no control over any actual emergency services so are completely irrelevant and spurious.

Next?

A drill on the same day, in the same places, the exact same scenario that occurred at the same time as the real event. Is spurious ? lol

This is not a coherent argument for foreknowledge ? Do you know the odds on this happening ? Iv'e heard it in the hundreds of millions to one.

This is only 1.5 min.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jInH6VS13YY

Neutronale

Sixtus wrote: »

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/meet-delores-the-exmi5-officer-now-living-as-a-woman-6801922.html

David now goes by Delores.

As for 7/7 Ripple Effect. It' creator Muad'ib proclaims he's the king of England.

Neither one of them presents a coherent rational argument.

As for their evidence, a friend Rachel North was injured in the bombing and her dealings with David and other 7/7 conspiracy theorists is detailed extensively in Jon Ronson's "The psychopath test". Their theories are spurious nonsense and if you wont come out and raise a rational coherent argument as to why you agree with them, I don't see why I need to bother re watching two idiotic documentaries.

Why are you even commenting if you are not interested in viewing the vids which are the very basis for this thread?

Sixtus

Daithi 1 wrote: »

A drill on the same day, in the same places, the exact same scenario that occurred at the same time as the real event. Is spurious ? lol

This is only 1.5 min.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jInH6VS13YY

A drill that was a paper exercise. Had no control of any actual emergency services.

And no it was not at "the same places" because the Drill dealt with attacks on stations no trains.

Sixtus

Neutronale wrote: »

Why are you even commenting if you are not interested in viewing the vids which are the very basis for this thread?

I've already watched them. Why don't you discuss the parts that you think are important or significant. Why should you just get to post link and expect everyone else do all the work?

Daithi 1

Sixtus wrote: »

A drill that was a paper exercise. Had no control of any actual emergency services.

And no it was not at "the same places" because the Drill dealt with attacks on stations no trains.

Excuse me. He said he 1000 people in the city sat down running an exercise almost precisely matched that scenario that occurred. ?

How the fook is that a paper exercize ? :rolleyes:

Sixtus

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=60417868

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=55639337

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=52079307

Three threads that discuss the 7/7 bombings at length on this forum.

Sixtus

Daithi 1 wrote: »

Excuse me. He said he 1000 people in the city sat down running an exercise almost precisely matched that scenario that occurred. ?

How the fook is that a paper exercize ? :rolleyes:

Because you can run a exercise without using people.

And he said the organisation (a company) not the emergency services has a 1000 people working for it, but sat down with a small group of people.

But Peter Power, a former Scotland Yard police officer, says on 7 July, the exercise he ran was office-based and involved just six people from a publishing company.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/8124687.stm

Peter Power would be the man interviewed in your clip.

Not 1,000s of people.

Duh.

Oh and btw, like I dunno about 9 million people I was on the underground that morning, and took two of the lines mentioned. They don't run live terrorism drills on busy lines carrying millions of people in the middle of a Tuesday sodding rush hour.
If you're actually bothered you should watch the BBC documentary the conspiracy files which

Daithi 1

Sixtus wrote: »

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=60417868

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=55639337

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=52079307

Three threads that discuss the 7/7 bombings at length on this forum.

Is there ?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=55639337

Sixtus

Daithi 1 wrote: »

Is there ?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=55639337

What are you jibbering on about, you just showed yet another thread that proves my point.

Neutronale

Daithi 1 wrote: »

A drill on the same day, in the same places, the exact same scenario that occurred at the same time as the real event. Is spurious ? lol

This is not a coherent argument for foreknowledge ? Do you know the odds on this happening ? Iv'e heard it in the hundreds of millions to one.

This is only 1.5 min.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jInH6VS13YY

Not only that but the BBC exercise had exactly the same format; 3 bombs on trains and one on the road...in 2004 :eek:

Daithi 1

Sixtus wrote: »

What are you jibbering on about, you just showed yet another thread that proves my point.

Thats a thread you showed.

Neutronale

Sixtus wrote: »

I've already watched them. Why don't you discuss the parts that you think are important or significant. Why should you just get to post link and expect everyone else do all the work?

well to be honest I dont think I could it justice, its fairly strong stuff, some of which I am sceptical about myself.

Neutronale

Sixtus wrote: »

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=60417868

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=55639337

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=52079307

Three threads that discuss the 7/7 bombings at length on this forum.

Why are you even bothering commenting, you just seem to want to close down the thread?

Jonny7

Neutronale wrote: »

Not only that but the BBC exercise had exactly the same format; 3 bombs on trains and one on the road...in 2004 :eek:

Another coincidence.. incredible.

I am really keen to know who in the UK government was involved, any of the wikileaked intelligence officials involved? any of the expenses scandal MP's involved? did they leave any documents on trains? talk to any undercover reporters?

We're gonna need a bigger conspiracy theory..

Brown Bomber

Neutronale wrote: »

Why are you even bothering commenting, you just seem to want to close down the thread?

