MI5 and the cover-up over 7/7
April 30th, 2009Yesterday’s acquittal of 3 men from Bangladesh and Pakistan on charges of being involved in the 7July 2005 bombings in London will have two dramatic consequences. It will allow the publication next month of a devastating report by the Parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) which reveals how MI5 and the West Yorkshire police failed to follow up leads which could probably have prevented the suicide bombings. It shows that, contrary to the line put out initially by MI5 that these were ‘clean skins’ about whom nothing was previously known, in fact the security services knew a great deal about two of the bombers, whom they had extensively photographed and bugged. They also knew that these two bombers had attended training camps in Pakistan, but dropped them from surveillance when they returned to the UK. The report also shows the extraordinary incompetence of MI5 when its Director-General, Manningham-Buller, actually assured MPs only 24 hours before the bombings that there was no imminent threat to London. And even the Deputy Assistant Commissioner of the Met has openly recognised that a public explanation needs to be given why MI5 monitoring of the bombers was dropped when it could well have prevented the killing of 52 innocent victims. But there are still other critical revelations which should now be opened up.
On 7 February 2008 I wrote to the ISC asking them to examine a number of unexplained issues which had either been raised with me personally or appeared in the media. The first concerns the fact that, astonishingly, an exercise was being run on 7 July 2005 by Peter Power, a former senior Scotland Yard official, who had worked at one time with the Anti-Terrorist Branch. This exercise involved a dry run to test the responses of the emergency services if the London Underground were bombed at the exact same locations and at the exact same times as then happened in real life. He stated this in an interview on Redio 5 less than an hour later on the same morning, and I included excerpts from the interview in my submission to the ISC. The question is: who commissioned this exercise by Visor Consultants whose MD is Peter Power?
I also sent a copy of a photo of the 4 bombers taken by CCTV as they entered Luton station on their way to London. It appeared in several newspapers, but is decidedly odd. It shows one of the bombers at the back in the middle who appears to have his head behind the top rail of a railing, but his body in front of the middle rail, and the lower part of his body behind the third rail. It cannot be a genuine photograph, and must have been doctored. But who did this, and why?
There is also one further dimension to this tragedy which has so far been concealed, but which urgently needs to be brought to light in the public inquiry which the families of those killed are now demanding. The Saudi Government has made known that, prior to the 7 July bombings, they provided essential information concerning expected terrorist attaacks in the UK. What exactly was this information, and on how many occasions was such information provided? I asked the UK Government to reveal this under Freedom of Information (FOI) provisions. The Government insisted it was protected from release by section 23 (1) of the FOI Act 2000 which provides for national security considerations as an exemption. Yet revealing this information cannot now in any way undermine national security nearly 4 years after the event. Moreover, in terms of trying to prevent any such bomb outrages ever happening again, it is clearly in the public interest that it should be known how such information was handled and what lessons should be learned. |I intend to raise these matters in the House next Thursday when the latest ISC report is being debated.
May 1st, 2009 at 1:30 pm
I’ve seen the ‘doctored’ image you refer to. There’s nothing doctored about it, you fantasising idiot.
May 2nd, 2009 at 3:03 pm
Some interesting facts to emerge during the trial of the 3 accused was from the testimony of Clifford Todd, a forensic scientist, who claims that all the explosions occurred on the floors of the trains and the bus, and that id belonging to the 4 was scattered some distance from each explosion, indicating that they hadn’t been in the bags or on the bodies of the accused at the time of these explosions. This has been explained as the need for the 4 to be identified by flinging these documents around the carriage before setting off their bombs, a seemingly impossible task for Germaine Lindsay on the ‘packed to capacity’ Piccadilly Line train to accomplish in the seconds after leaving Kings Cross.
Has anyone questioned the role of the ex-Special Boat Services’ anti-terrorist operative who worked in the Iqra bookshop in Beeston, especially as it is reported that it was he who ordered the encryption of the computer systems?
http://julyseventh.co.uk/media/archive/2005-07-19-Lottery-Propaganda-Shop/
(An SBS operative infiltrated the command structure of the IRA :
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4156/is_20021215/ai_n12579493/ )
As for forthcoming revelations regarding what was known about MSK and Tanweer and whether the events of July 7th could have been prevented, remember that MSK and Tanweer must have felt incredibly protected or confident knowing that :
Their friends in the ‘fertiliser bomb plot’ had been arrested in April 2004
Mohammad Junaid Babar, the FBI supergrass and witness in the case against the 3 accused, had been arrested in New York and was singing like a canary in April 2004. It is even claimed that Babar visited Khan at his home
Mohammad Naeem Noor Khan was arrested in August 2004 apparently with plans to attack the UK found on a laptop and was ‘cooperating with investigators’. (Strangely, he has since been released).
