This Forum is Closed
June 27, 2022, 12:08:58 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: GGF now has a permanent home:
  Home Help Search Links Staff List Login Register  

July 7th Inquest begins with MI5 Saying quite clearly they will set the rules

Pages: [1]   Go Down
Author Topic: July 7th Inquest begins with MI5 Saying quite clearly they will set the rules  (Read 766 times)
Jonnie Goodboy
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 833

The Gulag Archipelago, - had 'Paradise Islands'.

View Profile
« on: October 11, 2010, 01:45:23 pm »

Submissions by J7-Truth campaign to the July 7 London underground & bus bombing/explosions Enquiry/Inquest are to be made now that the Enquiry has opened, with as token jesture, all 53 dead's names being read out in the court. Father to one such victim, a Mr Graham Foulkes a witness at the hearings stated on Channel 4 News that:
"We've now seen that the intelligence community don't seem to be able to answer to anybody they made it clear just this week that they are not answerable to a judge, they are not answerable to a coroner and their are not answerable to Parliament and they've said quite clearly that they will set the rules on how the inquest will be run, and that's not right".

C4 News anchor stated that:
"A number of family members have stated concerns about the security services apparent lack of co-operation with the inquest"

Follows an excerpt from the quite astonishing ascertions by the July 7th Campaign, to be presented as evidence, as found at:

J7 Response to the Provisional Index of Factual Issues Provisional Index of Factual Issues Issue 7 & 8
Forensic issues regarding the bombs and the bodies of MSK, Tanweer, Hussain and Lindsay
7. The likely components, manner of construction and mode of operation of the explosive devices.
8. The likely involvement of MSK, Tanweer, Hussain and Lindsay in the development and assembly of the explosive devices.

Immediately after the events of 7th July 2005 all the news reports that mentioned the kind of explosive used stated that high grade explosives, as typically used by military forces, were responsible. While much of this may be dismissed as media speculation, the police authoritatively confirmed this on the record:
Deputy Assistant Commissioner Brian Paddick: "All we are saying is that it is high explosives. That would tend to suggest that it is not home-made explosive. Whether it is military explosive, whether it is commercial explosive, whether it is plastic explosive we do not want to say at this stage."1
Assistant Police Commissioner Andy Hayman:
"Initially, the forensic investigation suggests that each device used had less than 10 pounds of high explosives"2
Expert scientists Hans Michels and Neil Fisher also confirmed this opinion.3
Clearly the early forensic evidence from the blast sites indicated that high explosives had been used. Why has this evidence been set aside?
1 Advanced bombs were so powerful that none of 49 dead have been identified -
2 Ibid.
3 Plastic explosives seen as most likely material | UK news | The Guardian - J7: THE JULY 7TH TRUTH CAMPAIGN SUBMISSION TO THE 7 JULY INQUEST - PIFI-07-08 WWW.JULYSEVENTH.CO.UK

The evidence presented by Clifford Todd, at the trials of those cleared of conspiring with the alleged perpetrators of the July 7th 2005 explosions, was that the main explosive charge was a mixture of highly concentrated hydrogen peroxide and ground black pepper.
Giving evidence at the trial for the 21st July 2005 incidents, explosives expert Professor Hans Michels stated that those devices were "not capable of exploding"4. His evidence was so compelling that the prosecution dropped the charge of conspiracy to cause explosions likely to endanger life5.
The devices allegedly used on 7th July 2005 were essentially the same (using pepper instead of flour) as those which a court of law has revealed to be "not capable of exploding".
No credible explanation has been given of how they were capable of causing the explosions that occurred on 7th July 2005.

Although, as stated above, Clifford Todd gave his expert opinion that the main explosive charge was peroxide and organic material, he also stated that the investigation had failed to find any trace of the main explosive charge at the sites.
In the absence of these traces, what is the evidential basis for his opinion that the main explosive charge was peroxide and organic material given that by his own admission such a device would be "unique in the UK and possibly the whole world"?6
Explosions caused by some kind of electrical failure would also leave no residue.
How have electrical explosions on the Underground trains (perhaps amplified by the detonation of tunnel dust) been ruled out, given the early reports of power surges and eye witness accounts of the train floor being raised up as if the explosion had originated underneath it.

