<9/11 Truth Smoking Guns       Remote Military Hijacking       Why Media Is Silent?      What is Al-Qaeda?

77 unanswered questions concerning 7/7 London Bombing

Two weeks ago I first presented a list of 77 questions. This list today is an update. Very few questions of the original list have been answered or appear less important today. But the majority of questions still remain. A lot of new questions have been added. Many specified.
Let me repeat what I wrote the original introduction:
This list is not a conclusive judgement on the investigation as it is still ongoing but a list that will help measure the quality of the investigation. A real investigation should come up with answers to every single question. Presenting this list is also a way of documenting that the critical public follows the investigation very carefully and has all theses questions it wished to be answered. Contrary to most of the media who have apparently forgotten that asking questions was once the main aspect of investigative journalism.
If anybody has any answers, further question or critic I’d be very grateful. (especially as since one week I had no access to Internet.)

The timeline of the bombing:
The exact time is of course very crucial in a crime case.

1. On 7/7 it was reported that the first blast happened at 8:51, the second at 8:56 and the third at 9:17. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4659331.stm
(CNN, 7/7/05)
Later this timeline was changed and it was said that the first three blasts happened within 50 seconds. The change was based on “After examining computer data, electrical equipment and eyewitness statements” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...
Why did it take 2 ½ days to realize that the timeline was completely wrong ?

2. On 7/7 it was noted “0924 British Transport Police say the incident was possibly caused by a collision between two trains, a power cut or a power cable exploding. Police report "walking wounded".” http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4659331.stm
But if the police met “walking wounded” how come they couldn’t figure out the time of the blasts?

3. The given explanation for the wrong timeline was: “They attributed the discrepancy to the fact that no one phoned in the explosion at the Edgware Road station as a bomb until 9:17 a.m. -- some 25 minutes after it actually occurrred.”
Is it possible that a London tube station nor the tube itself has any possibility to do an emergency call if there was a power failure?
Is there no station master who would have realized the incident?
Is there no automatic tracking of the tubes to avoid collisions? Shouldn’t the controller haven’t notice at once the three incidents happening at the same time?
How come then that other trains on the same line didn’t collide with the bombed tubes? Shouldn’t even passenger in unharmed tubes have noticed the time of the event?
How can one NOT know immediately the time the incident occurred?

4. Taken for granted that in fact there was no possibility to inform anybody in the outside world then why was apparently the informing of the outside world possible immediately in the first blast, five minutes later for the second and 26 minutes for the third? Why the big discrepancies in this three cases?

The first reports on 7/7:
5. The first reports were: “0924 British Transport Police say the incident was possibly caused by a collision between two trains, a power cut or a power cable exploding. Police report "walking wounded".”
As the police knows of “walking wounded” why don’t they know that none of the three given causes is correct?

6. Why did early reports state: “1025 Transport union officials say they have reports of explosions on three buses, PA says.”

Why did the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Ian Blair himself speak of “six events”?:
“1118 London's Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair tells the BBC he knows of "about six explosions", one on a bus and the others related to Underground stations. He says he believes the six affected areas are Edgware Road, King's Cross, Liverpool Street, Russell Square, Aldgate East and Moorgate, but says it is "still a confusing situation".”

There was talk of two unexploded bombs on 7/7. "Vincent Cannistraro, the former head of the CIA's counter-terrorism centre, told The Guardian that "two unexploded bombs" were recovered as well as "mechanical timing devices"
Is this true? But who could have planted the two other bombs? Where were they found?

The CCTV images:
London is now the undisputed capital of CCTV cameras, with more than any other big city on earth.”
It has 2500 CCTV cameras in the center.
Tube and busses do have CCTV cameras as well.
All in all detectives are viewing films from more than 5000 cameras.
(Express, 7/15/05)
“So far, they have collected more than 12,000 CCTV tapes, of which they have viewed around 6,000. They expect to view around 25,000 in total.”

Therefore the CCTV cameras should be considered as a perfect eyewitness of the 7/7 bombings as all of them happened in public places and all four alleged bombers travelled to their final destination with public transport.
And in fact it turns out that one CCTV image from King’s Cross was the key for identifying the suspects of 7/7. Here is the best article describing the procedure of the investigation I could find:
“The critical breakthrough in the hunt for the London bombers came on Monday night in a police video viewing suite. Detectives involved in watching thousands of hours of film for glimpses of the terrorists had been given a "profile" based on a simple question posed for their guidance by senior officers.
The question was: what would the terrorists look like? The answer was that they would be young men, probably in their 20s and 30s, and they would be carrying rucksacks. At 8pm on Monday, on footage from a camera at King's Cross station in central London, officers found images of four young men carrying bulky rucksacks, similar to those in which soldiers carry radios.
One source observed: "It was like the infantry going to war, or like they were going on a hiking holiday." One of the faces was known. It belonged to Hasib Hussain, a 18-year-old man from Leeds whose family had called the police casualty bureau at around 10pm last Thursday to say he had gone to London with friends and was missing and was a potential victim. A West Yorkshire police "family liaison officer" was appointed to the family. Subsequently, documents, including a driving licence and cash cards which were linked to him were found in the debris around the No 30 bus in Tavistock Square.
He remained a potential victim but, after his face was seen with the others at King's Cross, in footage timed at around 8.30am on July 7, he is now suspected of being one of the first four suicide bombers in Britain.
It is now believed that two other men, aged 30 and 22, also died. It is thought they have been identified as suspected suicide bombers by comparing images from the CCTV and from personal property found at three of the bomb scenes - Tavistock Square, Liverpool Street and Edgware Road.”

