London Suicide Bombers Hoax

WHO DID LONDON 7/7 - THE HARD PROOF

This analysis evaluates the improbability of evidence such as timing of recent terrorist attacks and media reports of subsequently denied warnings pointing to an innocent third party. The prime suspects are found to have the means, motive and opportunity. We consider how records in Government databases could have been used in framing Muslims for London 7/7. The combination of Leeds criminals together with London scene of crime is also found to be at variance with the official "Islamic militants" line.

From their previous record of deception, spying, and carrying out false flag attacks [Ref. 1] [Ref. 2] which is too numerous to list here, Israel would be the prime suspect for the London 7/7 attack. Evidence of complicity would include a specific motive for the timing of recent terror attacks, as well as a more general analysis of who benefits. From the events of 7/7 alone, it should be possible to infer some estimates of the probability of Israel's guilt or innocence.

The two most significant terrorist attacks of July 2005 were London 7/7 and Sharm al-Sheikh 7/23. The online MIPT Terrorism Knowledge Base provides the researcher with chronological information of terrorist incidents by region, tactic, target or group [Ref. 3]. Incidents in the database carry a detailed report which includes the associated number of fatalities and injuries. Attacks that are classed as "domestic" are included back to 1998; the data covers international incidents from 1968 to the present. Updating is bimonthly, so very recent incidents are not included. And the "terrorist group" variable is as asserted by the US Government, so could require further analysis to ascertain the true perpetrators. In spite of that, the database is a useful tool.

For the UK, it can be seen that London 7/7 (approximately 56 fatalities) was the worst terrorist attack since the Lockerbie plane bombing of December 1988 (270 fatalities). Total terrorism fatalities for UK, 1988, including other incidents is shown as 271. From 1968 to 2005, there were no other UK international terrorist incidents comparable to the 1988 and 2005 attacks. Domestic incidents (e.g. IRA) sometimes claimed about 10 to 20 lives, and are not included pre-1998. But over the period 1968 to 1997 there were no domestic terrorist incidents with 50+ fatalities. Hence, erring on the high side, if we count London 7/7, the frequency of a 50+ fatalities terrorist attack in the UK (immediately prior to 7/7) could be taken as once every 17 years.

For Egypt, there were between 64 and 88 fatalities in the Sharm al-Sheikh attack of 7/23, with the actual figure probably closer to 88. Attacks of October 2004 killed 34 in two other Sinai resorts. Back in November 1997, an attack in Luxor resulted in 74 fatalities. The total terrorist fatalities for Egypt, 1997, is shown as 84. Going back to 1968, there are no Egypt incidents of similar magnitude. Hence, again erring on the high side, we can take once every 8 years as the frequency of terrorist attacks in Egypt on a similar scale to the July 23 attack (e.g. 64+ fatalities).

British Gas recently discovered significant offshore gas fields in Palestinian Authority (PA) areas off the Gaza coast. Israel did not express any interest in this gas, even though gas from Egypt was more expensive. For political reasons, Ariel Sharon preferred to deal with Egypt, fearing that a $150+ million annual cash flow to the Palestinians would be used to bankroll terrorism against Israel.

On June 30, Israeli and Egyptian officials signed a $2.5 billion deal for the sale of Egyptian natural gas to Israel over the next 15 years, with options for a further 5 years. Israel then found out that Egypt and British Gas had struck a secret deal behind her back, whereby Palestinian gas would be sold to Egypt [Ref. 4]. Effectively, Israel would be purchasing from Palestine after all, but having to pay a premium price into the bargain.

Let's test the theory "World Zionist Organization / Jewish Mafia orders hits on two targets for double crossing". If the theory is false, then London 7/7 and Sharm 7/23 were pure coincidence. We shall suppose Israel found out about the Gaza gas deal as early as July 1. The incidence of UK terrorist attacks of magnitude to the order of 7/7 is one every 17 years. The probability of one or more attacks would always be less than one, reaching about 0.6321 or 1-1/e over a 17-year period. As the sampling time becomes small in relation to the mean inter-event period, the probability approaches the ratio of sampling time / mean period = 6 days / 17 years = 1/1,035. For Egypt, the mean period between 64+ fatality attacks is 8 years, so we have 22 days / 8 years = 1/133. Hence, the probability for both attacks to occur within the timeframe is 1/137,655.

In everyday experience, we observe "improbable" combinations of events that appear to be meaningfully related. When there is no causal connection, the events are sometimes believed to be an example of "synchronicity". In fact, due to such events being part of an almost infinite set, they are virtually a certainty. The phenomenon can be accounted for as pattern recognition in neural nets. It is true that the above 1/137,655 figure would undergo some degree of dilution. A corrected probability or improbability would be closer to unity, after allowing for other events that gave a negative indication, in the set of events which would provide a test of the theory "WZO did 7/7 and 7/23".

