The wealth of evidence that has emerged in the month following the 7/7 London bombings only leads us to one clear conclusion, that the attacks had to have been orchestrated by or with help from the very highest levels of British intelligence.

The latest piece of evidence to suggest that the official story is a fraud focuses again on the contention that the bombs were placed under the trains and were not detonated by suicide bombers wearing backpacks.

The first eyewitness to report this was Bruce Lait, a victim of the Aldgate Station bombing.

He told the Cambridge Evening News,

"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."

Now another credible source, Guardian journalist Mark Honigsbaum, talked to eyewitnesses at the Edgware Road bombing, who essentially described the same thing.

Eyewitnesses told Honigsbaum that "tiles, the covers on the floor of the train, suddenly flew up, raised up."

How could the floor of the train raise up from a bomb supposedly in the backpack of an individual seated in the carriage, above the floor?

The victims then heard "an almighty crash" as a train traveling in the opposite direction collided, clearly indicating that the train had derailed due to the bomb being placed under the carriage.

Click here to hear the audio.

For individuals to plant bombs underneath trains and secure them in place without being caught, they would need to secure access to the trains. In this scenario, London Underground could have been told that a dummy device was to be placed underneath the train as part of an exercise to test security an alertness. When the real attacks happened some LU officials would have been alarmed but their suspicions would have dampened when it was revealed that the bombs were carried in backpacks, meaning that the drill was just a strange 'coincidence'.

The fact that the bombs were actually planted underneath the trains could have easily been buried in an avalanche of official announcements to the contrary.

On the other hand the backpack bombs could have just been the diversionary blasts to enable patsies to be framed, just like the planes flying into the towers acted as the diversionary cover for the explosives planted inside the World Trade Center.

The fact that the ID's of all the so-called suicide bombers were found in pristine condition right next to where the bombs went off strongly suggests the planting of evidence to frame patsies. The ID's would have had a very good chance of surviving if the bomb was not in the backpack with them, but underneath the train.

The drill scenario would have provided culpability cover if investigators started asking questions about objects underneath the carriage.

As we have exhaustively documented, such a drill did take place on the morning of 7/7.

A consultancy agency with government and police connections was running an exercise for an unnamed company that revolved around the London Underground being bombed at the exact same times and locations as happened in real life on the morning of July 7th.

On a BBC Radio 5 interview that aired on the evening of the 7th, the host interviewed Peter Power, Managing Director of Visor Consultants, which bills itself as a 'crisis management' advice company, better known to you and I as a PR firm.

Peter Power was a former Scotland Yard official, working at one time with the Anti Terrorist Branch.

Power told the host that at the exact same time that the London bombings were taking place, his company was running a 1,000 person strong exercise which drilled the London Underground being bombed at the exact same locations, at the exact same times, as happened in real life.

How can anyone credibly claim that this was sheer coincidence when pieced together with the rest of the evidence?

Our original article on this matter is the top link on Google when you type in 'London bombing' - above BBC, CNN and ABC News, proof of how much attention this article received.

Our suspicions were aroused just hours after the bombing when it was reported by Associated Press that Israeli Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had received a warning from the Israeli Embassy not to leave his hotel for a speech he was to give that morning. The location of the speech was right next to the site of one of the bombings.

Despite debunking attempts from much of the establishment press, Associated Press never retracted the story and later Mossad admitted that it was true.

The so-called claim of responsibility for the attack was made by a group that is known to not physically exist and which at best is one guy sitting at a computer posting messages on a forum.

And yet the establishment media still report Al-Qaeda responsibility for the attack as if it were the gospel truth.

Exactly what evidence have we seen to even agree with the contention that four men with rucksack bombs carried out this attack? Four grainy CCTV pictures of dark skinned men with rucksacks? Should we not question this evidence especially when verified witnesses on two of the three trains that were bombed said that the bombs were underneath the train and that they saw no men with rucksacks even in the area?

Questions about the attacks are never ending.

Why was it reported that the explosives used were military in origin but then the story changed to say they were homemade? Can explosive experts not tell the difference or was the story changed for a reason?

Why would a man with an 8-month old baby, another who was only interested in sports, and another who taught disabled children, want to kill themselves, other innocent people and cause so much carnage in the process?

Even the establishment media started speculating that the bombers were duped into killing themselves by someone else.

Why did the cameras on the targeted bus malfunction that day? Why was the bus diverted from its usual route? We personally visited the site of the bus bombing at Tavistock Place and verified that no number 30 bus travels down that road.

What are we to make of claims by Stagecoach bus employees who say that a different group of contractors inspected the CCTV cameras in the days before the bombings and that they took two entire days to carry out tasks which normally take just hours to complete.

