Conspiracy Files on 7/7 London Bombings BBC2

[Frank Freedom]

Just a "general" heads-up for those who may have forgotten.

Thread also here:

http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=17444

[uselesseater]

Thanks...

Just watched it. Very predictable indeed. I thought most of the featured campaigners came across well though.

[scienceplease 2]

Tony, how much of the interview you gave was edited out?

Rudin very cleverly crafted the result to make your radio show and interviews seem somehow subversive.

The BBC as judge and jury, together with supplying new evidence unseen by anyone else, is worthy of a kangaroo court in a banana republic. Who'd have guessed eh?

[Busker]

Thought it was funny, anything raised by analysts that said the government position needed questioning was down to conspiracy nuts reading too much into a situation.

The government line or that of the Israeli government had simple denial statements being presented as fact. Ah, so that's ok then. lol

As with any programme, the power lies in the edit suite.

Plus I thought it a little too convenient they didn't mention CCTV on the tube trains or the bus.

[Prole]

Not quite a full house, but nearly:

[isfahan]

I happened to have switched on the TV whilst this programme was on. My immediate reaction was about the style of presentation with the use of a solemn kind of voice common to many of these programmes concerning 'terrorism'. That immediately warned me what to expect.

It wasn't long before Nick Kollerstrom was on the screen and about 15 minutes later followed the predictable character slur, aided and abetted of course by 'Rachel North', of his being a nutter and/or holocaust denier. Tony Gosling and Dr Naseem couldn't be given the same treatment: instead they were both portrayed as playing leading roles in dividing the nation by pursuing nonsensical conspiracy theories (shame on them for such subversive behaviour!). This despite the editors including Dr Naseem's challenge why we should unquestioningly accept the government conspiracy story.

This programme is all about propaganda, not about investigatory journalism. The techniques used were all meant to ridicule the Truth Movement and cast it in the worst of all possible light. Many of us here are quite used to the BBC using its licence monopoly to behave as the government's conduit for state propaganda. Nevertheless, every time I see this kind of stuff my stomach churns. It reminds me of how much our 'democracy' is based upon lies and calculated fabrication.

If you haven't already signed this petition against the licence fee I urge you to do so:

http://www.petitiononline.com/BBC2007/petition.html

[scienceplease 2]

[Frank Freedom]

Here's my instanaeous take on the "program":

I thought it was an excellent example of attacking the weakest theories of the "conspirasists" views
on 7/7.
Mentioned but not emphasised was Blairs need for public backing for his (rather nwo) war against Iraq at the time.

We were shown the supposed "bomb factory" (made in a bath) without mention of the type of explosive used.

we were also told the train on the official narrative did not run,they got an earlier train,despite if the homemade
highly sensitive bombs in their backpacks they could catch the "earlier" train when the official released footage
shows they were outside Luton station at 07.21,they have 4 minutes to catch the 07.25 train that they now say
they did,is that possible or likely?

The shown footage of the conspirasist proponents Gosling et al did not help at all,especially "Muad dib", as a truther he looks suspect tbh.

No account of the bus times,and the alleged fact the bus the bomber took originally was apparently bound for
Tavistok square anyway-some independant verification would be handy here!

Copious footage of Rachael North,saying (in effect) some people think this event not occur?

Where no one is saying that,obvious strawman,it's the "who" done it that's the issue.

That's it for now off the top of my head.

[numeral]

@scienceplease 2

The CCTV footage showing four murky figures leaving King's Cross Thameslink via the walkway to King's Cross proper was released by the Met in 2008 during the first "7/7 helpers trial". The still shown was timed at 08:26.

See http://segamiemos.blogspot.com/ for another still.

[kbo234]

I was shocked at how 'fair' this programme was.

OK there was the spin and the bald statement that the government is telling the truth and that the 4 Leeds lads 'did it' but....

....the treatment could have been much more disparaging. Everyone came across fairly well, I thought. You cannot really blame the 'Conspiracy Files' for mentioning NK's views on the Holocaust nor the fact that Muad Dib thinks he's the messiah....because he does.

Nevertheless, the film acted like an advert for 'The Ripple Effect'**. It showed very reasonable Asians saying that it was much more believable than than Blair's narrative....they were allowed to point out the government lies on Iraq etc. Peter Power's 'astonishing coincidence' was publicised and in no way explained. I thought Tony did well and Noel did well and Nick Kollestrom put his case well too (they could have put much more emphasis on his holocaust ideas)....they allowed Tony to admit that Muad Dib's case is undermined by his messiah-complex but that "He makes many important points and we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater."