But the set of events that would provide a test of this theory is necessarily very limited in extent. The vast majority of recent events, such as did a particular person have a birthday on 7/7 or 7/23, are wholly independent of the matter of who ordered the London and Sharm bombings. It might be thought that if there are, say, 100 suspects for an Israeli conspiracy, then the question of whether or not any of these individuals blew the whistle or confessed ought to count as an event correlated with Israel's guilt. If so, then lack of confessions would constitute 100 qualifying events that contradicted the hypothesis.

Whether or not one supports the theory that Israel has, to further its international agenda, carried out dozens of false flag attacks over the previous 57 years [Ref. 5], cases where an individual freely confessed are either very rare or non-existent. The most spectacular failures, such as the attack on the USS Liberty and the Lavon Affair, were due to operational problems rather than whistleblowers or confessors. In one case, Israel's operatives - given rockets, 30 mm cannons, torpedoes, napalm bomblets, radio jamming transmitters, and a crooked puppet President and Defense Secretary who would provide a 2-hour window of opportunity - failed to sink a US ship. In the other, bombs went off prematurely.

In contrast, consider the numerous occasions where police, military, security services etc. have tortured or in any way coerced an individual into "confessing". Over a period of decades, there must be hundreds of thousands, or millions, of such cases across the globe. (In the specific case of Jews in recent times, both voluntary and involuntary confessors are probably below the mean. This is accounted for by tribal loyalties and the global power balance.) Unfortunately, the system produces a set of incentives and deterrents whereby whistleblowers are the exception and innocent confessors are the rule. The overall correlation between confessions and guilt is strongly negative.

And when we try to identify other events that are positively correlated with the truth-value of Israel's guilt, the indication often turns out to be positive.

For example, initial news reports on 7/7 stated that Israel's (then) Finance Minister and former PM Binyamin "Bibi" Netanyahu was warned in advance of the explosions [Ref. 6]. Netanyahu, scheduled to speak at the 4th annual Tel Aviv Stock Exchange (TASE) Investors Conference in the Great Eastern Hotel, arrived in London on Wednesday night and was staying at a Mayfair hotel. Original reports stated that warnings before the attacks prompted him to remain in his hotel room, and revised accounts held that he was "on his way to the hotel" when he was warned "after the first explosion".

It was necessary to explain why Netanyahu did not show up at the TASE conference. The original plan (of Israel and the mainstream media) was to report that Scotland Yard warned the security officer at the Israeli Embassy who in turn warned Netanyahu, a few minutes in advance of multiple simultaneous explosions on the London Underground, which were followed by a bus bombing. The simultaneity of the Tube bombings would "prove" that the attack had "all the hallmarks of al Qaeda". When Scotland Yard refused to play along, Israel could not admit foreknowledge, leaving the original "warned by Scotland Yard before the attacks" claim dead in the water.

Following negotiations, the UK authorities did agree to a minor rewriting of the script. A version where the three Tube explosions were spread over a period of 26 minutes, from 08:51 to 09:17 allowed the Netanyahu warning story to be revised to "after the first explosion". With several detonations occurring after the warning, the decision to avoid the conference would have been vindicated. It was hoped that the warning story would be forgotten two days later, by which time the simultaneous Tube explosions account would be resurrected.

Unfortunately, the new improved script still incriminated Israel. Until the bus bombing, almost an hour after the attack began, the British police believed that the incidents were related to "power surges" rather than bombs [Ref. 7] [cached]. In fact, the explosions caused power surges after rails were shorted out by metal debris.

Efraim Halevi's piece [Ref. 8], in the July 7 online edition of the Jerusalem Post, was obviously mostly written in advance. The two paragraphs about Russell Square and Great Russell Street were an ad hoc insertion on the day. Although the bus explosion actually took place at the junction of Tavistock Square and Upper Woburn Place, the remark about Russell Square and its being "within a stone's throw" of 77 Great Russell Street is fair comment, since early reports did quote Russell Square as a blast site. The true historical irony was that if the bomb had exploded even closer to Great Russell Street and the bombers had been capable of time travel into the past, they might have bombed away the cause of their bombing. Fortunately, the laws of physics prohibit such time travel.

But how did Halevi, a former head of the Mossad, know that the explosions were simultaneous, two days before the London police knew (if the official story is correct, Israel is innocent, and Israel-UK negotiations on the warning story didn't take place as above)? This was a pre-written paragraph that should have been revised on the day, but wasn't.