“Police were considering whether to release the video footage of the men from cameras at King's Cross today.” (Daily Record, 7/13/05) The image was apparently very telling: “For several minutes their heads were close together as they chatted. Without any elaborate farewells, the four went their separate ways. "You would think they were all going on a hiking holiday when, in effect, they were Britain's first suicide bombers," Channel Four Television quoted the officer as saying yesterday.” (Ottawa Citizen, 7/13/05)
Why wasn’t this image never published? Why is the only CCTV image showing all four alleged bombers from Luton at 7:21?

10. Why does the CCTV image from Luton (the only photo showing all four alleged bombers) sometimes have no stamp at all, sometimes a stamp only of the date, sometimes of date and time, sometimes of date, time and number of the camera?

And as CCTV images do stills every three seconds why wasn’t another image from the same camera at Luton released that allows to see all four persons more clearly? The quality of the image is so bad that one alleged bomber doesn’t even seem to have a face.

11. There is only one close up photo of one alleged bomber. The one of Hasib Hussain.

Why are there not more of him?
Why is there not a single close up photo from 7/7 of the other three alleged bombers?
There should be many many more. Keep in mind that busses and tubes do have CCTV cameras as well. See the photos of alleged bombers from 7/21:

12. Why especially was no photo published showing the four alleged bombers entering their last tube and their last bus? This would be a very important proof of their crime.

13. Why is no CCTV image released showing the alleged bombers with their backsacks sitting at the place in the tube where the bomb exploded?

14. Why did the following problem occur if more CCTV images were at hand?
“Police have not identified a fourth bomber and do not know if his remains are at the King's Cross blast site or if he has fled. (…) Using a combination of evidence recovered from the scene and closed circuit television pictures, police were able to identify three suspects and retrace their movements. (…)
All four men were captured on closed circuit cameras arriving at the King's Cross subway station at just before 8:30 a.m. last Thursday, police said.”

(Cox News Service, 7/12/05)
So, why then didn’t the police publish the CCTV images they had of the yet unidentified fourth alleged bomber and asked for witnesses and people who could identify this person? Why didn’t the police do what they did after 7/21? They couldn’t know that Lindsay’s car left in Luton lead to his identification on July 12.

15. There was talk of a strange fifth person:
“The camera also picked up a fifth man, standing alongside them, who then peeled off and vanished into the crowd.”
Why weren’t theses CCTV pictures made public so people could help to identify the “mysterious fifth man”?
Who is this fifth person?

16. A “bus had four cameras - one covering people getting on, the second at the exit doors and one on each deck scanning the length of the vehicle.”
Why did none of the four CCTV cameras in bus no. 30 work on 7/7? http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=15717499%26met...
Scotland Yard’s speculation that the bus driver might have forgotten to switch them on is not correct as the cameras are always switched on.

Although the CCTV cameras should have provided Scotland Yard with an unparalleled amount of visual evidence the absence of published evidence is striking. If Scotland Yard has more evidence in his hands why don’t they publish them moreover if they would many questions they raised would be answered by theses images.

The journey of the alleged bombers:
17. The CCTV at Luton was made at 7:21.
The four alleged bombers are said to have arrived at 8:30 at King’s Cross. (AP, 7/12/05)
Yet, the trip does take much less time then one hour (departure and arrival times are: 7:24-7:59, 7:30-8:03, 7:40-8:15 and 7:48-8:19). So, what did the four do in the mean time?
Is the “Australian” correct on this info:
“Carrying military-style backpacks, the men boarded the crowded 7.40am Thameslink commuter train to London, arriving at Kings Cross a few minutes behind schedule at 8.20am.”
In that case again : What did they do for 20 minutes in Luton ? Why didn’t they take an earlier train? And why is the often mentioned CCTV image from King’s Cross only from 8.26 and not from 8.20 when the four arrived?