......all in all, a result.............


..Maybe the BBC are looking out more carefully for their own reputation after David Shayler/Bristol 9/11's decimation of their last 9/11 film on WTC7.

** I have always been puzzled by the way prole has attacked 'The Ripple Effect'.

'Mind the Gap' and 'Ludicrous Diversion' are better films in the sense that they avoid all speculation and criticise the government narrative in a more forensic fashion....

.....but 'Ripple Effect' is much more powerful propaganda. It uses the Panorama film and indulges in reasoned and fairly compelling speculation. It stirs the blood very effectively.

The battle we are in is not about 9/11 or 7/7 in themselves but about exposing the depth of the wickedness that enslaves us all and revealing this in an effective way to the public consciousness.

In the war of consciousness, raising serious questions in an 'impartial' manner might be a better way of winning an argument in a court of law.....but in the court of public consciousness (the one that matters) drama, accusation and damning words strike heavier blows and have more useful effect than mere reason.

Whenever I handed out or asked anyone to watch a 7/7 film it was always 'The Ripple Effect' I chose.......for its impact.

Well done Muad 'Dib. I don't care if you think you're Jesus or not. You've made an excellent film there....and please God, many more thousands will decide to watch it after tonight's programme.

I'm not convinced that even if the government have an Inquiry into 7/7 it will be of much use. They are bound to 'do a 9/11 Commission' with it. What government would ever convict itself (effectively) of involvement in such a crime. I think we would have a partly closed investigation carried out by some noble Lord or other followed by an admission of all sorts of minor failures including failures to recognise the significance of some of the intelligence services early suspects....followed by Rachel North congratulating the government for doing the right thing, admitting to failures, but making it a safer world for British citizens by their noble (if tardy) actions.

Prole, if you want to get results stop attacking Tony, Muad'Dib and others that you should see as allies and 'stir it up' with some more oblique and asymmetric actions against the liars you oppose. IMO obsessively demanding a Public Inquiry is a dead end.

[PAULA]

now you know why muadib and shayler are portrayed as messiahs...to make us look like nutters...cleverly planned psyop..wont stop me selling my dvds on ebay though..still think peter power is a whore of zionism

[TonyGosling]

All Gladio edited out - I'm livid.
And Tristan Quinn sat through Allan Francovich's three films finding nothing of contextualising interest??
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=3409375633223151728

You can see for yourself how much of Martin's speech has been edited out here. They used only the bit about the citizen bloodhounds.

False Flag Fever: 9/11, 7/7 & The War On Terror In Context
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=6640448501056709386

Martin Summers told me at the end of last year that he phoned the producer Tristan Quinn and told him not to use the image of Jihad, 'The Secret War in Afghanistan by Tom Carew'. Carew's real name is apparently Philip Sassenago.
The book has been deiscredited so Martin wanted to make sure they didn't use it in the final programme.
Instead Tristan allowed that book to be the ONLY book to be shown as part of that sequence filmed at the Bristol Cube cinema last year.
This is deliberate concious distortion of the facts mister Rudin.

Throughout the old formula - set up theory - debunk it...

[Frank Freedom]

@KBO,much as I would like to agree the emphasis in the "program" clearly stated the nutters side,not much to inspire further analysis by those undecided.

[TonyGosling]

A mercenary that wanted to blow the whistle?
Dug up this unbelievable story on the ultimate fate of the author!

Death of an SAS fantasist: Was Tom Carew murdered - or did he fake his own death?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1128630/Death-SAS-fantasist-Wa s-Tom-Carew-murdered--did-fake-death.html

[PAULA]

According to that * program there was only 6 people involved in the exercises that were run on 7/7.


That's funny cos Peter Power says on this clip that there were 1000 people involved.


Funny that isn't it.

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

[scienceplease 2]

Sorry to disagree but but I believe he says "a thousand people in the organisation" (of the company) and not involved in the exercise. This is a typical way of expressing the size of a company. Apologises again but you saw in the BBC 7/7 stuff how Rudin directs his attack on truthers for going after individuals rather than the facts...

[GodSaveTheTeam]

The conspiracy files show last night called Power's drill an amazing coincidence. Maybe.

But add to that coincidence the other amazing coincidence of him participting in the mock terror drill London Under Attack Panorama show which also envisions the same scenario "almost precisely" and it sends the odds absolutely through the roof.