The Netanyahu warning fiasco, and Halevi's prior knowledge that the explosions were simultaneous, are also events that are correlated with the truth-value of Israel's guilt. Over recent times, the world has consisted of approximately 200 countries. It is rather telling that the country whose intelligence services, famous characters and online messaging services have the most foreknowledge of terror attacks, and whose spies are caught in compromising circumstances with astonishing regularity, invariably turns out to be Israel. The latter has less than 0.1% of the world's population, and is dwarfed by Iran, Syria, the Netherlands, Brazil, South Africa, Japan, Indonesia, etc.

Netanyahu and Halevi's prior knowledge can be considered as events each with a probability of 1 in 200 (assuming Israel is innocent). We do not specify either individual in advance and so do not include a probability for a particular individual to exhibit foreknowledge. Similarly, if the mean expected number of foreknowledge events for an attack such as 7/7 is lower than two, then no additional improbability is relevant in determining the culprit. We accept that there were two cases of foreknowledge, and then the relevant question is of which State the individuals concerned happen to be associated with. Thus, the accumulated undiluted improbability so far is:

137,655 * 200^2 = 5,506,200,000 or 1 in 5.5062 * 10^9 probability.

There was also the report in the German newspaper Bild am Sonntag that the Mossad office in London received advance notice of the attacks, but only six minutes before the first blast [Ref. 9] (German) [Ref. 10] (English, Google translation works with Explorer 6.0). It might be thought that these three cases of foreknowledge are really just one case, since the parties would have been in contact with each other. But that would be the case if Israel is guilty. When we set the truth-value of the theory under test to false, i.e. if Israel is innocent, the events that had a causal link to the theory and hence were explainable become unexplained, unconnected, improbable coincidence. The likelihood of Israeli foreknowledge increases with the number of alternate Israeli characters or organizations reported as having prior knowledge. One could postulate a theory of an "anti-Semitic" media as the common cause of all Israeli foreknowledge reports. These reports also featured in the Israeli press as well as the mainstream media. The proposer of such a theory would have to consider whether the Israeli and mainstream media have exhibited an anti-Semitic bias in recent times.

Semites are mostly comprised of Arabs and Jews, with the latter greatly outnumbered by the former. For the moment, we'll take the bizarre mainstream position that "anti-Semites" include those who oppose Israel's policies and the influence of World Jewry or International Zionism on global politics, but who may well sympathise with Arabs faced with illegal unprovoked invasions or bulldozed homes. Only the most blinkered or biased observer would fail to see that the mainstream media is more pro-Jew than pro-Arab. How often does one hear of a Jewish suicide bomber/terrorist, or a non-occupied Arab nation conducting military operations and legitimate assassinations against terrorists across the border in Israel? Comprehensive studies, albeit a few years old, have found Jewish control of the media to be wholly out of proportion with that expected for an ethnic minority [Ref. 11]. Nevertheless, let us give the benefit of the doubt, and count two rather than three cases of Israeli foreknowledge.

(If Israel claim that their foreknowledge is due not to complicity but to a highly efficient and skilled spy network, why do they never provide warnings - or the recipient never "acts on" their warnings to prevent an attack? And isn't it rather suspicious that their spy network is so proficient but doesn't seem to contribute to the general good?)

Another interesting test would be the nationality of the company that was selected by Metronet Rail to provide a "networked video solution" to be installed in the entire London Underground. The company is Verint Systems [Ref.12], previously known as Comverse Infosys (before February 1, 2002), and is a subsidiary of Israel's Comverse Technology [Ref. 13]. Watch for incidents at Copenhagen Railway, Montreal Metro, the Bank of Montreal, Porto Portugal buses, Brazil's Port of Santos, Washington Dulles airport, and Vancouver International airport, which have also selected Verint networked video. The Israeli security company's control of the software and computers involved in Verint Systems' "networked video solution" enable multiple 'malfunctions' to occur at the very times and places that a Mossad operation is in progress. Hence, a camera-free opportunity to install the 7/7 bombs. Along with a massive spy network, and puppet "leaders" of government and police etc who are either bribed, blackmailed, or brainwashed Masons, the Israelis have the means and opportunity.

The gas deal double-crossing would have been one part of the motive. The primary rationale was International Zionism's longstanding strategy for world domination, a brilliant, exhaustively documented Machiavellian program for controlling and enslaving the masses by way of manipulating the media, money supply, and national leaders. Puppet governments and oppositions ensure that no matter how people vote, they get precisely the same result: policies that enrich a tiny global elite whilst the vast majority of honest, hard-working folk are increasingly impoverished and enslaved. In a nutshell, the strategy is divide and rule. Any false flag attack that creates conflict between sections of the host population and allows the manipulators to profit from others' misery will be conducive to the long-term goal. The double-cross could be viewed as an irrational component of the motive which triggered the 7/7 and 7/23 attacks, an emotional reason for hitting a given target at a given time.