What is the reason behind Alan Greenspan's decision to flush nearly $40 billion in liquidity into financial markets two days before the attack? Was this an attempt to preemptively head off a run on the markets? If Greenspan had information about a terror attack then why didn't the people on the trains and buses get the same warning?

Who were the individuals that profited from short-selling the British Pound in the ten days before the attack? The pound fell 6or no particular reason. Fortunes were made after the pound dropped even further in the aftermath of the attacks. This directly mirrors short selling of United and American Airline stocks in the days before 9/11. These suspicious transactions led directly to the CIA.

Why was an innocent man, Jean Charles de Menezes, shot in the head eight times at Stockwell tube station? Why did the police change their story, from saying Menezes was wearing a heavy jacket to admitting it was a lightweight denim jacket? Why did the media initially report that Menezes was shot in the stomach but then change the story when it was pointed out that it would be stupid to shoot suspected suicide bombers in the very place that the bomb would be.

Was Menezes shot because he knew something about the drills? Menezes was an electrician by trade. Did he have damaging knowledge of why the bombings were reported as an electrical surge for over an hour?

Why did Tony Blair immediately reject a public inquiry into how and why the bombings took place? In Britain, there is a public inquiry for every event, no matter how insignificant, and yet after Britain's biggest tragedy since the blitz, Blair shuts the door. What is he frightened of?

The final nail in the coffin regarding inside involvement emerged when it was admitted that the so-called mastermind of both the 7/7 and 7/21 attacks, Haroon Rashid Aswat, is a British Intelligence Asset.

Terror expert John Loftus told Fox News,

"Back in 1999 he came to America. The Justice Department wanted to indict him in Seattle because him and his buddy were trying to set up a terrorist training school in Oregon... we've just learned that the headquarters of the US Justice Department ordered the Seattle prosecutors not to touch Aswat... , apparently Aswat was working for British intelligence."

The mastermind of the London bombings was under the direction and protection of MI6. How much more obvious does it need to be that criminal elements of the intelligence agencies were involved in this attack?

Related: London Bombings Data Page

20 questions Re: London bombing psy-op alleagations.

1) Men who were part of a secret Al Qaeda organisation, that had the
ability to evaded western intelligence agencies for years, would NOT
have carried documents with them, whereby they could have been
identified, if captured, or after they killed themselves when the bombs
exploded. Such documents would enable the police to link them to their
families and provide an opportunity for the British police to start be
able to break into the 'secret Al Qaeda' organisation.

2) The men would not have split amongst themselves, documents belonging
to one man, so that again, the web of the organisation can be connected,
identified, tracked and hunted down.

3) The men would not have been so foolish as to allow themselves to be
seen together, especially outside Kings Cross Station. A station so
obviously known to have many spy cameras in and around it..

4) There is no reason why these men would travel, together, to London,
as again, this allows them to be linked together.

5) There is no reason why they would have driven from Leeds to Luton and
then taken the train to London. Where did they disembark on arriving in
London? Why would outside the arrival station for a group meeting
infront of Kings Cross and all its obvious CCTV cameras?

6) The fact the bus's 4 security cameras were not operating is very
suspicious. When was maintenance conducted on these cameras. What does
the maintenance report say?

UPDATE: From Prison Planet:
"We received an e mail from an employee of Stagecoach, the company
responsible for the majority of London buses. Our contact works a route
roughly one mile from the site of the bus bombing last Thursday. The bus
driver pointed out that the number 30 bus was the only one to be
re-routed after the initial bombs went off in the London Underground,
every other bus carried on its normal journey, but for some reason this
bus was diverted.
The driver notes the following about CCTV maintenance.
"CCTV gets maintained at least 2 or 3 times a week and can digitally
store up to 2 whole weeks worth of footage. this is done by a private
contractor....So when I heard that the CCTV wasn't working on a vehicle
that's no more than 2 years old since last June.....I'm sorry that's
rubbish, I work for the company I know different." Also a point of
interest....last Saturday a contractor came to inspect the CCTV on the
buses at the depot, According to my supervisor the person spent more
than 20 hours over that weekend, 20 hours to see if the CCTV is working?
Also that person who came was not a regular contractor, for security
reasons the same few people always come to the depot to carry out work,
this time it was different. Drivers in the depot already think the so
called bombers had inside help because it was to organised. Some even
think it had help
from the company."
end of update

7) A bomber wishing to cause harm would done so BEFORE the Olympic
committee decided on the wining city, to ensure London did not win the
Olympic bid.

8) A bomber who wanted to strike against the UK would have tried to make
sure that his actions would lead to only a minimal increase in powers
being granted to anti-terror organisations.