4 BBC NEWS | UK | 21/7 suspect's claim 'is amazing' -
5 BBC NEWS | UK | 21/7 accused are 'plainly guilty' -
6 Details of July 7 'bomb factory' disclosed - Telegraph -
7 CEN News : Region-wide : "I was in tube bomb carriage - and survived" -
« Last Edit: October 11, 2010, 01:49:27 pm by Two Tenners » Report Spam   Logged

"When the righteous become many, the people rejoice; but when anyone wicked bears rule, the people sigh".
Prov 29:2

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

Full Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 177

View Profile
« Reply #1 on: October 12, 2010, 12:06:00 pm »

The thread title says it all !!!
Report Spam   Logged
Jonnie Goodboy
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 833

The Gulag Archipelago, - had 'Paradise Islands'.

View Profile
« Reply #2 on: October 18, 2010, 07:46:29 am »

Greetings from J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign

As you might expect, J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign is keeping a close
eye on 7/7 Inquests that are taking place at the Royal Courts of Justice
under the auspices of Lady Justice Hallett. The Inquests are expected to
last at least five months and will see the release of evidence that has
previously been kept from public scrutiny.

The J7 submissions to the Inquests announced last week detailed
suggested lines of inquiry and questions which we believe should be
proposed and considered by the Coroner.  If you haven't seen them yet,
you can read and download the J7: Submissions to the Inquests here:

J7's submissions to the Inquests would appear to have been read and
commented on by the solicitor to the Inquests, Hugo Keith QC.  On the
first day of the Inquests, during his opening statement, Keith stated:

14 My Lady, I have mentioned this evidence because
15 a number of unlikely conspiracy theories have been aired
16 in the press and on the internet. One particular
17 campaigning group has submitted voluminous submissions
18 to the Inquest team, and the submissions reflect
19 long-held views expressed on the website, that website,
20 to the effect that there are a large number of anomalies
21 that merit detailed attention.
22 We consider it important that such claims are
23 identified and addressed, many of the claims were
24 helpfully identified and summarised in the written
25 submissions advanced before you in April by


1 Kingsley Napley.
2 Where such claims do not appear to be supported by
3 the evidence that has been gathered, there is, we feel,
4 a danger that the continuation of such claims might
5 needlessly distress the bereaved families as well as
6 detracting attention away from the issues that you have
7 identified as being worthy of further investigation.
8 My Lady, as you know, the law does not oblige you to
9 conduct an inquisition into every stated rumour and
10 suspicion. There must be a reasonable basis in evidence
11 for such a suspicion before any coroner can be expected
12 to conduct an inquisition into it.
13 There is no evidence at all that we have seen to
14 suggest that the bombers were duped in some way so that
15 they did not know that they were going to die or, even
16 more absurdly, that they did not know that they were
17 carrying explosives at all. Indeed, such claims run
18 entirely contrary to all the evidence that I have
19 summarised so far.


Despite Hugo Keith's confidence in the "evidence summarised so far", and
after only four days of hearings at the Inquests, the official story is
coming even further apart at the seams than it already has as a result
of J7's research since 2005.

However, if your only source of information is the press and mainstream
media, you might know that some of the accused shopped at Asda, but you
wouldn't be aware of the show-stopping fundamental flaws in the official
story that the Inquest hearings have already revealed. 

In order to add the independent public scrutiny for which J7 has earned
renown over the last five years, J7 have set up a dedicated new blog to
examine and analyse witness testimonies and any releases of evidence as
they occur.

J7: 7/7 Inquests Blog - Examining and documenting the proceedings of the
Coroner's Inquest into the London Bombings of 7 July 2005, including
analysis of the hearing transcripts and the evidence presented.

Currently, there are three articles on the blog which examine the
opening of the Inquests and some of the core issues that have been
covered during the first week of the Inquests:

J7: 7/7 Inquests Blog: 7 July Inquests: It's A Conspiracy, Stupid!

J7: 7/7 Inquests Blog: A CCTV Fuss About Nothing?

J7: 7/7 Inquests Blog: The Final Curtain - "CCTV rich" to "CCTV FAIL!"

We will be in touch again soon.  In the meantime, please keep checking
back at the J7: 7/7 Inquests blog.  You can also subscribe to the J7:
7/7 Inquests blog using RSS feed links on the blog, or by email using
the 'Subscribe to J7:Inquests Blog' form in the blog sidebar.

In solidarity, for truth and justice,
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
J7 Blog:
J7 Inquests Blog:
J7 Facebook:
J7 Petition:
J7 Forum:
J7 MySpace:
Report Spam   Logged

"When the righteous become many, the people rejoice; but when anyone wicked bears rule, the people sigh".
Prov 29:2
Pages: [1]   Go Up
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
Free SMF Hosting - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy
Page created in 0.048 seconds with 19 queries.