The video network might be considered the most important aspect of security. It is essential that one's agents are not filmed installing explosives. Other security measures also had an Israeli connection, e.g. "Operation Kratos" training in Israel of specialist London Police units such as SO19. This included the shoot to kill policy of at least five shots to the head. Ironically, in Greek mythology, Kratos and others on Zeus' orders actioned the torture of Prometheus, but there was no intent to kill him. Thirty years later, Zeus ordered Heracles (Hercules) to release Prometheus from the rock, where his liver had been renewed nightly after being gnawed by an eagle (or vulture),

One important aspect of security clearly was controlled by Israel. Others were not, or had a partial connection, which we may count as negatives. So another 1 in 200 probability for the nationality of the company providing video security on the London Underground places the accumulated undiluted probability for the five events to occur at 1 in 1.10124 trillion.

The Visor Consultants drill of an attack at the exact same locations and time as the 7/7 attack (provided it was not deliberate misinformation) is not a good test of Israel's guilt, unless we accept the (true) premise that the UK government is essentially Israel's puppet. Proof of this could fill several volumes, and would cover the myriad of Government policies that are designed to enrich and fulfil the agenda of an international elite, rather than benefit the British people. The program was administered by quislings from Cromwell through to Churchill, Heath and Blair.

But the simultaneity of the exercise would demolish the "Islamic militants" theory about 7/7. How would Arabs have amazingly precise intelligence of the UK Government's operations (along with the NRA's "plane hits building" and Dick Cheney's aerial attack exercises on the morning of 9/11), when Western Intelligence for all its multi-billion-dollar budget is so incompetent it thinks weather balloon trailers are "mobile biological weapon labs" and imagines Saddam could have launched "WMDs" at 45 minutes' notice? Although in any case, the asinine conspiracy theory of Pakistanis or Ethiopians bent on world domination, who invariably target areas with a high Muslim rather than Jewish population, was always a non-starter.

The matter of whether the authorities held video of the 7/7 terrorists would provide a test of the official story. Britain is the world's premier surveillance society [Ref. 14]. With more than 4 million cameras nationwide including over 6,000 in London's Underground subway network, the average commuter is recorded some 300 times a day. After more than a month, the only video frames released were one of one and one of four men at Luton railway station. Many consider the image of the foursome to be faked; in any event, the quality is too poor to prove a thing. It's another nail in the coffin of the official story. However, as in the case of the drill, this does not prove Zionist culpability beyond the five events already counted above. We have already counted 1 in 200 probability for an Israeli company to handle video security.

New information that surfaced at the end of August 2005 dealt another fatal blow to the official 7/7 attacks theory. Police claimed that the four "suicide bombers" were filmed at Luton station at 7:22 and took the 7:40 Thameslink train to King's Cross, where they were filmed at 8:26. However, the relevant trains did not run to schedule on July 7, due to problems with the overhead lines in the Mill Hill area of North London, between Luton and King's Cross. Thameslink's 7:40, 7:46 and 7:56 trains were cancelled, and others were delayed (the arrival at King's Cross but not the departure from Luton) by up to 35 minutes [Ref. 15].

The 7:24 departed Luton at 7:25. Independent trials have shown that it takes over three minutes to walk up the steps to the ticket office and down to the platform [Ref. 16]. In the image of Hasib Hussain on the stairs, he is not running. For the official theory to have even a snowball in hell's chance, the "bombers" would have had to have bought tickets in advance, they would not have needed to queue at the station, almost immediately upon entering the station (just after the almost stationary Hasib was filmed) a Tannoy announcement must have informed them that their train was about to depart from the relevant platform, and they must have immediately started to run for the train. But if a quartet of Muslim guys with bulky rucksacks were rushing up and down stairs to catch their train, there should have been witnesses. And the "suspects" would not have jeopardised the mission by sprinting like Linford Christie to catch a particular train whilst carrying bulky rucksacks containing ten pounds of shock-sensitive high explosives. The official Thameslink summer timetable shows trains running every six minutes on average, from 07:00 to 08:00 on weekdays. It was not until about 07:40 that the advertised trains on the screens began to be cancelled, and those arriving at the station at 07:22 would have been unaware of delays at Mill Hill [Ref. 17].

The 7:30 did not arrive at King's Cross until 8:39 (35 minutes late). In this event, the 8:26 CCTV capture is patently impossible, and it is most improbable that all three Tube bombers would have reached the explosion sites by 8:50. Subsequent trains all arrived later than 8:39.

An eyewitness has confirmed that no King's Cross trains left Luton between 7:25 and 7:56, apart from the 7:30 at 7:42 from Platform 4 [Ref. 17].