18. The CCTV image from King’s Cross was taken at 8:26. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22989-1696094,0... (New York Times, 7/15/05) Their final destination of three of them takes clearly less than 20 minutes. (Russel Station is only one station) What did they do during theses 20 minutes? Is the following account correct?
“Khan caught the 8.43 Circle Line train in the direction of Edgware Road. Tanweer headed for the opposite platform, and boarded the eastbound train. Lindsay took the Piccadilly Line towards Russell Square, and Hussain, the youngster, is thought to have made for the Bank branch of the Northern Line, heading towards Camden.”
Keep in mind that the CCTV image taken at 8:26 showed the alleged bombers going off in different directions:
(Ottawa Citizen, 7/13/05)
Why did the alleged bombers need 13 minutes and more to take their trains? Did they do anything special in the mean time?

19. “Peter Clarke, the top antiterrorism officer at Scotland Yard (…) said. ''Did you see this man at King's Cross?'' Mr. Clarke said, referring to the station to which Mr. Hussain traveled from Luton. ''Was he alone or with others? Do you know the route he took from the station? Did you see him get on to a No.30 bus? And if you did, where and when was that?'' His remarks were broadcast live on television news channels.”
(New York Times, 7/15/05)
There is speculation that he was supposed to board the Northern Line.
Why is Scotland Yard forced to speculate ? Why don’t they simply watch the CCTV images from the Northern Line halt at King’s Cross? If Hussain tried to board it but couldn’t because the line was temporarily interrupted one should see Hussain arriving at the halt and disappointedly returning. Why the need to speculate?

CCTV images should basically tell us everything the four alleged bombers made on 7/7 in public spaces yet Scotland Yard is far from knowing a lot as it seems. Besides a vague photo from Luton at 7:21 we have nothing at hands.

(Two weeks since first article that noted already the strange absence of eyewitnesses. But in the meantime not a single new eyewitness has stepped forward and reported that he has seen one of the alleged bombers on 7/7.)
Not only the CCTV cameras should be of great help for the investigation but eyewitnesses as well. Especially given the fact that the crime happened in public space, that many eyewitnesses have survived the blasts and that the four bombers should have been seen in Luton, in the Thameslink, waiting at the tube station etc.

20. Very crucial is the question: Why is there in general not a single eyewitness so far who actually saw one of the four alleged bombers?

21. An open question is still for Scotland Yard on which bus station Hasib Hussain got on bus no. 30. http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=1398122005
Why does no eyewitness remembers on which station Hussain got on the bus?

22. There are two special cases of eyewitnesses that needs further specification: Richard Jones who claims to have seen Hasib Hussain in bus no. 30 and Bruce Lait who was in the tube that exploded at Liverpool Street.
Why is Richard Jones all over the news although it is fairly easy to prove that he can’t have seen Hussain on bus no.30?
A proof here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph... (original post and post 15. Note to the moderator: This two posts contain only MSM sources).
The simplest refusal is the fact that Jones claimed to have been downstairs: http://www.sundaymail.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=15721018&m...
While the explosion happened upstairs and took of the roof of the bus.

23. Of course it is possible that Richard Jones simply mistook his neighbour for Hussain. But it is noteworthy that Jones’ accounts also has striking contradictions with the account of the bus driver George Paradakis:
Richard Jones describes in his accounts that because of the alleged bomber who didn’t stop fidgeting in his backsack he was annoyed and wanted to get off. The driver agreed to stop the bus although there was no bus stop and “About half a dozen got out the back door just before us and the same number, including me, left by the front.” http://www.sundaymail.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=15721018&m...
“As he and another dozen frustrated passengers who had also abandoned the bus began to walk away, it was ripped apart by the bomb”
Richard Jones specifies: The bus moved about 15 yards and exploded behind me.”
But bus driver George Paradakis tells a very different story.
“Although the bus usually travels from Hackney Wick to Marble Arch, it had been re-routed by police to avoid areas cordoned off near Underground stations. Such was the demand for buses that Psarabakis was unable to pick up all the passengers looking to board the number 30. Confused by the re-routing, the driver pulled up at the junction of Upper Woburn Place and Tavistock Place to ask two traffic wardens' advice on the best route to Marble Arch. As the wardens approached the bus, an explosion ripped through the upper deck of Psarabakis's vehicle, throwing the roof onto the street.”
(Sunday Tribune, 7/10/05)
The parking attendant warden Ade Soji agrees with the bus driver:
Ade Soji, 35, a parking attendant from Dagenham, east London, said he had given directions to the driver of the diverted bus just before it exploded. "The bus stopped and the driver asked me the name of the street," Mr Soji said. "I told him Tavistock Square and he called me over. Just as I was about to go, I heard the bus explode.
"In another second I would have been dead. I had to run for my life. I looked back and saw the roof flying over."

(Sunday Herald, 7/10/05)
While Jones states that the bus continued its way and Paradakis states he stopped (apparently not to let off any passengers but to ask for the best way – although how likely is it that an experience bus driver gets lost?) and didn’t have a chance to continue his way because of the blast.
Moreover Jones clearly mentions that he and a dozen passengers got off then why does Paradakis mention that he couldn’t allow waiting people to get on his bus? There should be some space for a dozen passengers, shouldn’t it.
Was Richard Jones really on bus no. 30?
Where are accounts of any of the dozens passengers that experienced exactly the same miraculous survival as Richard Jones?