Comes highly recommended,

Sixtus This message is hidden because Sixtus is on your ignore list.

To ignore him you left click on his name and then you'll get the option.

You know what I'd love to see happen? An independent, civilain enquiry like they had for Hillsborough. I'm going to watch the film now and let you know what I think.

Sixtus

Neutronale wrote: »

well to be honest I dont think I could it justice, its fairly strong stuff, some of which I am sceptical about myself.

Such as?

List the most credible facts in your opinion.

Brown Bomber

Jonny7 wrote: »

Another coincidence.. incredible.

I am really keen to know who in the UK government was involved, any of the wikileaked intelligence officials involved? any of the expenses scandal MP's involved? did they leave any documents on trains? talk to any undercover reporters?

We're gonna need a bigger conspiracy theory..

Here is one. Mohammed Babar, a US informant and trainer of the alleged bombers.

Exactly like the multitude of Muslim "terrorist" entrapment cases in the US.

While talking heads like Glenn Beck continue to invoke the threat of radical Islam, they habitually ignore the blindingly obvious, that radical Islam is a creature of the US military-industrial complex. Case in point - the terrorist who trained the London bombers was a US informant and has been freed after serving only four and a half years of a possible 70-year sentence.

Citing his "exceptional co-operation," in working with US authorities, a New York Judge released Mohammed Junaid Babar despite him pleading guilty to five counts of terrorism, an outcome that has, "Raised questions over whether Babar was a US informer at the time he was helping to train the ringleader of the 7 July tube and bus bombings," reports the London Guardian.

Babar admits to consorting with high level "Al-Qaeda" terrorists, as well as "providing senior members with money and equipment, running weapons." He also set up a training camp in Pakistan in 2003 where alleged 7/7 ringleader Mohammad Sidique Khan learned bomb-making techniques.

"Graham Foulkes, a magistrate whose 22-year-old son David was killed by Khan at Edgware Road underground station in 2005, said: "People get four and a half years for burglary. They can get more for some road traffic offences. So for an international terrorist who's directly linked to the death of my son and dozens and dozens of people to get that sentence is just outrageous."

But Babar's release makes perfect sense given the fact that he was likely working for US authorities as an informant while training one of the alleged London bombers.

"A remark from the sentencing judge that Babar "began co-operating even before his arrest", has raised the possibility, supported by other circumstantial evidence obtained by the Guardian, that he may have been an informant for the US government before his detention by the FBI in April 2004," writes the Guardian's Shiv Malik, who in a separate article goes into greater depth on how, "Babar may have been working for the US security services while pretending to be a jihadi – allegations that could imply serious failures to prevent the 7 July bombings."

The Guardian article describes how a top US terrorism lawyer has seen sealed evidence in the case which "suggests Babar could have been working for the US authorities before his arrest in April 2004."

"Having reviewed the court transcript himself, bereaved father Graham Foulkes said: "There's a hint from one or two of the sentences [in the transcript] that do strongly suggest [Babar's] co-operation was going well beyond his official arrest. And it looks as if the Americans may well have known in detail what Babar was up to in Pakistan [at the time] and that is a very, very serious matter."

Another possibility would be the "ex" CIA agent who had taken up a position as London Underground (or transport) Chief prior to the attacks. His name escapes me just now.

EDIT: Bigoted headline, but here is a link between the supposed bombers and British Intelligence


Muslim with intimate 7/7 links works for Scotland Yard
A man described as a suspected terrorist sympathiser closely linked to the July 7 bombers has worked for Scotland Yard and a string of councils to run training courses about "engaging" Muslim youths.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/8500124/Muslim-with-intimate-77-links-works-for-Scotland-Yard.html

Neutronale

Sixtus wrote: »

Such as?

List the most credible facts in your opinion.

There are so many.

The BBC exercise imagined three bombs on trains and one on road in 2004.

The Visor exercise with 1,000 participants and again 3 bombs on trains and one on road...on the very day of 7/7.

The train bomb victim who said he saw no asian on his carriage and that there were 3 bomb 'craters' on the carriage from bombs beneath the carriage.

People fell into the three craters and one person died there...from only one bomb?

The bomb bus was worked on for 20 hours by an unknown 'service crew'.

The presence of an explosive expert on the bus bomb who was the only witnesss who said he saw the asian bomber.

There's a few to be going on with

Sixtus

Neutronale wrote: »

There are so many.

The BBC exercise imagined three bombs on trains and one on road in 2004.

So whats the plan? Tell the BBC and get them to talk about a bomb plot a year before the attack. Why would that even make sense?

The Visor exercise with 1,000 participants and again 3 bombs on trains and one on road...on the very day of 7/7.

Can you not read? A few posts ago I showed how that exercise had 6 people. Not 1,000 and had no possible control over actual resources.