Clearly, those who concocted the frame-up merely referred to the Thameslink summer train timetable, rather than the actual times on the day. Just as the official theory was holed below the waterline and it was starting to look as if Sir Ian Blair would be facing grave criminal charges and Tony Blair an impeachment, a ludicrous heavily dubbed and edited video was released, purportedly of one of the 7/7 "suicide bombers". The lookalike actor could not mimic a Yorkshire accent, so had to mime along to a Yorkshire-bred narrator, with the audio and video out of sync by an ever-changing interval. This was rather like the "Nick Berg beheading" video.

The movements of Rudi Giuliani - the former New York mayor who played a key role in 9/11 - are interesting, to say the least. On July 6, he happened to be speaking at Harrogate, North Yorkshire, which is within some 20 miles of the south Leeds areas of West Yorkshire where most of the 7/7 "suspects" lived. Leeds is about 190 miles from London. As the Tube bombs detonated on July 7, he was just yards from Liverpool Street station, having breakfast at the Great Eastern Hotel, where Netanyahu was due to address the TASE conference to promote investment in Israel.

Most present or former Western politicians are Zionists. Giuliani is no exception, and is rather overzealous. If two spins of a die produce two identical numbers, the first result specifies the actual number and the probability of the second matching is one in six. If we take {prominent devout Zionist is within half a block of a London blast site when the bombs are detonated} as the first event for defining who it is (just as the first spin specifies the number), we then have the probability of this person happening to be in the target area on the previous day.

England is an area of about 50,000 square miles. Harrogate is within a 20-mile radius of the south Leeds crime scenes, so pi*20^2/50,000 equals the probability of hitting this target, assuming the July 6 destination could have been anywhere in England. It is about 1 in 40.

The improbability could be doubled by assuming a 50% probability that Giuliani would not travel outside the capital. However, this is balanced out by the fact that he could have been in the vicinity of Luton instead, which would appear equally suspicious. His Yorkshire role could have included planting peroxide-based explosive material in the Leeds apartment rented by the Egyptian biochemist, whom the UK authorities unsuccessfully attempted to frame, and buying plastic tubs from a Leeds garden centre to obtain a receipt which could then be "found" in pristine condition at one of the blast sites.

When we take into account the fact that Giuliani is not merely an enthusiastic Zionist, the probability decreases below 1 in 40. He played a key role in promoting the official story of 9/11. The overt role included banning the public from taking photos of WTC site, and arranging for Controlled Demolition, Inc, to remove and recycle the WTC steel as quickly as possible, ensuring that no private, independent investigators could get hold of any. The covert role could have included planting pairs of "looted" WTC Gap store jeans in a fire truck at Ground Zero, in order to demoralise the fire-fighters and discourage any from speaking out about explosions and a controlled demolition. But that is conjecture.

There must be dozens of key players who could have been suspected of an important covert role in 9/11. High profile figures who openly played a part are fewer and far between. Let's suppose there are as many as 100 of these characters. If we assume the person placed at the Great Eastern Hotel on 7/7 and at the other crime scene the previous day was a member of a set of as few as 2,000 key past or present political figures, the probability of this event becomes 1 in (40*2000/100) = 1 in 800.

The Giuliani connection is suggestive of government subterfuge, but is not really useful for proving an Israeli connection. It still requires assumptions about Zionism, and governments being in the pocket of Israel and international Zionism. In the interests of limiting the set of possible events that are correlated with Israel's guilt, it is better to suppose that Giuliani's movements, the Visor Consultants drill, and the failure of the UK authorities to provide clear and comprehensive video evidence of the 7/7 "bombers", are not evidence of Israeli complicity.

We have five events whose improbabilities are 1,035, 133, 200, 200 and 200. The gross, undiluted improbability product is 1.10124*10^12. Given some estimate of the total number of events in the set, a useful approximation of the dilution factor is provided by the nCr function:

nCr = n! / [r! * (n - r)!]

where nCr is the number of possible combinations of n elements taken r at a time, r is the number of selected improbable events or elements within the set (5 in this case) and n is our estimate of the total number of qualifying events in the set. In order to qualify, the probability P of an event or condition must have sufficient positive correlation with the truth-value of Israel's guilt. As a guide, if Israel is innocent then P<0.01, and if Israel is guilty then P>0.1.

The Google calculator includes the nCr function [Ref. 18]. Input the variables in the format "n choose r" in a Google search. Alternatively, many scientific calculators carry the function, or the Windows calculator will compute factorials up to some rather high values.

