Birth of the London Bomb Official Story

The bombers are all dead, and dead men tell no tales

Region:
Theme:
In-depth Report:

>You can practically hear the click at that moment in the life of every conspiracy when the police investigation turns into the Official Story. At that point, the investigation is intended to ‘fix the facts’ to the Official Story, and the cover-up begins. The story of the London bombs has made this transformation within the last twenty-four hours. The authorities thought it was small bombs with timers or triggered by cell phones and almost certainly not a suicide bomb attack; now they claim with certainty that the bombs were accompanied by handlers, some or all of whom may have died in the blasts, possibly by accident and probably intentionally (which means they were suicide bombers, as it is extremely unlikely that all four made a mistake). The original story was that it was an international al Qaeda operation; now it is British Muslims. In just a day or two, everything has changed.

The British government has managed to fashion the least damaging story possible under the circumstances. Cell-phone triggered bombs are out, as that might lead to calls for cell-phone jammers near transportation routes, a prospect that would cost rich people who own cell-phone companies money. Small bags with explosives and timers are out, as that is just too scary. The prospect of an unlimited quantity of small bombs was causing too much panic. Suicide bombers are in, as it will be thought that the likelihood of there being a lot of available suicide bombers is small, and thus the level of concern can be reduced in the general population. Of course, there will still be enough tension to lead to more video cameras and more call for national ID cards and increased police powers. International al Qaeda is out, as it brings up too many associations of how Blair’s alliance with Bush in Iraq put the British people in direct danger (but watch for the ‘mastermind’ to eventually be connected to the governments of Syria or Iran). Any connection between British government wrong-doing and terrorism must be broken. Local Muslims are in, as there appears to be a new campaign to demonize British Muslims as part of the ongoing Zionist program to associate terrorism with calls for the Islamification of British society. This fits in with the general idea that terrorists are Evil and have impossible demands which can’t possibly be met, and thus terrorism has to be fought with the ‘war on terror’, and not with negotiations and concessions. All these wars suit Israel and the arms dealers. For that reason, British Muslims are going to be in for a difficult time, and the ‘Londonistan‘ meme is the start of that process.

Just a few early questions:

  1. Why would suicide bombers need timers? Are we to believe that all four of them died when they mistakenly set off their bombs?
  2. Why would suicide bombers carry identification which would lead the authorities directly to their colleagues? How did it survive in at least three of the bombs? I am reminded of the convenient passport found at the World Trade Center.
  3. If all four video cameras on the bus were not working, how do the police know what happened on the bus? The witness who saw someone fiddling with a bag just begs the question of whether the fiddler was a bomber. Why do video cameras on buses need to be switched on by the drivers?
  4. Why did Jack Straw state so quickly that it was al Qaeda? Is the theory that it is still al Qaeda, or some other group?
  5. How did the British know to warn Netanyahu so quickly? If they knew enough to warn Netanyahu, why didn’t they have enough time to shut down the subway system? Or did they?
  6. Why was the transportation system still operating when the bus bomb went off, nearly an hour later than the subway bombs? One theory is that the last bomber got on the bus after the subway system was closed!
  7. How easy would it be to pay some Muslim British men, who are told to carry identification, to drive to London and sit in specific places on specific subway trains or buses? When the bombs go off and the identification is found, you have instant patsies, and British Muslims in the frame. The fact they were seen together on video footage then becomes just part of the set-up. With so many known video cameras in London, why wouldn’t they take care not to be seen together? They could have entered London separately if they did not want to be identified as part of a ‘cell’, and avoid giving the police information that could be used to trace their colleagues. As is often the case with these stories, we are asked to believe that they would be technically proficient (‘military grade’ explosives), but make the dumbest small mistakes.
  8. What happened to the story, out of Canada and New Zealand, that the police shot one or two men near Canary Wharf?

The bombers are all dead, and dead men tell no tales. They were kind enough to leave enough identification, and enough video footage, to tie them to British Muslim colleagues. Once the ‘cell’ is broken everybody can rest easy, with no more inconvenient questions about the sanity of the ‘war on terror’ or the fact that Blair’s lies led to the attack. Nothing to see here; please move along (oh, and may I see your ID card please?).


Articles by: Xymphora

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Centre of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post Global Research articles on community internet sites as long the source and copyright are acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original Global Research article. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected]

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]