7/7 Researcher Tom Secker - On the Edge

More 7/7 CCTV-based chicanery identified by J7...

Jaguar at Luton station car park from J7 Truth Campaign on Vimeo.

All is explained, or rather identified as being unexplained here...

The Curious Case of the Jag That Parked in the Daytime

.

I Can't Believe It's Not a Proper Inquest!! pt4

Given that the J7 team are doing an excellent job of analysing the material generated by the 7/7 Inquest over at their dedicated blog J7: 7/7 Inquests Blog, I do not intend to duplicate their effort by posting my own version of their work.

I may, however, make occasional posts on issues that I wish to amplify or offer a slightly different take on

The latest post on the J7 Inquests Blog discusses the evidence that there may been more than four people in the group of alleged bombers that visited London on 7/7, and the off-hand treatment of that evidence by 7/7 Inquest officials...

Don't Mention The Fifth (or Sixth?) Man

A commentator underneath one of my recent posts seemed to think that because I and others have issues with the absence of relevant CCTV material that maybe we are under the impression that the four alleged bombers didn't visit London on 7/7.

Nope

There could just as easily have been five, or six, or zero, or, yes, even four bombers who travelled down to London by train on the morning of 7/7

I haven't the faintest idea

That's my problem with the Official Narrative

The only alternative theory I am promoting is that I think the Official 7/7 Narrative is currently unsupported by evidence of a quality that would secure a criminal conviction 'beyond reasonable doubt'

and that's putting it mildly

-

Additional 7/7 Inquest analyses that people have made me aware of since my last post include...

Terror on the Tube

Thanks to the commentator who pointed me to Nick Kollerstrom's posting on the 7/7 Inquest. Dr Nick has admittedly assisted with some useful research on 7/7, particularly in establishing that the original version of the Official 7/7 Narrative had the alleged bombers travelling to London on a train that didn't run. An all the more impressive performance from the Official Narrative given that it also alluded to witnesses on that non-existent train

I do, however, have a major problem with the quality of Dr Nick's judgment. Not least the fact that he decided to diversify into a spot of Jewish holocaust revisionism where he put his name to an article which implied that Auschwitz was some kind of Nazi Butlins; complete with swimming pool, water polo and picture postcards. An article that the mainstream and controlled alternative media got righteously steamed up about just before Dr Nick offered himself up for selectively-edited sacrifice by the BBC's Conspiracy Files

Wish You Were There?
Nazi Slave Labour Camps - The Kollerstrom View

Out of respect to the useful work that he has done, I'll link to Dr Nick's current posting on the 7/7 Inquest but I won't be including his site on any permanent link listings, as he has demonstrated that he is more than capable of pulling off feats of outstanding foolishness at the drop of a hat

Personally speaking, I may, on occasions, attempt to use crude humour or a superficially flippant style when writing about issues such as 7/7 but I never forget that this is a serious business and that 56 people died violent deaths on 7/7. This is not some abstract intellectual entertainment and to even hope to achieve some kind of positive result I believe that we sceptics have to educate ourselves to exercise good judgment and common sense

...as demonstrated by Keelan Balderson, producer of 7/7 The Big Picture, over at Wideshut.co.uk

Keelan's just put out a podcast containing a reasoned critique of the 7/7 Inquest (the 7/7 material starts 20 minutes in). The podcast, like 7/7 The Big Picture, is a little rough around the edges but nevertheless contains good information and reasoning. It is clear that Keelan is working hard towards developing an evidence-based analytical approach that tries to avoid the flights of fancy that have been attributed to Conspiraloons in the past


Tom Secker, the producer of another indepedent 7/7 Documentary, Seeds of Deconstruction is another researcher who seems to me to be trying to exercise critical judgment in his handling of the 7/7 material. Tom's take on the 7/7 Inquest thus far can be found over at his blog Howard Beale's News Hour


By their forensic nature, the articles I've linked to above are quite long and detailed. As such they illustrate one of the dilemmas faced by independent researchers who are sceptical of government narratives

If those researchers perform painstaking, meticulous research they are accused of being pedantic, train-spotter types who waste their lives teasing out the kind of tiny inconsistancies that even a completely honest narrative would contain

If those researchers don't perform painstaking, meticulous research they are then subject to the kind of bullshit typified by this comment from an anonymous bell-end underneath a link to J7 on the Indymedia site...