The errors introduced by the nCr approximation exaggerate the degree of dilution of improbability. These errors decrease as the individual improbabilities increase, and as the individual improbabilities become more equal - i.e. as they approach the rth root of the gross improbability product, which is around 256.080433 in our example.

If we assume the five events were part of a set of 100 events with the required correlation with Israel's guilt, the nCr approximation predicts a dilution factor of 75,287,520. So the corrected probability of the five events has increased from 1 in 1,101,240,000,000 to 1 in 14,627.

Calculations were also carried out using a more complex algorithm [Ref. 19] that corrects for the nCr approximation's increasing error as the probability or improbability approaches unity. It does not correct for another approximation that is also implicit in the nCr approximation: the equal probabilities approximation. If we have five events each of probability 1 in 256.080433 to give a gross undiluted product of 1 in 1.10124*10^12, the better algorithm predicts a dilution factor of 55,315,338 which places the corrected probability at 1 in 19,908. The nCr approximation and implicit equal probabilities approximation exaggerated the dilution factor by some 36.1% compared to the equal probabilities approximation alone; the true corrected probability would be less than 1 in 19,908.

It is possible that there could have been dozens of unconceived events that did not point to Israel's guilt. There are other aspects of security apart from video, for instance. But in many of these, it would in any case be unrealistic to expect an Israeli connection beyond the partial connection of, say, Operation Kratos.

Hundreds or thousands of negative events is surely too high. The events must be suitably positively correlated, and it is not enough just to poke holes in the official account. Once we start including drills, movements of prominent Zionists, a surfeit of dubious probably planted evidence but little in the way of video confirmation, cover-ups on shooting of innocent Brazilian, etc, the gross improbability would rise considerably, commensurate with the increased dilution factor of a greater number of events.

At 200 events, when n = 200 and r = 5, nCr = 2,535,650,040 placing the approximate corrected probability at 1 in 434. At 300 events, the nCr approximation predicts a dilution factor of 19,582,837,560 which would make the corrected probability 1 in 56. Assuming 500 events, the nCr dilution factor of 2.55244*10^11 would predict a corrected probability of 1 in 4.314, i.e. we could be 76.8% certain that Israel is guilty. The error introduced by the nCr approximation increases as n increases, hence the corrected, diluted probability does not approach unity as quickly as the nCr estimates imply. So, in order to conclude that Israel is innocent, it would be necessary to have a set of well over 500 events, all suitably positively correlated with Israel's guilt, and then find that the indication was negative in over 99% of cases.

Any independent investigation of events such as 7/7, 9/11, the Millennium Bug hoax, Lavon Affair, La Belle attack and tricking of Reagan into bombing Libya, attack on the USS Liberty, Kennedy assassination, Suez crisis, Gulf Wars, Lockerbie plane bombing, Bible Codes hoax, Bolshevik Revolution, Great Depression, promotion of gambling websites and pornographic spam, promotion of all-hours binge drinking, etc, will find a common theme of almost ever-present Israeli connections. These will be nearer 10% than 1%. The most reasonable estimate would take an n-value to be somewhere in the upper two-digit range, which would place the odds of Israel's innocence at tens of thousands to one against.

Not all terrorist incidents are linked to Israel / Mossad. When the 7/7 frame-up began to fall apart - even with the aid of Orwellian revisions such as "traces of TATP/HMTD", "no timers", and "bombs in rucksacks" - the UK Government would benefit from a second wave of "failed" bombings such as London 7/21. The simplest 7/21 theory, consistent with the evidence, limits the plot to four people. Four plucky friends, loyal to their own kith and kin, felt obliged to make a political protest in relation to the carnage of the illegal Iraq war. The plan involved neither suicide nor any injuries, since the devices were designed to be all bark and no bite.

Naturally, the Government would attempt to promote 21/7 as part of its ludicrous conspiracy theory of thousands of evil Muslims bent on world domination. The claims that some of each party of suspects had previously travelled abroad (provided the documents weren't forged or relating to a namesake) where they just might have conspired or trained for terrorism, or that a relative of one of the "bombers" was said to use the same banking network that the alleged "al Qaeda organization" is alleged to use, were cited as "proof" of links between the 7/7 and 7/21 suspects. This, along with planted evidence and statements obtained under duress, was supposed to "prove" the official conspiracy theory (as explained above, the official theory was even more in need of life-support by September 1, 2005).

Alternatively, an MI5 agent could have masterminded the 7/21 operators. For Tony Blair and cronies to insist that London's July 2005 incidents were unrelated to the Iraq war whilst simultaneously fully aware that they had used the war to dupe the patsies into carrying rucksacks, would have been a delicious example of government cynicism. It is even less likely that the Blair regime accidentally became aware of the 7/21 plot, although if so they clearly would have done nothing to prevent it.