9) To prove his cause worthy, a bomber would have tried to strike at a
target far more directly involved in oppression of Muslims.

10) Why would a bomber detonate bombs in London at the time of the
extended G8 in Gleneagles? If they thought that the security in Scotland
was too tight then they would of course have realised that the security
in London would be almost as tight. Certainly it would have ranked
second to Gleneagles. Bombing at the same time as the G8, would only
help the psychotic liar Tony bLiar a golden opportunity to get the
worlds most powerful leaders to offer support to Mr bLiar. After all,
can you imagine a world leader refusing to stand behind bLiar as he made
his trickery-fakery condemnation? A series of bombs in other less well
CCTV'd cities, and against military or governmental targets would have
made far more sense.

11) Benjamin Netanyahu was given a warning before any bombs exploded to
stay in his hotel room. Mr Netanyahu was planning to attend a conference
in the Great Eastern hotel above the Liverpool Street subway station.
However this version of events has spawned multiple variations, with
some sources saying he was on the way, some reports saying he received
the warning AFTER the bombs has exploded. Whenever Mr Netanyahu received
the warning, who were ordinary civilians not warned? Not to warn them
raises the charge of manslaughter. Who issued the warnings of attacks?
Evidence of their warnings should be given along with the timings of
their warnings to quash these incredibly serious allegations. Conference
participants are said to have been evacuated from the hotel. Where is
documentation about the timeline of this evacuation event?

12) New Scotland yard and Israeli authorities contradicted each other
about Mr. Netanyahu warning.

13) Peter Power (a former Scotland Yard official), Managing Director of
Public Relations firm Visor Consultants, which bills itself as a 'crisis
management' advice company, was working at one time with the Anti
Terrorist Branch. Mr Power said that a large company was, at 9:30am
7/72005, staging a drill at the EXACT SAME TIME and EXACT SAME LOCATION,
where the railway station bombings occurred. The drill involved
'simultaneous bombings'. On 9/11/2001, the CIA conducted drills
involving hijacked planes flying into the WTC in New York and on the
Pentagon at 8:30am that morning. Mr. Power may have noting to do with
the bombings, but his information and correlation to 9-11 is deeply
disturbing. What is the significance of drills? It is said that the
'drills' are to provide a cover for the REAL government backed terror
operation. If the operatives were caught, they would simply say they are
part of the drill. Power himself refuses to release the identity of the
private company in London that these drills were being conducted for.
Why does this private company wish to remain anonymous? Power states the
company has over 1,000 employees.

14) UK official sources stated that "high explosives", "probably of
military grade" were used in the London bombings. and not 'typical' of
home made devices.

15) The look of calm on many of the people close to the scene of the
bombings was unusually calm. If these people were genuine, then it
indicates that the 'bombings' were very low key. There is also the
possibility that a number of them interviewed
after the bombings were actually people participating in the drill, and
were possibly not actual real victims.

16) Israeli media reported that the explosives used in the bomb were
probably the same as used in Tel Aviv, as used, supposedly, by two
British Muslims on a suicide bomb misison there. It is said that one of
the bombs failed to detonate and one of the men ran away. Later his body
was found on a beach. The Israeli media showed the men's British
passports and later, the passports were said to be fake. When has it
become policy to notify Israeli intelligence and the media on issues and
information concerning matters of British internal national security?

17) On 13/7/2005 British anti-terrorism agents detonated a series of
'controlled-explosions' in explosive devices left in thebombers car in
Luton. Why would the bombers have left this material in the car? If this
was an intended bomb, then if it was set off, there would a link from
the London bombs to Luton train station, again enabling the police to
trace events and therefore be in a strong position to destroy the
"Secret Al Qaeda organisation in Europe" cell. If these unattended
explosive devices were functional back-ups then why were they abandoned?
If they were dud's why were they abandoned? The explosives inside them
would have aided explosion in London, whether they were in working order
or not. What exactly are 'controlled explosions' How do they render
explosive material safe? Why the need for ten controlled explosions? How
can these multiple controlled explosions be done in such a way a to
preserve forensic evidence? Why not just transport the explosive
material to a safe location and detonate it there? Why not get a robot
to try and disarm the device in the care there and then? How can
destruction of evidence be allowed to take place? Surely ALL untainted
evidence must be collected when investigating criminal cases. It is said
that the bomb disposal unit/ anti-terrorist investigators were targeting
specific parts of the car in order to try to limit damage to forensic
clues. The theory and methodology, execution and results of this must be
explained. Why remove the car in 4:30am darkness?

