On July 7, 2005, at 8:50 AM, three bombs were detonated more or less simultaneously at three stations of the London Underground subway system. Approximately one hour later at 9:47 AM another bomb detonated, this time above ground in a double-decker bus, at the intersection of Tavistock Square and Upper Woburn Place.1 Four men, three of Pakistani descent and a Jamaican, were identified by authorities as the bombers. Their names were Mohammad Sidique Khan, 30; Hasib Mir Hussain, 18; and Shehzad Tanweer, 22. The fourth bomber was Germaine Lindsay.2 Within two weeks of the attacks the authorities’ investigation seemed to be closing in on the party that put the four men up to the bombings. Sir Ian Blair, Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police (Met), said he expected to uncover a "clear al-Qaeda link".3

As it turned out however, the Met’s investigation into al-Qaeda involvement in the bombings4 would only go so far. Any evidence of "inside" assistance in carrying out the attacks, no matter where it might have come from, was scrupulously avoided by the Met; and there was plenty of evidence for "inside" assistance.

The first indication that the bombers must have had inside help in carrying out the attacks occurred later in the evening of 7/7 when Peter Powers, Managing Director of Visor Consultants, gave several interviews to the media recounting a series of bizarre coincidences between the bombings and an exercise that his company was conducting that very morning.5 Peter Powers revealed that at 9:30 AM his company was running an exercise that envisaged the same bombing scenario that took place that morning, right down to the same three tube stations that were actually bombed. The odds of Visor Consultants conducting an exercise of three bombs going off within the same hour, on the same day and in the same tube stations as the real terrorist bombings is 1 chance in 3,715,592,613,265,750,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.6 In other words, it can’t happen in the universe we live in, which means that Visor Consultants must have been infiltrated by comrades of the four bombers. To date there has been no investigation by the Met into who or how Visor Consultants was infiltrated.

The second indication that the bombers had inside assistance is the nature of the explosive damage to the tube trains. Bruce Lait who was riding on one of the bombed trains was knocked unconscious by the explosion as his train was approaching London's Aldgate East station. Lait reported that after he regained consciousness, and was being assisted out of the wrecked carriage by a police officer, "The policeman said 'mind that hole, that's where the bomb was'. The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train. They seem to think the bomb was left in a bag, but I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag."7 The only way the metal floor of the carriage could have been blown upwards is if the explosive device had been planted under the carriage. This is evidence that the bombers had inside assistance from within the London Underground. To date there has been no investigation by the Met into who or how London Underground was infiltrated.

A third indication that the terrorists had inside assistance comes from the fourth bombing that took place above ground at 9:47 AM on a No. 30 bus. A No. 30 bus had been diverted from its normal route along Euston Road allegedly due to road closures in the King's Cross area stemming from the earlier underground bombings.8 The interesting thing here is that this No. 30 bus was the only bus re-routed after the initial bombs went off that morning.9 This is evidence that the bombers had inside assistance from within Stagecoach, the company responsible for the majority of London buses. To date there has been no investigation by the Met into who or how Stagecoach was infiltrated.

A fatal flaw in the hypothesis that the bombers must have had inside assistance in order to carry through to fruition their plans crops up when one analyzes their journey from Luton station to King’s Cross station that morning. One year after the 7/7 bombings Home Secretary John Reid announced that the time of when the terrorists boarded the train at Luton Station was wrong.10 Indeed it was, because the 07:40 trian that the bombers were initially said to have boarded had been cancelled.11 The new story is that the bombers boarded the 07:25 train at Luton, arriving at Kink’s Cross station Thameslink at 08:23. Now not long after the 7/7 bombings the Met said it had CCTV pictures of the bombers taken at King’s Cross mainline station at 08:26. A problem, however, is soon realized when one attempts to reconcile the 08:23 arrival time of the bombers at King’s Cross station Thameslink with the 08:26 CCTV pictures the Met claims it has of the bombers at the King’s Cross mainline station. The problem is one of distance because "from King’s Cross Thameslink, it takes a good seven minutes to walk through the long, Underground tube passage which includes a ticket barrier, to reach the main King’s Cross station, in the morning rush-hour with large rucksacks".12

No wonder the Met refuses to this day to release the 08:26 CCTV pictures it says it has of the bombers at King’s Cross station. Obviously they don’t exist. Now we begin to appreciate the true identities of the participants who were on the "inside". The reason for the failure of the Met to investigate Visor Consultants, London Underground and Stagecoach for infiltration becomes self-evidently clear. The perpetrators of the 7/7 bombings were not terrorists, at least not terrorists in the usual every day meaning of that word. The 7/7 masterminds were from the British security services themselves, the very persons we were brought up to believe were there to protect us! The four bombers were nothing more than innocent patsies.

----------------------------------------------------------------

1.http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/london_bombing/timeline050707.html

2.http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4676861.stm

3.Ibid.

4. The official report into the London bombings says, "There is as yet no firm evidence to corroborate this claim or the nature of Al Qaida support, if there was any. But, the target and mode of attack of the 7 July bombings are typical of Al Qaida and those inspired by its ideologies." http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/7-july-report?view=Binary, p. 21.

5.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEbUQiYOGjU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKvkhe3rqtc&feature=related

6.http://www.infowars.com/articles/London_attack/probability_drill_attack_coinciding.htm

7. http://prisonplanet.com/Pages/Jul05/250705under.html

8. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2005/jul/08/terrorism.july71

9.http://www.officialconfusion.com/77/witnesses/150705stagecoachwit.html

10.http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/5170708.stm

11.http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/july-7-luton-kings-cross-train-times.html

12.http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/july-7-luton-kings-cross-train-times.html