UK government lied about London 7/7 bombings.

[JihadJane]

Survivor, Jacqui Putnam: asks: 'What else have we not been told?' **

Family members and survivors of the 7/7/05 London Bombings are demanding an "independent and impartial public inquiry" into the attacks.

Echoing US government lies about pre-911 intelligence, the UK Home Secretary, Tony Blair and other politicians claimed that the alleged bombers were “clean skins” and that the attacks came “out of the blue”.

“Either they were lying or the intelligence community lied to politicians.” (Graham Foulkes , whose son, David, died on one of the bombed trains.) ***

** http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/may/01/politics.terrorism2

*** http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6188768.ece


The UK government continues to resist holding a public inquiry into how the bombings came about.

 

[The Fool]

Can you point out who exactly has accused the UK Government of lying and what, if any, evidence they have presented?

I can answer Jacqui's question.....She has not been told The color of Tony Blairs underwear but there could be further things that she has not been told....I haven't been told everything either so she should not take it personally.

 

[Alt+F4]

Echoing US government lies about pre-911 intelligence, the UK Home Secretary, Tony Blair and other politicians claimed that the alleged bombers were “clean skins” and that the attacks came “out of the blue”.

What is "clean skins" and when did the U.S. government ever use that phrase in regard to 9/11? 9/11 came "out of the blue"? Try reading Coleen Rowley's Memo to FBI Director Robert Mueller.

 

[JihadJane]

Can you point out who exactly has accused the UK Government of lying and what, if any, evidence they have presented?

I can answer Jacqui's question.....She has not been told The color of Tony Blairs underwear but there could be further things that she has not been told....I haven't been told everything either so she should not take it personally.

From OP:

Tony Blair and other politicians claimed that the alleged bombers were “clean skins” and that the attacks came “out of the blue”.

In fact, MI5 had been monitoring the supposed ringleaders of the 7/7 plot, along with other suspected terrorists, since, at least, early 2004.

 

[WildCat]

Can you point out who exactly has accused the UK Government of lying and what, if any, evidence they have presented?

I predict that JJ will not answer this question.

The million dollars is mine all mine!

 

[JihadJane]

What is "clean skins" and when did the U.S. government ever use that phrase in regard to 9/11? 9/11 came "out of the blue"? Try reading Coleen Rowley's Memo to FBI Director Robert Mueller.

"Clean skins" means unknown to security forces, not suspected of being criminals.


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


"REICHMANN: So let's start with the economy. Did you ever think that you'd be -- that we'd be finishing a two-term Republican presidency with a federal budget deficit so high, with bailouts and government spending sort of run away?

CHENEY: No, obviously, I wouldn't have predicted that. On the other hand I wouldn't have predicted 9/11, the global war on terror, the need to simultaneous run military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq or the near collapse of the financial system on a global basis, not just the U.S."

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/01/09/cheney-911-economy/

"I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon; that they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile. All of this reporting about hijacking was about traditional hijacking."

C.Rice, May 16th 2002


"I am satisfied that I never saw any intelligence that indicated there was going to be an attack on America - at a time and a place, an attack,"

G. Bush, April 11th 2004

 

[Dr Adequate]

In fact, MI5 had been monitoring the supposed ringleaders of the 7/7 plot, along with other suspected terrorists, since, at least, early 2004.

Well, that's not quite true, is it?

They monitored them in early 2004, when then met with people who were already being monitored:

MI5 confirmed in a statement yesterday that Sidique Khan had been recorded meeting members on the fertiliser bomb plot on five occasions in 2004.​

Precisely what they failed to do was monitor them since then:

David Blunkett, who was home secretary at the time police began investigating the fertiliser plot, said today that MI5 had not been short of money to track those associated with the plotters. "They said they had the cash they needed, but not the capacity to recruit and train the experts we need. It takes dozens of people to do that [conduct 24/7 surveillance] properly," he told the BBC's Today programme.​

Also:

The ISC report is expected in two weeks. The key issue for the relatives will be the fate of a fax message sent by MI5, which watched Khan in 2004 as he associated with another British terrorist, to West Yorkshire Police asking for his movements to be watched. Informed sources say that receipt of the fax was never acknowledged. Police did not monitor Khan ...​

The gist of the complaint of the families is that, in hindsight, MI5 and the police should have been monitoring them since early 2004 but didn't. This is why 7/7 did, in fact, "come out of the blue".

 

[Puppycow]

Wrong forum. This should go in the Conspiracy Theories tinfoil hatland.

 

[WildCat]

I predict that JJ will not answer this question.

The million dollars is mine all mine!

I see Jane has already ignored the question, is the $1 million check in the mail yet?

 

[JihadJane]

I see Jane has already ignored the question, is the $1 million check in the mail yet?

I already answered it but I’ll send you a little something anyway. PM me your address.

Wrong forum. This should go in the Conspiracy Theories tinfoil hatland.

Is that where you go to discuss Intelligence politics?

Well, that's not quite true, is it?