24. Bruce Lait had been on the tube on Liverpool Street. His recollection of who is in the carriage is very precise: “He recalled that the carriage had about 20-25 people in it, from all walks of life, and aged from their teens to over 60.
"I remember an Asian guy, there was a white guy with tracksuit trousers and a baseball cap, and there were two old ladies sitting opposite me," he said.”

He is very close to where the bomb went off: “"Out of that whole carriage, I think Crystal and I were the only ones who were not seriously injured, and I think we were nearest the bomb.”
"The policeman said 'mind that hole, that's where the bomb was'. The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train. They seem to think the bomb was left in a bag, but I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag," he said.”
Why did he see nobody?

25. How come “metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train.”?

Not only the absence of CCTV evidences but also of any eyewitness who actually saw the alleged bombers.
To put it in a nutshell: The strange thing is that the four alleged bombers somehow managed to be neither witnessed by other people nor by any CCTV camera.
Therefore we still lack any proof that the four alleged bombers actually are the culprits or even that they were at time and place of the blasts.

Cars left at Luton:
26. The first car was apparently found by chance:
“Detectives believe the group may have also hired several cars.
They only discovered the clue when an agent from a hire company turned up at a raided address in Colwyn Road, Beeston, South Leeds, and told police that a rental car had not been returned.
The car - a Nissan Micra or Renault Clio - is thought to have been hired by sports mad Tanweer who has not been seen by his family since Thursday.”

(Daily Record, 7/13/05)
In fact Tanweer had rented a red Nissan:
Shehzad Tanweer, was also preparing to leave behind the rundown brick terraces where he had spent all of his 22 years. A week earlier, he had hired a red Nissan Micra for the journey, using his own name and credit card. The car was already overdue to be returned to the car hire company.”
See also :

Another car that will be in the center of the investigation is a red Fiat belonging to Lindsay:

On July 12 two cars are found:
The car found at Luton is believed to have been hired in Leeds and used by the bombers. Three controlled explosions were carried out near the vehicle "to ensure public safety." A second car was later searched at Leighton Buzzard.”
(Scotsman, 7/13/05)
(Evening Standard, 7/13/05)
(Northern Echo, 7/13/05)
What is clear is also that in one car found at Luton station explosives were found on July 12:
“Yesterday, explosives were discovered in a vehicle left in the car park at Luton station, after a series of controlled explosions to make it safe.”
(Daily Record, 7/13/05)
(Northern Echo, 7/13/05)
(Baltimore Sun, 7/13/05)
Here the most detailed description of what actually happened:
“Forensic experts are continuing to examine two cars believed to have been hired by the London bombers and dumped at Luton train station - after police spent 14 hours dealing with "volatile" explosives at the scene. A small car - found to have explosives on board - was finally removed from the site's car park at around 4.30am and taken away on a low-loading recovery vehicle bound for London.
(…) Bomb squad officers worked under floodlights through the night to make the first car safe after the explosives were discovered yesterday afternoon. Ten controlled explosions were carried out on the car and hundreds of members of the public evacuated from the area, causing the train station to close and serious disruption to services. Police said small blasts were targeted at specific areas of the car, in order to ensure no vital forensic clues were lost. More than 100 officers from Bedfordshire Police were involved in the operation, working alongside the Metropolitan Police bomb squad and British Transport Police.”

(PUB, 7/13/05)

The second car was towed away to Leighton:
“A second car believed to be linked to the attacks was also found at the station and towed to Leighton Buzzard, 10 miles (16km) west of Luton, for further examination.”
(PUB, 7/12/05)
(PUB, 7/13/05)
(Herald, 7/13/07)
(Townsville Bulletin, 7/14/05)

So far everything seems to be perfectly clear. But the accounts which car was towed away and in which car the explosives were found are extremely contradictory.
The following article mentions that the car was the Nissan:

These articles mention that it was the rented car:
(Daily Record, 7/13/05)
(Evening Standard, 7/13/05)
(Scotsmen, 7/13/05)
(As seen above the rented car is the red Nissan hired by Tanweer).
The following article implies that this very car was the red Fiat:

The car is later photographed. Yet, this doesn’t solve the small mystery:

“Covered in black and blue tarpaulin”
(PUB, 7/13/05)
Which car was found at Luton station and examined there? Which car was towed to Leighton?

27. Often articles state that both cars were found at Luton station. Some state that one car was found at Leighton.
(Baltimore Sun, 7/13/05)
(Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 7/13/05)
(Cox News Service, 7/12/05)
(Though this might be a mix up with the information that the car was towed to Leighton).
The “Telegraph” states:
“Another car, discovered at an undisclosed location, was being examined at Leighton Buzzard”.
And “Daily Record”:
“Police refused to say exactly where it was recovered.”
(Daily Record, 7/13/05)
But interestingly the article continues:
“A Bedfordshire Police spokesman said the vehicle was not found at the train station”
(Daily Record, 7/13/05)
So, simple question: Where was the car that was towed to Leighton originally found?