Yet knowing all this, and presumably more, these two men returned to the UK from Pakistan in February 2005, to the same addresses and we are to believe concocted plans and bombs to attack the London transport system.
There is an overwhelming need for full disclosure of all the evidence into the public domain which would prove the official conspiracy theory outlined in the Official Report, until then it remains just that, a conspiracy theory.
May 2nd, 2009 at 3:48 pm
Mr Meacher, the first part of your post raises things asked by the families and survivors’ inquiry campaign group. However, the second part of your post is based on conspiracy theories, which have been debunked because they can be found only on conspiracy theory sites, and they are not true. Raising such issues in the House might make you look as if you have been taken discredited conspiracy theories seriously, and undermine calls for an inquiry.
You write
an exercise was being run on 7 July 2005 by Peter Power, a former senior Scotland Yard official, who had worked at one time with the Anti-Terrorist Branch. This exercise involved a dry run to test the responses of the emergency services if the London Underground were bombed at the exact same locations and at the exact same times as then happened in real life. He stated this in an interview on Redio 5 less than an hour later on the same morning, and I included excerpts from the interview in my submission to the ISC. The question is: who commissioned this exercise by Visor Consultants whose MD is Peter Power?
It was Reed Elsevier, a publishing company. Here is Mr Power’s statement in full:
There has been much nonsense written about why my company ran an exercise on 7 July 2005 that had very close parallels to the real thing that day. Since then I have made several attempts to add my own comments to numerous sites that seem to get increasingly excited about their own conspiracy theories and in the process exclude any rational debate. It seems those who occupy the world of finding conspiracy theories to replace just about any coincidence do not want to have any dialogue with those offering a different view but I have not yet given up hope. I am therefore hoping perhaps naively that someone might like to read an honest and factual account about a particular exercise my company ran in London three years ago.
Unfortunately the BBC had postponed in 2008 a programme in their ‘conspiracy files’ series that would have done this. Our client three years ago agreed to be named in the BBC programme since the attitude of the producer and his team was very balanced (several conspiracy theorists were also invited to take part). We even allowed our complete exercise material to be made available to the BBC. Regrettably broadcasting in 2008 might have jeopardised an ongoing court case so they had little choice about postponing it to 2009.
Early in 2005 Reed Elsevier an organisation specialising in information and publishing that employs 1000 people in and around London asked us to help them prepare an effective crisis management plan and rehearse it before sign-off. Several draft scenarios were drawn up and the crisis team themselves set the exercise date and time: 9.00am on 7 July.
The test was planned as a table-top walk through for about six people (the CM team) in a lecture room with all injects simulated. Everything was on MS PowerPoint. The location of their Central London office near to Chancery Lane was chosen as one test site. With many staff travelling to work via the London underground system the chosen exercise simulated incendiary devices on three trains very similar to a real IRA attack in 1992 as well as other events.
As there had been eighteen terrorist bomb attacks on tube trains prior to 2005 choosing the London Underground was logical rather than just prescient. With this in mind it was hardly surprising that Deutsche Bank had run a similar exercise a few days before and prior to that a multi-agency (and much publicised) exercise code-named Osiris II had simulated a terrorist attack at Bank tube station. Moreover I had also taken part in a BBC Panorama programme in 2004 as a panellist alongside Michael Portillo MP et al in an unscripted debate (we had no idea at all what the scenario was to be?) on how London might once again deal with terrorist attacks only this time it was fictional (created entirely by the BBC).
In short some of the research for our exercise had already been done. The scenario developed for our client even started by using fictitious news items from the Panorama programme then as with any walk through exercise events unfolded solely on a screen as dictated by the facilitator without any external injects or actions beyond the exercise room. Also factored into the scenario was to be an above ground fictitious bomb exploding not far from the head office of the protected Jewish Chronicle magazine where for exercise purposes our imagined terrorists would have been aware that commuters would now be walking to work (past a building already considered a target) as some tube stations would have been closed.