18) When investigating crimes, One key question that should always be
asked is... "Who benefits" The London bombs have achieved absolutely
nothing for the sake of what is called "radical Islamists" or whatever
label is used. Fear of Muslims has increased, Attacks on Muslims and
their property is now more likely. An opportunity for the deionisation
of something associated with Islam has resulted. The Image of Islam has
been Peoples fear level has increased which has inevitably led to the
public rallying behind the Government. New ID cards are more likely to
come into force whereas previously, 80f the population did not want
ID cards. Europe is reported to approve tighter security measures to
combat 'terrorism'.

19) The two Downing street memo's are a crushing blow to Tony bLiar
sickening pretence that he has been truthful about the war in Iraq.
These and his Jackie Milburn farce, his failure to uphold his nuevo
manifesto pledges clearly show that he's a pathological liar. The man is
dangerous, by his own admission as a consequence of his lies, he stated
categorically that an attack on London would result. In other words, the
citizens of London will pay a painful price for the lies of Tony bLiar.
Nothing he says should be believed. Another eerie event was the Death of
Dr David Kelly who, now it is known beyond any doubt, told the truth
about the Governments documents were sexed up. Kelly ended up dead, and
reports indicating foul play have never been answered successfully. Tony
bLiar cherry picked Lord Hutton to investigate the Kelly affair and
imposed restrictions on Huttons mandate to investigate the Death of
Kelly. Of course bLiar knew (as the downing street memo proves) that
Kelly was absolutely right. At that time the attorney General's legal
advice and the Downing street memo were still being covered from the
public. bLiar was in full knowledge of this. By calling for another
limited enquiry, he tried to play an ace and have the whole affair
buried and provide a doorstop to further claims about the whole
Iraq/Kelly/WMD event. And unfortunately, he has been partially
successful, in that the slow trickle of information showing bLiars
murderous actions never manages to surmount the crest of public
distaste, instead he has ridden over the gentle ups and downs of mild
political storms and lived to tell the tale. The ex-BBC journalist
Andrew Gilligan, made the assertion that the Government probably knew
the 45 minute claim was incorrect, has been proven in its entirety
without any residual doubt.

20) It is reported the bombers were ordinary 'law abiding folk' who
likes to play cricket and basketball, had 8 month babies and guys who
taught disabled schoolchildren. So that's the lifestyle of a suicide
bomber. What was the reason they blew themselves up? Why not just leave
the bomb on the bus or tube and then make a leisurely, unsuspicious
getaway? Live to fight another day, leave no incriminating evidence.
What was to gain by killing themselves. Nothing. What is to gain from the a section of the British Government having set the up as patsies and having them killed? Well, dead men cant incriminate anyone can they?

Police Press Conference Quote 14 July, 2005:  "Hasib Hussain, an 18-year-old from Leeds, is shown in a CCTV image mounting the stairs at Luton station before taking the 7.40am train to King's Cross. There the four bombers split up and launched their attacks during last Thursday's rush hour"

CONCLUSION OF EXTENSIVE RESEARCH:
 ON 7/7 IT WAS PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE
FOR THE 'SUPPOSED' LONDON BOMBERS
TO BE FILMED AT 7.22 AM AT LUTON STATION
AND ALSO CATCH A TRAIN WHICH ARRIVED
AT KINGS CROSS PRIOR TO BEING FILMED AT 8.26 AM

Between 7.00 am - 8.00 am Thursday, 7th July, 2005

Timetable info supplied by two separate sources at Thameslink & also verified by five 7/7 commuters

TIMETABLE		THERE IS NO TRAIN				ACTUAL TIMES
Official Timetable			Minutes Late			Actual Time
Leave Luton	Arrive Kings Cross		Leaving Luton	Arriving Kings Cross	Platform	Departed Luton	Arrived Kings Cross
It is physically impossible to catch the 7.24 AM as in a joint time trial it took 3 minutes 35 seconds  just to reach the platform WITHOUT EVEN INCLUDING ANY TIME TO ACTUALLY BUY A TICKET
7.04	7.40		On Time	On Time	1 or 3	7.04	7.40
7.08	7.56		On Time	30 Minutes	1 or 3	7.08	8.26
7.16	7.48		5 Minutes	31 Minutes	1 or 3	7.21	8.19
7.20	8.08		On Time	7 Minutes	1 or 3	7.20	8.15
7.24	8.00		1 Minute	23 Minutes	1 or 3	7.25	8.23
7.30	8.04		12 Minutes	35 Minutes	4	7.42	8.39
7.40	8.16		N/A	N/A		Cancelled	Cancelled
7.46	8.28		N/A	N/A		Cancelled	Cancelled
7.48	8.20		8 Minutes	22 Minutes	3	7.56	8.42
7.56	8.32		N/A	N/A		Cancelled	Cancelled