"18.10.2010 14:42
Most of your claims around 77 were around pulling apart the original and sparse CCTV released but now there has been a wealth of it been released your claims are meaningless. All these theories trickle down from Alex Jones, David Icke and others who make a lot of money from books, DVDs and lecture tours. You accuse people of being sheep for following 'mainstream media' but then you get your information from the likes of Infowars a site that tells its readers they need guns and gold to protect themselves, and they happen to sell it! Sorry Troofers, 911 was an outside job, 77 was an outside job. PS Just because you put the word 'truth' on your websites and in the name of your groups doesn't mean it is true."


J7 doesn't plug guns and gold. I don't plug guns and gold. None of us rely on Jones or Icke as primary sources. There is no wealth of CCTV, and the kind of person who posts mendacious nonsense like this is either a natural fucking idiot or a professional fucking idiot

And never, not once, in years of posting hundreds of sceptical articles have I had to resort to misrepresenting the views of people I disagree with. I may be off the mark with some of the views I hold but if that ever turns out to be the case I would have been honestly wrong and I have not lied to others, or myself.

And if I ever found myself behaving in that way I hope I'd be honest enough to ask myself what kind of Truth it is I pretend to be defending through the application of misrepresentation and deceit

.

I Can't Believe It's Not a Proper Inquest!! pt3

Twenty or thirty years ago, proceedings such as the ongoing 7/7 Inquest would have been subject to critical scrutiny by at least some journalists and politicians. Not necessarily because those journalists and politicians suspected a high-level State conspiracy but simply because that's what they were supposedly employed to do, to hold the State to account

In most other dimensions and universes this headline would be considered bollocks

Today, literally not a single paid journalist or politician is exercising any critical scrutiny over the 7/7 Inquest. An inquest into an event which has been used to justify a national commitment to overseas wars and torture, as well as the erosion of domestic civil liberties

Literally dozens of Terror Bastards tooling up for a campaign of bloody mayhem - or some people buying fish fingers. It's difficult to be sure

Over this last weekend a handful of, for want of a better adjective, ordinary people have been working through and analysing transcripts and other material generated by the 7/7 Inquest. These researchers are not being paid for their efforts and they are, in fact, reviled and accused of being mentally ill by the professional whores who should be doing that work

What a screwed up state of affairs we find ourselves in. We live in a time where the range of public discourse permitted to us by our Establishment has been so narrowed that the simple act of being sceptical of government narratives is now routinely dismissed as mental illness

Fuck them

Fuck them all

-

The folks at J7 have recently started a blog dedicated to their analysis of the material generated by the 7/7 Inquest

J7: 7/7 Inquests Blog

The first three posts are...


7 July Inquests: It's A Conspiracy, Stupid!

Which points out that the people running and taking part in the 7/7 Inquest are doing a stand-up job of attributing blame and apportioning guilt to the four alleged 7/7 bombers

...even though a) the Inquest has barely started, and b) the people running and taking part in the 7/7 Inquest have acknowledged that it is not the job of an inquest to attribute blame or apportion guilt anyway


A CCTV Fuss About Nothing?

Which ponders the question of how the Metropolitan Police could have been searching CCTV footage from Luton Station for signs of the alleged bombers one day before the Met had actually identified who the alleged bombers were and where they'd boarded their train. Maybe the Met is in on the secret of time travel?


The Final Curtain - "CCTV rich" to "CCTV FAIL!"

We Conspiranauts are well familiar with the long-established scientific principle that CCTV cameras spontaneously break-down whenever pointed at alleged terrorists carrying out their attacks or policemen shooting innocent people in the back of the head. However, there is still an almost comedic quality to the list of excuses, obsfucation and plain old bullshit that is being offered up by the Met in lieu of actual CCTV coverage from 7/7.

It's all vaguely reminiscent of Monty Python's Cheese Shop sketch - only the Met has got fuck all video evidence rather than cheese

At this rate of foul-ups the 7/7 Inquest is going to tie itself into terminal knots within a few weeks, regardless of however compliant the mainstream media continue to be. Presumably this will have been anticipated and corrective measures will be employed. Such a state of affairs was reached in the weeks after 7/7 when even the mainstream press started to question the suicide bomber narrative. At which point one, then two, 'confession' videos fortuitously emerged on the web and all was right in Official Narrative Land once again


As well as the work being carried out by J7, the researcher behind wideshut.co.uk is also publishing some analysis

And that, aside from some comments posted on this blog, is about it as far as I'm aware of. I do miss Lord Patel's contributions, and Lord Patel, at times like this. If anyone passing through this blog knows of any other decent research (and I think it's fairly clear what I mean by decent) being carried out on the 7/7 Inquest material please do share

.

