Keelan Balderson
Oct 12, 2010

The 7/7 inquest kicked off yesterday, as simultaneously this site was mysteriously taken offline while it held the top search position for the term “77 Inquest”, blocking hundreds of people from an alternative view on the proceedings.

Nonetheless today as we rank lower, and the second day of the inquest in to the deaths of 52 people killed in the July 7 attacks recommences, it has become clear that there is no intention to re-investigate the attacks with a critical eye, and several more questions have now emerged that shed doubt on the official story.

A point made in the new 7/7 The Big Picture documentary, is that the official narrative released by the Government states that alleged bomber Jermaine Lindsay’s car was towed away from Luton Station because it didn’t have a pay & display ticket:
“The Brava, which had been towed away because it did not have a parking ticket is later traced to Lindsay.”

It seems more has been added to this story during the inquest. It was reported by the Telegraph that:
“Lindsay received a parking ticket as he slept in his car while he waited at Luton station for the other three conspirators. The attendant feared being attacked.”

Note: this is a parking ticket fine because he didn’t have a pay & display parking ticket.

The question we should be asking here is why did the attendant fear of being attacked? Did he see any bombs or the handgun? If so he obviously should have reported the incident. Or was Lindsay getting irate because he was getting a parking ticket…while he was asleep? Which would seem a little odd if he was about to go kill himself anyway; in the same way it was odd that Tanweer would argue at the petrol station early that morning for being short changed.

What really needs to be clarified is the story that was widely reported in the media after the initial investigation, which was in complete contradiction to the official government narrative. As stated in the Times:
“Lindsay bought a pay and display ticket, and dutifully stuck it on the windshield. The DNA he left on that scrap of paper would later be used to identify what remained of his body.”

The Government have never been forthcoming about the DNA evidence in their official statements. The official narrative doesn’t make clear how or where it was obtained or cross referenced.

What the official narrative does state is that he didn’t buy a ticket, so his car was towed away. So media reports that investigators used this non-existent ticket to obtain his DNA, as proof that he was the bomber, is either invalid, or the official narrative itself is invalid.

As of yesterday we can now speculate that his DNA was retrieved from the parking fine ticket given to him when he was “sleeping” in his car; but something as important as DNA evidence shouldn’t be left as speculation. The whole point of the inquest is to answer questions not create more!

And of course this doesn’t answer why his car was towed away, because it is official Luton station policy to clamp unpaid parked cars, not to tow them away.

It seems we’re going around in circles.

This inquest is not about truth. They’ve already made up their mind that the four alleged bombers are guilty (which of course they could be, but has yet to be proven). Instead we’re getting a mish-mash of information, some about the inadequacies of the emergency response effort, and some about the inadequacies of the security services.

It would be in the publics best interest to learn that the intelligence agencies weren’t just incompetent that day, but directly linked to the alleged bombers themselves, through a series of intelligence informants and surveillance operations.

It was revealed in the Fertilizer Bomb Plot court testimony that alleged bomber Mohammad Sidique Khan was instructed to go to a terror training camp by Mohammed Q, who funded the plot’s ring leader Omar Khyam. As reported by the Telegraph:
Khan and Khyam both attended a terror training camp together in Pakistan two years before the 7/7 attacks on London’s transport system, which killed 56 people, including the four terrorists. Their contact was a man called Mohammed Quayam Khan, known as Q, who was under surveillance by MI5 for allegedly providing funds, equipment and recruits to al-Qa’eda. Khan had been in mobile phone contact with Q.

Strangely Q was allowed to walk away a free man from the Fertilizer trial while the foot soldiers went down. Also linked to the plot was FBI asset Junaid Babar, but he was given immunity to testify against the other plotters. It came out that he ran the camp that alleged bomber Khan had attended. As reported by the Times:
“Babar organised a Taleban terror training camp in the mountains of northern Pakistan, attended not only by himself and his friends, but Mohammad Sidique Khan, the future London 7/7 Tube-bombing mastermind.”

The BBC later reported that “Inevitably there were suspicions that he’d been an FBI agent all along.”

Upon their return prior to the London Bombings the widely reported mastermind of the attacks Haroon Rashid Aswat (who was allowed in to the country despite being on a terror watch-list) had telephone conversations with the men days before the attacks. He then disappeared. It was later revealed by former federal prosecutor John Loftus that Aswat was strongly suspected of being an MI6 double agent.

So a suspected asset Q, instructs the alleged ringleader of 7/7 to attend a terror training camp ran by an FBI asset Junaid Babar, and upon their return an MI6 asset instructs the bombers further before the attacks?

It’s highly unlikely that any of this information will be brought forward during the inquest.

It’s also unlikely that they’ll discuss evidence of high grade, possibly military explosives being used (not homemade), the exercise being run by Peter Power which envisaged almost the exact same scenario as the real attacks, inconsistent CCTV evidence, the bizarre nature of finding ID at all of the blast sites (Khan’s at 3 of them), the numerous prior warnings about attacks from the US, Pakistan, France, Spain and Saudi Arabia; or the long standing policy called the “Covenant of Security”, where Britain knowingly harbored radicals and terrorists, and used them for conflicts in the Balkans during the 90s.

One thing that has been promised is new video and photo evidence of the blasts sites. This will hopefully prove either way whether bombs were placed under the carriages or were simply in rucksacks. However what we really need is CCTV evidence of the alleged bombers boarding their supposed targets. None has ever been released, giving rise to speculation that they weren’t even on the respective carriages and bus.

None of the points made in this post are made lightly or without evidence. Please take the time to carefully watch the new 7/7 The Big Picture documentary, and compile your own research. Because despite this inquest it seems we’ll still have to come to our own informed conclusions about what happened that day, because the Government are not prepared to investigate it thoroughly.