Not to mention Giuliani being in London on 7/7.

Could someone calculate the odds of all those things happening on the same day please?

[xmasdale]

I think one useful way this programme could usefuly be analysed is to compare it with the first Conspiracy Files programme on 9/11 which John Yeates and I have thoroughly dissected on this website: http://www.bbcmot.blogspot.com/

Perhaps critics should start with our conclusions and see whether the BBC have modified their behaviour in the light of the criticisms they have sustained. Our conclusions in brief were:

"The review of the 911 Conspiracy File highlights some obvious conflicts with the BBC Royal Charter obligations as the BBC programme -


A. Gave inaccurate information.

B. Was partisan and biased.

C. Omitted key issues.

D. Confused and diverted attention from key issues.

E. Made repeated ad hominem attacks on those that question."

On B, this latest programme was certainly partisan and biased supporting the government view, but since the BBC's continued financing depends on its getting on well with the government that should not surprise us.

On C we have omission of mention of CCTV on the tube trains or the bus. No account of the bus times, and the alleged fact the bus that was bombed was the only bus curiously diverted through Tavistock Square.

On D we have diversion from the core issue of whodunnit. Repeated assertion that the said four Muslims dunnit is no substitute for examining alternative theories. Once again they have used the voice of Caroline Katz (an actress noted for playing authority figures) asserting in her soothing motherly tones the government's and BBC's line.

On E my impression was of a strong implication that Tony Gosling and Mohammad Naseem were doing something subversive and wicked, insulting to the survivors by questioning the official conspiracy theory. However, raising Muad Dib's and Nick Kollerstrom's achilies heels was fair game.

On A I'm not yet aware of inaccurate information being given, though I daresay we shall find some later.

It's inevitable that all the interviewees had only a fraction of what they had said broadcast. In my case I was annoyed that the point I had made that ruling out an inquiry because it would be in Tony Blair's words, "a ludicrous diversion" and "we know who did it" means that in modern Britain prime minister's opinion takes precedence over the principle of innocent until proven guilty.

I'm sure Tony, Martin and others will feel similarly frustrated at their pearls of wisdom being omitted.

The emphasis on Muad Dib's movie will have the effect of raising public interest in 7/7 Ripple Effect, the most speculative movie out there. This could be a calculated decision to divert the public from viewing more moderate films ( Mind the Gap and Ludicrous Diversion ) which might appeal to a wider audience. In this way the assertion that those who doubt the official conspiracy theory are nuts is reinforced.

On the whole I do think Mike Rudin and his team have learned something from the criticisms of their earlier programmes, probably from this blog http://www.bbcmot.blogspot.com/ among other places.

[PAULA]

does anyone think though that muadib and shayler are still on the payrolls of mI5..HENCE THE MESSIAH SYNDROME...put out truth and then totally discredit it by saying they are * jesus or whatever

[TonyGosling]

I already calculated probability of same three tube stations (of 275) on same day (of 365) 275 x 275 x 275 x 365 = 6000000000:1
roughly 6 Billion to one

[xmasdale]

[illeagalhunter]

[TonyGosling]

Only two anonymous threatening email so far.
Headers below

[TonyGosling]

And another

[xmasdale]

I never understand why some people claim that to doubt the government's conspiracy theory is insulting to the victims of the attacks.

One thing that is illustrated by the hate mail Tony has received is that abusive language with lots of swearing and obcenities makes you look like a nutter. There are some posters to this website who should take note of that.

[ian neal]

Dare I say that Peter Power (PP) and his exercise is in all likelihood a red herring and that the authorities will be only too happy for ‘us’ to dance around on the head of a pin whilst ignoring the big and legitimate questions.

Here is my main problem with this angle

1) The maths is incorrect

A remarkable co-incidence? Yes. A 6 billion to 1 co-incidence? No

Firstly, whatever assumptions/odds are used, the number is at least 6 times lower. Say you had 275 numbered balls in a bag and you had calculate the odds of pulling out the balls numbered 1, 2 and 3, the odds would be 3/275 x 2/274 x 1/273.

Second, not all tube stations are equal. If your scenario is multiple bombs to cause maximum loss of life and terror, it is reasonable to presume that central London stations that are major hubs are more likely targets than suburban stations. Liverpool St or Kings X is always a more likely target than Amos Grove or Moor Park. A more reasonable assumption could be the 50 odd stations on or inside the circle line.