They monitored them in early 2004, when then met with people who were already being monitored:

MI5 confirmed in a statement yesterday that Sidique Khan had been recorded meeting members on the fertiliser bomb plot on five occasions in 2004.​

Precisely what they failed to do was monitor them since then:

David Blunkett, who was home secretary at the time police began investigating the fertiliser plot, said today that MI5 had not been short of money to track those associated with the plotters. "They said they had the cash they needed, but not the capacity to recruit and train the experts we need. It takes dozens of people to do that [conduct 24/7 surveillance] properly," he told the BBC's Today programme.​

Also:

The ISC report is expected in two weeks. The key issue for the relatives will be the fate of a fax message sent by MI5, which watched Khan in 2004 as he associated with another British terrorist, to West Yorkshire Police asking for his movements to be watched. Informed sources say that receipt of the fax was never acknowledged. Police did not monitor Khan ...​

The gist of the complaint of the families is that, in hindsight, MI5 and the police should have been monitoring them since early 2004 but didn't. This is why 7/7 did, in fact, "come out of the blue".

The men were photographed and bugged so it is a lie to call them "clean skins".

Additionally, there is little reason to believe that either David Blunkett or MI5 would balk at telling further lies.

 

[WildCat]

I already answered it but I’ll send you a little something anyway. PM me your address.

Actually, all you did was demonstrate your failure at reading comprehension.

You have yet to show a lie by the UK government.

 

[Brainster]

Wrong forum. This should go in the Conspiracy Theories tinfoil hatland.

Let me politely disagree. I concur with the call for an inquiry. There are reasonable questions that people have about the 7/7 attacks that are not part of conspiracy theories; just as there were reasonable questions about the 9-11 attacks that were largely answered by the 9-11 Commission.

Rachel North, who was on one of the trains that was bombed, and who is not a conspiracy nutbar (in fact she was stalked by a 7/7 "Truther"), has called for an independent inquiry.

An inquiry independent of the government and the security services and the police, with the power to compel and cross examine witnesses, go through evidence in detail, and write a report and recommendations which will be acted upon and so, we hope, save lives and spare suffering in future. This is what we have asked for, for over three years now. We have been prevented from having one because of the legal processes - the trials that have followed 7/7, as a result of which some men have been jailed for planning terror offences and others have been acquitted. Now those trials are completed, we are still waiting.

I stand with Rachel North.

 

[Skeptic]

For some people, EVERYBODY is guilty of terrorism -- EXCEPT the Islamic terrorists who actually perform acts of terrorism, that is. They are the only one who are never actually involved in 9/11 or 7/7 or the Madrid bombing or...

 

[funk de fino]

I suspect JJ will once again make schoolboy errors with arguments about this 7/7.

Remember the "almost immediately named" faux pas?

Chief source is a 911 liar for a lot of the claims made previous.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Radical Islam is at war with Britain, but Britain isn't at war with them. British authorities are paralyzed by political correctness and are more frightened of offending the jihadists than losing the country to them.

If British authorities had prior knowledge of the 7/7 bombers and failed to act because of their general moral spinelessess then this needs to be brought out and exposed.

The people of the U.K. need to be more aware of the jihadist threat and to put pressure on the authorities to do their bloody jobs.

John Smeaton can't be everywhere at once.

 

[Ysidro]

Is this going to be one of those things were terms like "clean skins" "terrorist" and "London" mean something different to JJ than the rest of us?

 

[Dr Adequate]

Radical Islam is at war with Britain, but Britain isn't at war with them. British authorities are paralyzed by political correctness and are more frightened of offending the jihadists than losing the country to them.

If British authorities had prior knowledge of the 7/7 bombers and failed to act because of their general moral spinelessess then this needs to be brought out and exposed.

The people of the U.K. need to be more aware of the jihadist threat and to put pressure on the authorities to do their bloody jobs.

John Smeaton can't be everywhere at once.

Why, thank you, sir, for explaining how the British and their government are paralyzed, frightened, morally spineless and unaware. I had almost begun to blame 7/7 on the terrorists.

I await with eagerness your disquisition on the causes of 9/11.

 

[Dr Adequate]

Let me politely disagree. I concur with the call for an inquiry. There are reasonable questions that people have about the 7/7 attacks that are not part of conspiracy theories; just as there were reasonable questions about the 9-11 attacks that were largely answered by the 9-11 Commission.

Rachel North, who was on one of the trains that was bombed, and who is not a conspiracy nutbar (in fact she was stalked by a 7/7 "Truther"), has called for an independent inquiry.

I stand with Rachel North.

However, the spin that JJ's putting on it is conspiratorial.

 

[Thunder]

did any zionists die on 7/7?

no? interesting.....

 

[Nogbad]

Radical Islam is at war with Britain, but Britain isn't at war with them. British authorities are paralyzed by political correctness and are more frightened of offending the jihadists than losing the country to them.

If British authorities had prior knowledge of the 7/7 bombers and failed to act because of their general moral spinelessess then this needs to be brought out and exposed.

The people of the U.K. need to be more aware of the jihadist threat and to put pressure on the authorities to do their bloody jobs.

John Smeaton can't be everywhere at once.

Radical Islam is at war with anything with a pulse. Quite how one determines our moral spinelessness when we have sent thousands of troops to Iraq and Afghanistan is baffling. No one here is in the slightest bit interested in accommodating their brand of religious fruit loopery - least of all the bulk of our Muslim population, many of whom came here to get away from that nonsense.

That is not to say the security forces didn't screw up. However, if there is a reluctance to hold an inquiry it will be because mistakes were made, not because there is some PC driven concern that it might upset terrorists.

So far there has been one successful attack and a couple of really pathetic failed ones. That hardly suggests we have been over-run.