I Can't Believe It's Not a Proper Inquest!! pt2

"The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made. Thank you, thank you. Now excuse me I've got an inquest to run..."

Years ago, shortly after 9/11, I was arguing with a work colleague about the blatant inconsistancies in the Official Narrative of that particular atrocity.

The miraculous fire-proof passports were high on my list of bullshit, as was the suggestion that the hijackers had been cramming 767 flight manuals in the airport car park on the morning of 9/11. I also had big issues with the story that at least some of alleged Muslim fanatics had got lagered up in the Pink Pony titty bar the night before their 'martyrdom operation'

My colleague explained to me in the most patronising tone he could muster...

'But what you don't understand is that these Al Qaeda operatives are trained to blend in seamlessly into Western Culture'

Now, as it happens, he was the kind of seedy old sod who did frequent titty bars on business trips and probably does consider them to be the epitome of Western Culture, but that's by the by

My response to my colleague was

'Is there anything those men could have done that would have disproved that they were Al Qaeda terrorists?'

His answer was that they shouldn't have destroyed the Twin Towers

Basically, he already knew that they were guilty (because he had been told by the media that they were), and the details of anything they did before the attacks, however banal or contradictory to the notion that they were religious fanatics, was to be interpreted in that light

Once you adopt that kind of mindset absolutely anything a person you've identified as a criminal does will be damning proof of their guilt

-

Critical thinking clearly isn't as popular as it once was but, even so, it should still be fairly clear that theories which are phrased in a way that they can't ever be disproved, even if they are wrong, are not very useful theories at all

They are, however, the basis of much top quality comedy - including many a Marx Brothers routine, huge chunks of Catch-22 and the scene in Life of Brian where Brian denies that he's the Christ and is then informed that 'Only the True Messiah denies his divinity'

That which makes for top quality comedy does not, however, make for top quality inquests...


From the afternoon session on the 11th:

13 There is no evidence at all that we have seen to
14 suggest that the bombers were duped in some way so that
15 they did not know that they were going to die or, even
16 more absurdly, that they did not know that they were
17 carrying explosives at all. Indeed, such claims run
18 entirely contrary to all the evidence that I have
19 summarised so far.
20 It is right to say that the bombers were
21 surprisingly effective, it would seem, in concealing
22 their intentions from those around them. Tanweer played
23 cricket in the evening before putting the terrible plot
24 into effect and seemed more concerned, according to his
25 family, by the loss of his mobile phone.


You could write a longish essay exploring how many different flavours of intellectual dishonesty feature in the above extract from the 7/7 Inquest proceedings

but the short answer is, 'a lot'

A slightly longer answer can be found on the J7 Forum...


"This is utterly circular, and a complete nonsense.

The conclusion that there is no evidence that the alleged bombers were duped or otherwise unknowing suicide bombers is based on the assumption that they were entirely knowing. One piece of evidence that Tanweer was not a knowing, intentional suicide bomber (his playing cricket) is dressed up as evidence of the alleged 'concealing their intentions from those around them'. But this presumes that they were knowing, intentional suicide bombers, so the conclusion that there's no evidence of them being dupes or patsies is an implicit premise in analysing the very evidence that they were dupes or patsies.

When your conclusion is actually an implicit or explicit premise in your argument then your argument is circular. It also engages a certain degree of doublethink - evidence they weren’t guilty isn’t evidence they weren’t guilty, because we know they were guilty, and hence there’s no evidence they weren’t guilty.

This is a bloody pantomime. It not only presumes a desired conclusion, but seeks to refute 'conspiracy theories' by merely repeating the very thing the 'conspiracy theories' are questioning. It's like they've let the BBC's Conspiracy Files crew loose to carry out the inquests."

.

I Can't Believe It's Not a Proper Inquest!! pt1

Tavistock Place - The Musical

My late uncle served in the London Ambulance Service for 32 years. During that time he had developed a healthy respect for the Metropolitan Police. He had very little time for conspiracy theories, was willing to give the security forces the benefit of the doubt, and always invoked cock-up and the natural human desire to cover-up cock ups as the probable explanations for the kind of issues that we Conspiraloons get wound up about

Earlier in the Summer, and before he shuffled off this mortal coil, I was having one of my usual, mostly good-natured, slanging matches with my uncle about exploding trains and innocent people being shot in the back of the head in London when he said something along the lines of...