28. Another simple question: When was the car towed away?
Some articles only indicate that the car was apparently found before the car that was examined at Luton station:
“The cars were both found at the railway station. One was earlier towed away to Leighton Buzzard to be examined.”
(Herald, 7/13/05)
(PUB, 7/12/05)
But two articles specify that the car was found already on the day of the attacks:
“A second car was also taken away from the railway station on the day of attacks as a matter of routine.”
(Evening Standard, 7/13/05)
“It was revealed late on Tuesday night how the vehicle had been routinely recovered from Luton railway station hours AFTER four bombers struck tube trains and a bus in the capital last Thursday. »
Why are the basic information of time and place of this finding so much in confusion?

29. And another simple question: Why was this car towed away?
In any case it seems that the car that was towed away was found before the suspicious Luton car. This is also logic as in no way it was treated with the same caution as the Luton car. A caution that one certainly would expect to treat a car that might contain explosives or bombs.
One article explains:
“A second car was also taken away from the railway station on the day of attacks as a matter of routine.”
(Evening Standard, 7/13/05)
What is “a matter of routine”? This could only be that it had no parking ticket. But why did this car have none while the other had a daylong parking ticket?
Here is a completely different account:
“A Bedfordshire Police spokesman said the vehicle was not found at the train station but it was also being linked to the terrorist attacks. He said they had received a tip-off from the Metropolitan Police and had acted to recover the vehicle”
(Daily Record, 7/13/05)
But what kind of tip-off could that had been? And what was it based on? (Keep in mind that most likely this car was found before the car at Luton station).
And most importantly why then was the car not treated with the caution one would treat a car that might contain bombs?
So, what really happened?

The two cars found in and/or around Luton are extremely important findings as will be seen in the next chapter. Yet, save the basic facts that cars have been found everything else is in a surprising confusion.

Explosives and/or bombs found:
30. While all and everybody spoke of explosives that have been found on July 12 from July 16 all of a sudden we read that bombs have been found in the Luton car. And while as shown above it was mainly the hired Nissan that was parked at Luton and contained the explosives now it is mainly the red Fiat parked at Luton and containing bombs.
“Investigators reportedly found another nine bombs in Lindsay's red Fiat, which had been parked at Luton railway station.”
(Guardian, 7/16/05 b)
On the other hand the breaking ABC story clearly states that it was the car rented by Tanweer:
Other articles also state that the bombs were found in the Nissan: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22989-1710339,0...
So, again a very simple question : Where were the bombs found ?

31. Another question that shouldn’t raise to much trouble to answer: How many bombs were found?
Only nine bombs?
12 bombs?
Or even 16 bombs?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20050727/wl_uk_afp/britaina... ;_ylt=AhqfLlVIEB72c3unR7tsUKXjOrgF;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MXN1bHE0BHNlYwN0bWE-
Or even more:
“The Times has been told that up to 16 of the devices were recovered along with nine discs of the TATP-type explosive.”
Or just:
“There was at least one completed explosive device and about 15 other items.”
How difficult is it to count bombs?
And what sense does this statement from July 18 make?
“Police are investigating the possibility that up to nine bombs, primed and ready to use, could have been left in the hired Nissan Micra used by the gang.”

So, let’s try to insert some logic in here:
If explosives were found in the Nissan and later it were bombs in the same car then this simply makes no sense. Why weren’t the bombs found right away?
If explosives were found in the red Fiat and later it were bombs in the same car then this simply makes no sense, neither.
If explosives were found in the Nissan and four days later bombs were found in the Fiat:
Why does it take four days to find bombs? Why does not a single report talk of one car containing explosives and another car containing bombs?
Why are the explosives completely forgotten once the bombs hit the news?
If explosives were found in the Fiat and four days later bombs are found in the Nissan:
The same questions apply as above.
Moreover as many articles imply that it was the Nissan that was examined:
Why does this impressive examination where many people are participating not reveal within four days that the car contained bombs?

But a general question:
32. Why would an alleged bomber that normally would aim for the biggest possible destruction leave bombs behind instead of using them or distributing them to his fellow bombers in order to create an even bigger destruction?
The following explanation hardly makes sense:
"I believe that the explosives left in that car were left there for a second strike," said Bob Ayers, a London-based terrorism consultant with expertise in demolition. "But the metropolitan police responded so quickly, they were able to get to the car and take control of the car before the second team could get the explosives and leave.""
But how can that be?
A second team should have gotten to Luton to pick up the bombs?? Why not give them the day before?
Btw the police took the car on July 12. That means the plan was the bombs should stay for more than five days in the car waiting for the second team?

