21 July plotter 'linked to 7/7'

[Skeptic]

21 July plotter 'linked to 7/7'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6484317.stm

The alleged head of the 21 July London bombing suspects has been accused in court of collaborating with the 7 July suicide bombers.
Woolwich Crown Court heard Mukhtar Ibrahim was in Pakistan at the same time as Mohammed Sidique Khan, one of the four to blow themselves up in 2005.

But Mr Ibrahim denied he met Khan or fellow suicide bomber Shehzad Tanweer.

He said he had built hoax devices because he was angry about the treatment of Muslims around the world.

In earlier evidence Mr Ibrahim, of Stoke Newington in north London, said he had planned to cause panic with realistic but fake bombs but had no intention to hurt anyone.

But in cross-examination, Stephen Kamlish QC, counsel for co-accused Manfo Asiedu, alleged Mr Ibrahim had spent two months in Pakistan at the same time as Mohammed Sidique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer.

Seated separately

He further alleged that the men had met and jointly conspired to organise a bombing campaign, with the two separate attacks to both use the same kind of rucksack bomb.


When the authorities analysed the explosives that Mr Ibrahim is accused of making for the alleged 21 July attack, they realised that they had only seen them once before, alleged Mr Kamlish - on 7 July 2005.

The allegations put to Mr Ibrahim in court represent the first time that a link has attempted to be made between the 7 July suicide bombers and the alleged attacks of 21 July.

On Thursday, Mr Asiedu broke ranks with the other five defendants when his lawyer told the court that Mr Ibrahim had allegedly planned to carry out something "bigger and better than 7/7".

He has now been seated separately in the dock from the other defendants.

Discussions alleged

Challenging Mr Ibrahim's version of events, Mr Kamlish said that he had documentary evidence that proved Mr Ibrahim, Khan and Tanweer were all in Pakistan at the same time.

"Had there been any discussion between you and them on how to make effective bombs, to start a bombing campaign in this country, the first of which was 7/7, the second of which was going to be 21/7?" asked Mr Kamlish.

"No," replied Mr Ibrahim.

"The only two occasions on which the authorities in this country had ever come across an improvised explosive device made from hydrogen peroxide and an organic substance was the 7th of July and the 21st of July," replied the lawyer, referring to expert testimony from earlier in the trial.

"Yes," Ibrahim replied.

"There is a question mark whether or not the only two ever-known bombs made from hydrogen peroxide are the 7/7 and 21/7 bombs. You were in Pakistan at the same time [as Khan and Tanweer]. You see the coincidence, don't you?"

Ibrahim replied: "When you say this fact, yes."

Mr Ibrahim said that he learnt how to build the devices from a video downloaded from the internet.

After jurors were shown the "martyrdom videos" of both Mohammed Sidique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer, Mr Ibrahim added that he did not believe in suicide bombing.

Mr Ibrahim is on trial with Mr Omar, 26, from New Southgate, north London; Mr Asiedu, 33, of no fixed address; Mr Osman, 28, of no fixed address; Mr Mohammed, 25, of North Kensington, west London; and Adel Yahya, 24, of High Road, Tottenham, north London.

[paul wright]

I notice that the 21/7 bombs appear to have been reduced in the media from a TATP plus chapati flour to a hydrogen peroxide and chapati flour combination. Is there evidence that this combination is an explosive mix, as the prosecution continually asserts.?
I've got both ingredients in the house - the one to make chapatis, and the other for medicinal purposes. I'd hate for their existence to be used against me in some future time as bomb making evidence.
I've checked my sideboard is free of masking tape, to ensure it isn't carried into court as evidence against me.I worry that some corrupt policeman or secret service agent might stick a few strips on it to 'prove' the previous existence of a booby-trap device
Do other people read the reports in the press from this trial and find themselves sniggering nervously at the continuing surreality of the account?

[numeral]