'OK, you weren't completely off the mark with that Brazilian thing but you can't seriously deny those four Muslim nutcases set those bombs off in London that day!?'

As it happens, my uncle was on duty driving a support vehicle on 7/7 and ended up in Tavistock Place. I know he saw a fair few casualties from the bus explosion. So, I said to him

'According to the Government, those bombs were supposed to be made from home-made explosives and home-made explosives burn, not blast. How many of the people you saw getting off that bus had any burn injuries?'

My uncle looked confused for moment, didn't answer the question and changed the subject completely

Which wasn't like him at all, especially as I'd already played the same card a couple of years back

Your own Dissonance is a dish best not served in your face, repeatedly

-

I only mention that story now because of this little nugget I've just come across, courtesy of The Antagonist...




7/7-Style Explosives Found In NY Cemetery

Explosives of the same type used in the London 7/7 bombings have been removed from a New York cemetery

Eight bricks of the powerful C4 explosives were discovered in a plastic bag at the historic New York City Marble Cemetery



which, of course, completely contradicts the Official 7/7 Narrative which states that home-made explosives were used

The obvious counter from a Pro Official Narrative viewpoint would be that, as is invariably the case when news reports contradict Official Narratives, the news report is simply misinformed

Misinformed by the...


"New York police said the explosives were "very potent" military grade of the same type used the 2005 London attacks. But they were missing detonators."


That would be the same NYPD that was selected to release the pictures of those very spikey, and highly photogenic, bombs...


...that the alleged 7/7 bombers allegedly put together with loving care with the military grade explosives they made in the bath out of chapati flour and hair care products, only to leave in the back of their car on the day of their attack

From what I've read of the current 7/7 Inquest-themed pantomime it would seem that the establishment is sticking with the DIY explosives story. How well that's going to hold up as the Mock Inquest proceeds (not very well so far) remains to be seen

More allegedly inconsistent car-based 7/7 antics are detailed here...

7/7 Inquest: Causing More Questions Than Answers

.

Ah, the Good Old days...

Anyone for a spot of purification?

Back in the golden days of no-nonsense justice, the process of identifying evil doers was sped up considerably by deciding that they were guilty before any inquiry actually began

The potentially tedious, long-winded and utterly pointless process of having to hear a case for the defence was often done away with thanks to the brilliant innovation of offering the pre-judged a less agonising form of execution if they confessed

Costs were kept to a minimum and impressively high conviction rates were achieved

Re-offending rates were low

Times moved on and things have changed

A bit

-

Those of us who are dissatisfied with and can point to gaps in the Official 7/7 Narrative, and who think that this is more important than the X-Factor or the new football season because of the societal changes that have been justfied by 7/7, should have raised an eyebrow at today's news that...

7/7 bomber's widow loses appeal for legal aid at victims' inquest

High court blocks Hasina Patel's application for financial help to understand Mohammad Sidique Khan's motive

The first eyebrow raiser, though we arguably should be used to that by now, is this constant referral by the media to the alleged 7/7 bombers as being the 7/7 bombers

Says who exactly?

Ok, I know the police and government do but both institutions have been known to get things wrong in the past and, dare I say it, tell fibs occasionally.

That's why silly things like inquests and jury trials and the opportunity for representatives of the accused to present a defence came into fashion for a while

Anyone referring to the alleged 7/7 bombers as the 7/7 bombers, in the absence of a conviction by due process, is pissing all over the principle of Innocent Until Proven Guilty

That would be one of those sacred freedoms the terrorists are supposed to be trying to take away from us

That's another one off their todo list already then

Another reason to raise your eyebrows over the refusal to give legal aid to the widow of an alleged 7/7 bomber is the reason given for refusing the aid...


"Far from providing any information that might assist the wider public interest, she has flatly and unequivocally declined the opportunity to do so."

"Although requested by this court to show how she could help establish why her late husband and the others whom she knew acted to murder fellow citizens, she has provided not an iota of evidence to us which could show how she could bring a wider benefit, let alone a significant benefit, to the inquests or to the understanding of the victims of the bombing."


...which basically boils down to the High Court saying that this woman would be granted legal aid only if she is willing and able to confirm her husband's guilt

If she is unable to provide such evidence or, perish the thought, she's not 100% sure of her husband's guilt she can fuck right off

Back to the golden days of no-nonsense justice it is then

And I appreciate that I'm in the tiniest of minorities thinking like this but I guess that part of my brain which thinks that sticking to moral principles is really, really easy and involves no tough decisions must be damaged beyond repair

.