It is unlikely that the police shot Mr de Menezes, the Brazilian electrician, because he knew too much. The Government surely had its own operatives who could wire fake or real bombs if necessary. This shooting reinforces the theory that the Government was unaware of the 21/7 plot, which was purely a political protest albeit one which played into the Government's hands. But it is true that eleven shots at point blank range - "marksmen" missing altogether in three cases with bullets lodged in the carriage, plus another shot to the shoulder - suggests that not only was there deliberate intent to kill, but they knew full well there was zero risk of an explosion. The police would have been under political pressure to come up with at least one of the 21/7 culprits within a very short space of time. Selecting a foreigner for the hit, they were gambling that there would be no eyewitnesses, that the target had no relatives or had poor relatives who could be bought off, and that the target was a Muslim.

There were two overwhelming reasons for ensuring that Mr de Menezes was allowed to get on the train rather than shot on the streets of London: (i) Guaranteed "failure" of CCTV and minimal witnesses, or witnesses too terrified to speak out. Police would instantly seize videotapes or discs, bringing them back later and claiming that there was "nothing on them"; the system must have been "not working". A suitable large magnet, heater, or hammer would do the trick. As for the claim that the SRR surveillance soldier was "relieving himself" as the suspect exited the building, it is about 300 to 1 against that being true. (ii) The police could use the excuse of losing radio contact with their control; thus the decision to shoot had to be taken by field officers.

The 7/7 planners had to select committed Muslims as patsies. The UK's Office for National Statistics (ONS) is responsible for the decennial Census, which included religion for the first time in 2001 [Ref. 20]. For each individual in a household, religion was an optional question, although 92.29% volunteered this information. Other questions such as ethnicity were compulsory. The Census data resides on a Sybase database [Adaptive Server Enterprise (version 11.5)]. After completion of the scanning / data capture project in April 2002, the original paper forms were reportedly pulped and recycled (confidential papers are occasionally discovered unshredded). Digital images were transferred to microfilm for public release in 2101.

2001 was also the first Census where the main scanning and capture services were contracted out. The external service provider was Lockheed Martin, the world's largest defense contractor. 2004 sales by customer are: (i) US Department of Defense / Intelligence (58%); (ii) Civil Government / Homeland Security (22%)... There were communication links from the Fareham ONS office to three external sites: Widnes, the Lockheed Martin / ICL data processing site; GROS, the corresponding Government office in Scotland; and NISRA, the Government office in Northern Ireland. Government agencies could readily obtain lists of known Muslims. Foreign operatives could have breached security at the time of data capture, or more recently by infiltrating ONS, hacking their database, providing IT services (potential suppliers approach the Procurement office in Newport, South Wales), or even being supplied by Lockheed Martin or the Pentagon.

A select statement around July 1st may have specified four columns rather like "Leeds" + "Muslim" + "male" + "born 1974 to 1987". Three of the 7/7 "bombers" grew up in Beeston, Leeds. Mohammed Khan only moved to Dewsbury very recently and would have been within the Leeds Authority in 2001. The fourth, the Jamaican, was an enthusiastic Islam convert in 2001, so may well have declared as such in the April 29 Census. He appears to have been brought up in Huddersfield before moving to Aylesbury so does not quite fit the Leeds criterion. It would be interesting to know whether any relatives were aware of mailshots or telephone calls regarding a job on 7/7, and whether offers of a 7/7 job were going out to other Muslims or even those who declared themselves as "Jedi Knight" in 2001.

The ONS site states that, "The key criteria for ONS were that outputs should: [...] minimise the risk of disclosing information about identifiable individuals..." and that disclosure protection includes measures such as swapping a few records in the output database. I.e., the system does maintain names and addresses and there is some risk that individuals can be identified, even without unauthorised access to the microfiche library. Tracing such a breach would not be straightforward, since the transaction log does not store select statements. It stores updates, deletes, inserts and user ID, and if auditing is turned on some additional security features are provided at the expense of performance.

Even disregarding all the evidence pointing to Israel masterminding 7/7, it is unlikely that the Government would have directly organised a plot to cold-bloodedly murder dozens of its own citizens. An external power probably selected the patsies. There remains some probability that the Government had advance warning of 7/7 but was powerless to prevent it, or was even cowed into playing a major role, due to blackmail (e.g. nuclear strike on Iraq/Iran, or radiological attack on UK). In this case the Muslim "suicide bombers" would have been set up by the Government, and lured into Visor Consultants' anti-terrorist drill.

The planners' cursory research could not eliminate family men with babies, special needs teaching assistants, sports science graduates who love cricket and have many white and Sikh friends, people who are thoroughly decent, honest, law-abiding, etc. Although there are many more Muslims in London, it was necessary to have the "bombers" drive part way so their car(s) could then be part of the "evidence".