33. The presented bombs (on photos as well) are nail bombs.

Why did the alleged bombers apparently leave nail bombs in the car while taking simple bombs for the attacks?

34. And please note this concerning the findings of bombs:
The American report contradicts information provided to the British media by Scotland Yard this month. They dismissed the idea that a large cache of bombs had been found in the Luton car park. Senior police sources continued to dispute the US reports yesterday, saying that a number of components for bombs were found in the car.”
Why does “Scotland Yard dismiss reports earlier this month that bombs had been found at Luton station”?

Here for the first time we do have huge evidence. Or better said we could have huge evidence. Yet, it is again striking that the story what actually was found at Luton Station changes again and again. And Scotland Yard even dismisses parts of the presented results.
Therefore it is hard to take the findings at Luton station as evidence without further examination.

Number of cars involved in the 7/7 operation:
35. So far we have only mentioned two cars: the hired red Nissan and the red Fiat belonging to Lindsay. Yet, some accounts imply that more cars have been involved.
“It is also not known how they travelled from West Yorkshire, though it is thought that two or three hire cars may have been used.”
(Daily Record, 7/13/05)
« several cars » http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=15729250&metho...
This appeared on July 13 in the news. The very same day the cars found at Luton had been presented as well.
Was any other car found that was involved in the operation and is it a certainty that Lindsay drove alone in his red Fiat and Hussain, Khan and Tanweer drove in the hired Nissan as normally reported?
“Extensive DNA and fingerprint examinations were being carried out to see how many of the dead bombers used the car.”
(Daily Star, 7/13/05)
What was the result of this examination?

Analysing the bombs:
One central question in any case of a explosion is to determine what kind of bomb was used.

36. Soon after the attacks it was reported:
“After the injured and dead were removed, explosives specialists swabbed the scene - including victims' skin and clothes - with chemicals to find out what kind of high explosive was used.
Teams of evidence recovery specialists will sift through thousands of pieces of wreckage for even the most minute bomb parts, hoping to build accurate model of the bombs.”

This is exactly what one would expect a proper investigation to do.
But why did the statement what kind of explosives the alleged bombers used change several times?
At first “high-grade military explosives”
“Privately, intelligence experts say they now believe the London Underground data suggests at least four terrorists were at work last week. The fact that the type of explosives used was not hand-made, but small 10lb commercial high explosives, probably linked to a timing device, suggests a level of sophistication and financing.”
“The authorities have said the bombs were made of less than 10 pounds of high-grade military-style explosives. Because of the quality of the explosives, Scotland Yard is now trying to determine if the bombers had assistance, either in assembling the bombs or in obtaining the material to build them, officials said.”
(New York Times, 7/13/05)
“(M)ilitary TNT originating from former Soviet satellite countries, intelligence sources said”.
Traces of military plastic explosive, more deadly and efficient than commercial varieties, are understood to have been found in the debris of the wrecked Underground carriages and the bus.”
Then “TATP, or triacetone triperoxide, a compound that can be made from easily purchased chemicals”
Newspapers specify that the kind of bombs that were used on 7/7 link the attack to al Qaeda:
“(T)he bombs used in London contained a substance similar to that within the device used by (shoe bomber) Reid.”
(Guardian, 7/16/05 b)
“The ingredients for the bombs match the recommended elements for an explosive device outlined in al-Qaeda”.
(Calgary Herald, 7/16/05)
Then even “innocent designer perfumes and aftershaves (were used) as a deadly mix for the London gang's home-made devices”
Then after two weeks it is officially stated that Scotland Yard has no clue and that it is unclear when they will figure out what kind of explosives had been used.
And finally another story:
“Bombs (…) were made from simple ingredients such as hair bleach, and three of them were probably set off by cellphones, New York's police chief said.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050804/ts_nm/security_brit... ;_ylt=AunpZQJYJ.ZYs7ztyMRzRndg.3QA;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MXN1bHE0BHNlYwN0bWE-
And although the London police is apparently not very happy about this public statement of their US counterparts they didn’t deny them.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050804/ts_nm/security_brit... ;_ylt=AunpZQJYJ.ZYs7ztyMRzRndg.3QA;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MXN1bHE0BHNlYwN0bWE-
How is this ever changing story explainable ? Why is it so difficult to examine the explosives? There are even portable machines available that are supposed to analyse explosives right on the spot.

37. Was alcohol used in the explosives as the story of Lindsay buying perfumes for £700 suggests? (The explanation given was that he used the alcohol of the perfumes).
If yes, why wasn’t this found out before? Why was the story of Lindsay buying perfumes for 700 £ needed to realize the use of alcohol?
If not, what is the sense of Lindsay’s excessive shooping?