Thirdly, the odds of an exercise taking place on the same day is a factor of how often exercises of this type occur. We have no data on this but I suggest one per week or one per month is closer to the mark than one per year.

2) No one as far as I know has shown that the PP exercise influenced events beyond those directly involved in the exercise.

On 9/11 it is entirely reasonable to flag up the numerous exercises that took place on the day. The exercises demonstrated that the scenario of multiple plane hijackings and suicide crashes into prominent NY and Washington targets had been anticipated (contrary to Bush and Rice’s claims at the time). The exercises were official military exercises. One involved diverting US fighters. There are reports of false radar blips being inserted into air traffic control screens. For a long time the true extent of the exercises on 9/11 were denied and even now many legitimate questions remain unanswered. Etc, Etc.......

In contrast the PP exercise was desk based and did not involve the UK authorities, unless others can show otherwise.

Indeed it is not beyond the realms of possibility that this was the purpose of Peter Power making his infamous call: i.e. to lead sceptics down a blind alley and to give the authorities an angle that they knew they could debunk later. Alternatively he may be wholly uninvolved just as he claims.

As for the big, legitimate questions, for me the starting points have to be

Countering the claims that the assumed bombers were ‘cleanskins’ with the mobile phone evidence linking Mohommed Siddique Kahn with Haroon Aswat in the days immediately prior to the attacks and the claims by John Loftus that Haroon Aswat was working for British intelligence.

http://www.btinternet.com/~nlpWESSEX/Documents/WATLoftusMI6.htm

Require complete transparency of the explosives evidence / analysis and establish whether it is consistent with the 'Leeds bomb factory' or military sources.

Require complete disclosure of all CCTV evidence including explanations for any questions over the time stamp.

Disclosure of the details of the Saudi warning given the UK authorities.

Require named sources and an explanation from these sources for the Associated Press report of the Netanyahu warning claimed to be from a 'senior Israeli source' and the Canary Wharf shooting report.

Etc.............

[kbo234]

[scienceplease 2]

I disagree on your maths, Tony. It is likely that an attack would only target key tube sites in central London. I think probably only 20 or so. So the maths would be, (days in year) x T x T x T where T is a result of a function to get likely number of targets. So "only" about 3,000,000 to 1

As regards to misleading information in the documentary, as I mentioned earlier, the scene where the bomber's bomb factory was revealed looked like dramatic reconstruction (but not labeled as such) - this was such a significant scene and significant new piece of information that I think that the BBC was misleading. After all how can anyone inspect this piece of information and judge whether it is true or not?

[TonyGosling]

Okay,

Let's say there are 20 central London Tube stations that might be chosen for the exercise.

Then it would be 20 x 20 x 20 x 365... which is about 3 million to one

[Pugwash]

Sorry to be pedantic..,
assuming both the exercises and the bombings would occur on a workday and only one bomb per station.

365 (261 busy weekdays) x 20-1/1 x 20-2/1 x 20-3/1 = 1,515,793

However a few more factors need be considered
The exercise was to be mock, then the time of the mock attack would be fairly irrelevant.
Even accepting the they really needed it to be at a busy period, it could have been either AM. or PM. 50/50 chance of getting the timing right.
1,515,793/0.5 = 3,031,586

The mock exercise is for bombs exploding. Up to then (by my recollection) the only attack on underground stations were by chemical release (Japan), and opening up a violin case and spraying passengers with bullets would seem just as likely, eg Mumbai. Not even considering hijacked planes or chemical trucks. Say we 1/3 chance of conventional bombs actually being used and also included in the scenario.

3,031,586/0.33 = 9,094,757

Consideration must also be given to the number of incidents, why 3. Surely more likely a lone bomber as an initial assumption? And if multiple why not 2 or 6 or 20? Without guidance I would say 50% single, 25% for two and 12.5% for 3;

9,094,757/0.125 = 72,758,057

Why all underground stations, admitted they can be packed with commuters, but so can main line trains coming into London, the Madrid attack killed far more, indeed why a solitary bus, could they not all have been buses. shall we say a 40% chance that 3 of the 4 would have been tube stations.

72,758,057/0.40 = 181,895,143

So much for my guesstimate. Perhaps I've missed a few?

In addition, a couple of logical points, with so many variables, what was the point of doing a 'terrorist' exercise anyway. They would not know what to expect, would they? Further..

We are given that 1,000 plus were involved in this exercise...