Of just eight nearby tube stations that fell within possible exercise scope three were chosen that by coincidence were involved in the awful drama that actually took place on 7 July 2005. A level of scenario validation that on this occasion we could have done without.
An exercise that turns into the real thing is not that unusual. For example in January 2003 thirty people were injured when a tube train derailed and hit a wall at speed. At the same time the City of London Police were running an exercise for their central casualty bureau where the team quickly abandoned their plans and swung into action to cope with the real thing.
For a surprising number of people such coincidents cannot be accepted as such. There just has to be a conspiracy behind them despite the obvious point that painstaking research will always identify probable above possible scenarios. By the way the only reason I was asked to speak on TV news that day when there was still much confusion about the real tragedies was to encourage more organisations to thoroughly plan their own exercises knowing the threat of terrorism is and remains very real. One tragic consequence being Islam a great Abrahamic monotheistic faith (along with Judaism and Christianity) has undeservedly become vilified by some people.
Peter Power
Visor Consultants
http://uncensored.co.nz/2009/04/04/peter-power-some-companies-used-g-20-protests-as-%E2%80%9Ctraining-for-flu-pandemic%E2%80%9D/
Even before Power explained the company’s name, C4 news had investigated and debunked the claims
http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/uk/coincidence%20of%20bomb%20exercises/109010
2.Mr Meacher, you wrote I also sent a copy of a photo of the 4 bombers taken by CCTV as they entered Luton station on their way to London. It appeared in several newspapers, but is decidedly odd. It shows one of the bombers at the back in the middle who appears to have his head behind the top rail of a railing, but his body in front of the middle rail, and the lower part of his body behind the third rail. It cannot be a genuine photograph, and must have been doctored. But who did this, and why?
It is a genuine still from real CCTV footage held back until recently when it was shown in the trial and retrial of 3 men accused of conspiring to cause explosions with the bombers. The rest of the CCTV was released yesterday. Here it is, on the police website.
http://www.met.police.uk/pressbureau/theseus-foi/
3.The Saudi Government has made known that, prior to the 7 July bombings, they provided essential information concerning expected terrorist attaacks in the UK. What exactly was this information, and on how many occasions was such information provided?
It’s an old story and was covered in Bob Woodward’s book on the Bush Administration’s rush to war ‘State of Denial’ pages 400-402 in 2006. It covers Bush’s reaction to a Memo 14 Dec 2004, about a man called Adel, Saudi national, caught with false passport & interrogated by Saudis, he said in 6 months there’ll be multifaceted London operation, using explosives from Bosnia, including area round ”Edgewood Rd” ( sic). 4 people carrying it out, one with tattooed fingers, co-ordinated by a Libyan businessman, cost $500k, supported by European-looking Caucasians, the bombers would come from 4 different countries, Syrian phone number would give the signal.
That was not enough to stop the bombs – some of the details are wrong, no dates, no contacts, Syrian number didn’t check out, and it was shared with CIA and Uk intel at the time. It should however have affected the security level which was decreased on 6/7/05.
Regards
RN
May 2nd, 2009 at 10:50 pm
Finally a brave MP of this country willing to ask the right questions and not sideline us the UK public.
Well done Michael Meacher!!
May 21st, 2009 at 1:57 pm
Clearly our national police force and security service (MI5) are rotten to the core and apparently working for a foreign power. Clearly Peter Power is a religious nutcase, just like the “ex-” MI5 officer Anthony Blair. Clearly Parliament, like most people, hasn’t got a clue about the dangers to the whole world posed by zionist gangsters and the traitors to mankind who work for them out of misplaced religious loyalty (that’s being kind to the traitors – undoubtedly money comes into it too and it has been poured over Anthony Blair since his departure).
Mr Meacher you are a courageous man. I only wish there were more like you. You need to watch your back.
August 6th, 2009 at 6:00 pm
Michael Meacher is one of regretably few in number i think, who understand what propaganda is.
They tell us lies to convince us to go along with whatever plan it is they believe is in the best interest……but best interests of who exactly?
Ideally the state exists to facilitate the wellbeing of the people. I fear that the people exist to be manipulated for the purposes of those in power within the state. And sadly, ‘they’ dont even realise they are a part of that detrimental state of affairs.
RIP Robin Cook, not forgotten…..