38. Based on the statement that Scotland Yard still doesn’t know the compounds of the bomb used this comparison between the bombs from 7/7 and 7/21 appears surprising:
“The same prolific bombmaker built the deadly devices used by the two suicide squads that attacked London this month, security sources have told The Times.
A number of bombs and components, some packed with nails to cause death and maximum injury, were recovered from a car parked by the July 7 bombers at Luton station.
Senior sources told The Times that the devices recovered at Luton are “strikingly similar in their configuration and contents” to the unexploded bomb found at Warren Street Tube station on July 21.”

On the first glance this statement creates a sort of missing link between the two attacks, yet: How can they know that if they still have no clue what kind of bombs were used on 7/7 ?

Again what is striking is the absence of any conclusive statement.

Timing devices:
Important aspect as well: How was the bomb detonated? With a cell phone like in Madrid, with a trigger or with a timing device. How did the alleged bombers manage the simultaneity of the attack?
Again so far there is big confusion in Scotland Yard.

39. The following day after 7/7 the story was broken that timing devices had been found. http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/investigators-find-tim...
And one of the sources for this information is nobody else but Vincent Cannistraro, the former head of the CIA's counter-terrorism centre
But then everywhere it is reported that no timing device has been found.
Has timing device been found or has there not? Why so many contradictions in spite of well-informed sources?

Again striking is the many conflicting reports.

Cell phones used:
40. Another possibility how a simultaneous attack could have been orchestrate is the use of cell phones as in the Madrid bombings.
But right after the attacks the use of cell phones was doubted:
(I)nvestigators doubt that cell phones - used in the Madrid train attacks a year ago - were used to detonate the bombs in the Underground because the phones often don't work in the system's deep tunnels, London's transport police said Friday.”
And Scotland Ian Blair himself apparently ruled it out on 7/7:
“Blair confirmed that police considered shutting down London's cell phone networks Thursday as the explosions were reported, apparently out of concern the bombs were detonated by mobile phone, but ruled it out.”
Yet, in the ever changing story of determining the compounds of the bombs and the presence of a timing device also the possible use of cell phones changed:
“Bombs used by four suicide attackers to kill 52 people in London were made from simple ingredients such as hair bleach, and three of them were probably set off by cellphones, New York's police chief said.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050804/ts_nm/security_brit... ;_ylt=AunpZQJYJ.ZYs7ztyMRzRndg.3QA;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MXN1bHE0BHNlYwN0bWE-
Why again the doubts ? Do cell phones work in the London subway? Again, why can’t this be determined with more certainty?

Analysing the crash sites :
41. Given the suspicion that a bomb was underneath the carriage (based on Bruce Lait’s account): Is there any official description of the damage done to this carriage?

42. Are there furthermore official documentations about the damage done to the two other tubes and bus no. 30? As some photos of the destroyed carriages have been made public: Why isn’t there one showing the floor of Bruce Lait’s carriage?

43. Is there any conclusion where the bombs were placed?

The identification of the alleged bombers:
The positive identification of the alleged bombers is extremely important as it is the essential proof that at least they had been present at the moment and the place of the blast.
44. On July 12 first three names were presented to the media:
Shahzad Tanweer, Hasib Hussain and Mohammed Sadique Khan.
(AP, 7/12/05)
The fourth name appeared only on July 15.
(a wrong version “Rashid Sacha” appeared already on July 13 : http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/story/0,16132,... )

45. First of all the alleged bombers left personal documents at the blast sites:
Why are reports different that personal documents of all four alleged bombers were found or only of three?
“Peter Clarke, the head of Scotland Yard's antiterrorist police, announced that items belonging to the four men had been found at the scene of the explosions”
(New York Times, 7/13/05)
(Townsville Sun, 7/14/05)
“"It is as if they wanted their identities to be known," one police source said.”
“A security source said: "They wanted people to know who they were. They wanted to be martyrs."”
(Evening Standard, 7/13/05)
Yet, all detailed accounts only specify the findings belonging to three alleged bombers. Was a personal document found that belonged to Lindsay? If yes, what was it and where was it found? And why took it almost one day longer to come up with his name?

46. The alleged bomber Tanweer was identified by “strong forensic evidence”.
« Shahzad Tanweer -was identified from DNA and fingerprints on the Aldgate Tube. Only his backbone and fragments of ribs and flesh remained.”
(Daily Star, 7/13/05)
Is it possible that “fragments of flesh” allow an identification by fingerprint? And how is it possible that although “only his backbone and fragments of ribs and flesh remained”
Tanweer was already identified on July 12 (the very same day the trail lead to Leeds) while on Jul 11 only one victim had been identified of all four blasts? (on July 12 it is all in all 4)? What are the odds that his few fragments were found? And what was used to compare them with?

47. Germaine Lindsay had not been identified so far. He’s officially name alleged bomber only because his rented car at Luton contained nine bombs. Is there any other single proof against Lindsay? And as his car was found on July 12: Why wasn’t his name not presented on July 12 already but the other three alleged bombers were?