The ONS website provides a wealth of fascinating information [Ref. 20], e.g. click on "National and Regional Rankings by Theme, Ethnicity and Religion". If the terrorists really were Muslim and were not selected by another agency, it would be more likely that they came from an area with a high Muslim population. For the Greater London area, the proportion of persons stating their religion as Muslim in the 2001 Census was 8.46%, compared with 2.97% for England and Wales as a whole. (Since 8.66% in London and 7.71% in England and Wales did not declare their religion, the actual Muslim proportions would have been some 9.26% and 3.22% respectively. For comparative purposes here, we shall take the percentages actually declaring as a particular religion.)

Considering individual local authority areas within London, Tower Hamlets is actually ranked #1 out of 376 local authority areas within England and Wales by percentage of population declaring as Muslim, with 36.4% to give a total of 71,389. Newham is ranked #2 with 24.3% and 59,293. In contrast, Leeds is ranked #66 with 2.99% and 21,394.

If the bombers had spontaneously emerged from outside London, there are more likely areas than Leeds. Bradford is ranked #4 with 16.1% and 75,188. Birmingham is ranked #7 with 14.3% and 140,033. It is the highest local authority area Muslim population, although if London were a single area its total would be around 600,000 Muslims. So even without factoring in an allowance for an inverse relation between the probability of an individual carrying out an attack and the required travelling distance, an attacker would be 28 times more likely to originate from London than from Leeds.

Luton is ranked #6 with 14.6% and 26,963. Leicester is ranked #17 with 11.0% and 30,885. Kirklees, to the south and west of Leeds, is ranked #19 with 10.1% and 39,312. Manchester is ranked #23 with 9.1% and 35,806.

Let's consider the Jewish population in these areas. Bradford has 356 Census respondents who declared their religion as Jewish. Birmingham has 2,343 (0.2%), Luton has 534, Leicester has 417, Kirklees has 171, Manchester has 3,076. In contrast, Leeds has 8,267.

In addition to the requirement that the "bombers" drive part way (e.g. to Luton) and take the train to King's Cross, Mossad agents were directing the plot. Hence, it was more likely that the patsies' place of origin was an area with an above average Jewish population. Outside of London, Leeds and Bury are the only local authority areas with a Jewish population of more than 8,000. The Bury Muslim population is 6,756 compared with 21,394 for Leeds. Leeds is the only area outside London where both Jewish and Muslim populations are over 8,000. The combination of 8,267 Jewish and 21,394 Muslim makes Leeds an obvious choice as an operational centre for 7/7, and convenient for grooming of patsies and planting of fake evidence of homemade explosives.

The official theory has "Muslim bombers" travelling from an area with an above average Jewish population to attack an area with a high Muslim population. Ever heard of the expression "carrying coals to Newcastle"?

We conclude that Israel ordered the Mossad to carry out 7/7 with a high degree of certainty, with the odds against innocence being a minimum of tens of thousands to one. And such proof does not rely upon identification of those responsible for 9/11, the Kennedy assassination, Gulf Wars, Great Depression, Dr David Kelly suicide hoax, Lockerbie plane bombing, Bali bombings, Casablanca attack, Madrid 3/11, etc. Israel had the means and opportunity through a highly proficient spy network and involvement in security at the London Underground. It had the motive which included sending a powerful signal to deter double-crossing (e.g. in energy deals), and a long-term strategy for global hegemony. The Office for National Statistics could have supplied the records for selecting out known Muslim individuals for the frame-up. Unfortunately for Mr de Menezes, the same degree of precision was not employed in his selection. The official story is so full of holes that the improbability of four Muslims travelling almost 200 miles from a Jewish area to bomb a Muslim-populated area is the least of its worries.

Article revised September 20, 2005

A COMPREHENSIVE ACCOUNT OF ZIONIST CRIMES Essential reading for those who seek to understand the current global power structure; sets the context for London 7/7

COLLECTION OF ASSORTED SHORT ARTICLES / October 1 2005 Bali "suicide bombers" hoax

TAKE OUR WORLD BACK Index Page

Recommended independent news site: WhatREALLYhappened.com

Recommended talk radio audio files: The Piper Report

Ref. 1 (Israel, history of spying/deception)

http://physics911.net/nuclearfalseflag.htm

Ref. 2 (Israeli spy ring in US, Fox News report, removed from their records but privately archived)

http://cryptome.org/fox-il-spy.htm

Ref. 3 (MIPT Terrorism Knowledge Base)

http://www.tkb.org/Home.jsp

Ref. 4 (Israel outmaneuvered by secret gas transaction)

http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=1051