The train bomb victim who said he saw no asian on his carriage and that there were 3 bomb 'craters' on the carriage from bombs beneath the carriage.

Missquoted and distorted lies.

People fell into the three craters and one person died there...from only one bomb?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/jun/27/july7.uksecurity

[qupte]
The bomb bus was worked on for 20 hours by an unknown 'service crew'.
[/quote]

Beforehand?

The presence of an explosive expert on the bus bomb who was the ony witnesss who said he saw the asian bomber.

Thats just complete and utter bull****.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/8255801/77-bomber-had-sweat-dripping-down-his-face.html

Anita Dybek-Echtermeyer Is lying?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2005/jul/13/july7.uksecurity6

There wasn't one witness it was a packed bus.

There's a few to be going on with

That took about 4 seconds to refute. Anything else?

Brown Bomber

Just we are clear here: In the "Muslims did 7/7" conspiracy theory which Al Qaeda are we talking about? The friendly "God is on your side" Mujahadeen allies from the 80's (and 90,'s in the Balkans) or the evil ones from the 2000's? Or the same guys from Iraq who were the evil ones but became our friends again when they were carrying out suicide bombings in Damascus? Or the Libyan holy warriors who we used to torture but then decided to arm them to the teeth and give them their own country? It's very confusing...

Sixtus

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Just we are clear here: In the "Muslims did 7/7" conspiracy theory which Al Qaeda are we talking about? The friendly "God is on your side" Mujahadeen allies from the 80's (and 90,'s in the Balkans) or the evil ones from the 2000's? Or the same guys from Iraq who were the evil ones but became our friends again when they were carrying out suicide bombings in Damascus? Or the Libyan holy warriors who we used to torture but then decided to arm them to the teeth and give them their own country? It's very confusing...

I'm sorry it's irrellevant that this clown has me on ignore but for the sake of a mature argument, it's entirely plausible to fund a terrorist group (through Pakistani intelligence, in the 1980s) when they were broadly on your own team (when US foreign policy could be summarised as "smash communism) and you don't really care that the group of rebels you're funding are religious fanatics whose fundamentalist worldview is ideologically at odds with your own, when both of you have the same short term goal. In the case of Afghanistan in the 1980s both the mujahideen and the Regan administration had the same goal (remove Afghanistan from the Soviet sphere of influence), it's just the US did not consider the broader implications of this tactic.

To elaborate are we supposed to believe that it's impossible that decades ago, under entirely different administrations who are ideologically and politically at the other end of the spectrum to subsequent administrations over the coming decades, can have different worldviews and opinions? So it's entirely possible for one US government to have supported the Taliban, or Saddam because it was politically useful for their own short to medium term goals, but could not foresee the long term ramifications of this policy, and these very people another government a quarter century ago, are now your enemies.

Is the level of discourse on this forum, so basic, the geo politcal understand so overly simplicistic, that the arguments put forward by this joker, aren't just laughed out of here as being the juvenile rantings of a teenager?

Yes the Taliban are the spiritual heirs to some of the mujahideen (spelling FFS BB) and Al Qaeda was born in Afghanistan. The Regan and Bush Sr administrations supported them to a degree (financial aide funnelled through the ISI), and the Clinton, Bush and Obama admininstrations have real cause to rue this decision.

So was that tremendously hard to grasp?

Jonny7

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Just we are clear here: In the "Muslims did 7/7" conspiracy theory

Just to correct you there, it's not a conspiracy theory. It's been established.

Any version you may have (doubtful) is a conspiracy theory. Of course if there is an investigation and/or subsequently an inquest which establishes your theory, the relatives of victims back it up, etc.. then you can have recourse to call it otherwise.

Ironically calling the established details of the 7/7 bombings in London a conspiracy theory is a weak attempt to try to discredit the facts.

mitosis

Was it Jimmy Savile?

Jonny7

mitosis wrote: »

Was it Jimmy Savile?

Most plausible alternative theory so far, thanks

SIR PEADO BAILOUT

Jonny7 wrote: »

I'm not joking, that's the best evidence I've seen so far

Train times oops

and no cctv,
the Jag at luton and tavistock square,
the primed bus with cuts in it
the spooks in tavistock square havin a good laugh
canary wharf wtf

and thats da short summary for youse

Sixtus

SIR PEADO BAILOUT wrote: »

Train times oops

The English Train network isn't Japan, and there is a acceptable ten minute gap before a train is considered late.

and no cctv,

There's plenty of CCTV of the bombers.

the Jag at luton and tavistock square,

Same make and model car in two locations. I'm just amazed you think you could drive from leeds to the centre on London in rush hour in the time it takes to get the train.

the primed bus with cuts in it

Bull****, no bus passenger said anything of the sort.

the spooks in tavistock square havin a good laugh

What seriously? What?

canary wharf wtf

Rumour and false stories pop up in the middle of a panic. Shock horror film at 11.

and thats da short summary for youse

A short summary of nonsense.