48. “The journey from Aylesbury to Luton takes nearly an hour. They arrived at Luton station at about 7am, and parked in the car park. 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.”
What is the result of matching the DNA? Nowhere I’ve found that Lindsay was positively identified by DNA.

49. Documents of Khan were found both at Edgware Road station where is supposed to have died but also at the Aldgate bomb scene.
What document was found at a place where Khan didn’t go to ?

50. Khan and Hussain have been only identified so far by their IDs that had been found at the site of explosion. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4689739.stm#
Or is it true that Khan’s body was found? http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/story/0,16132,...
If so, why wasn’t it reported so far that he was positively identified ?

51. Is the following report correct?
“The dominant theory, that the attackers were suicide bombers, was established when Hussain's head was found intact near the No 30 bus that he blew up in London's Tavistock Square - a grisly echo of suicide bombings in Israel, where intact heads have been shot into the air as suicide bombers' bodies have been blown apart by the force of the blast.”
(Ottawa Citizen, 7/13/05)
If so, why wasn’t it reported so far that he was positively identified ? And in that case: Why did the police need any CCTV image? Why did no eary report imply that there was one suspect identified?
If this report is not correct (and as no other alleged bomber’s head was found): In how far does this contradict the official assumption that the suspects had the bombs on their back?

52. As more than a month has passed now since the attacks:
When will all four alleged bombers be positively identified ?

Besides personal document that hint at the presence of the suspects at time and place of the blasts we have no real proof of it as no positive identification has taken place. At least to my knowledge.

The alleged bombers:
53. There are contradictory reports about Germaine Lindsay’s age; Normally he’s believed to have been 19. Sometimes 29. Why is there the same problem as with his first name? (There are about six different versions in the media of his first name)
It has been reported: “Yesterday, it was claimed that Lindsay was tracked by FBI agents when he visited relatives in America.
British officials had asked the US to keep tabs on him while he stayed with family in Cleveland in 1994 and 2000.
At that time, his mother Mary reportedly lived in the city and has since remarried.
During the 2000 visit, the FBI put him under close surveillance.
He entered the US despite being on a terrorist watch list, but on his return British intelligence allegedly lost track of him.”

But then Lindsay would have been surveilled at the age of 8! Then the story changes:
A mix-up is understood to be behind the claims by US intelligence that Germaine Lindsay, 19, the bomber who carried out the King's Cross attack, was on a British watch list. This was because the "fourth" bomber was wrongly identified in the United States as Lindsay Jermaine - someone with a similar name to a terroriist suspect.
How can this mix up happen between first and family name? Given the fact that most likely the age of the suspects doesn’t correspond.

54. How is the confusion surrounding Hussain’s travel to Pakistan to be explained?
“Evidence showing that all three of the London bombers of Pakistani descent visited Pakistan last year has been thrown into doubt.
A photograph of a passport purporting to show bomber Hasib Hussain was in fact that of a 16-year-old British boy with the same name.”

How difficult is it to realize the differences in their age and in their photos ?

55. The alleged bomber Mohammad Sidique Khan reportedly spend more than ten weeks last year (November 19 till February 8) in Pakistan. http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/story/0,16132,...
“He told them he had to go back to Pakistan to tend to his dying father.”
Even with this excuse: How working as a primary school teaching assistant could have he managed to take such long vacation? Do the documents of his school support the claim of Pakistan’s government that he did stay for such a long period?

56. Is it correct that bomb suspects of 7/7 had been arrested in 2004 as French Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy told the press? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4680155.stm

Were the alleged bombers aware of their death mission?
57. Several reasons indicate that this might not have been the case:
The “Mirror” asks: “Why did they buy return train tickets to Luton? Why did they buy pay & display tickets for cars? Why were there no usual shouts of 'Allah Akhbar'? Why were bombs in bags and not on their bodies?”
What is the conclusion of the investigation on this?

58. If they weren’t aware that they are going to die: Who is the one that is responsible for their ignorance and the success of the operation?

The mastermind:
59. Why emerged at first Mustafa Setmarian Nasar, a Syrian who was the
alleged mastermind behind last year's Madrid train bombings, (…) as a key suspect in the London attack”?

60. What are the odds that Nasar has almost the same name as the next publicly named bombmaker Magdy el-Nashar?
“When police raided the house after the attack, they found the bathtub filled with enough home-made explosives to make another 10kg bomb of the type”.
(New York Times, 7/15/05)
And the “Boston Globe” specifies that TATP was found in the bathtub.
http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2005/0... L_steps?mode=PF
Besides the evidence found in his house el Nashar had also a direct connection to alleged bomber Lindsay:
“He helped Jamal Lindsay rent a flat in Leeds last month but returned to Egypt a week before the attacks.”
Seen in the light of the above mentioned evidence: How can this judgement of Egyptian investigators be explained?
“An official from the ministry's media office said el-Nashar was released after authorities found no evidence against him and no links to the attacks or to al-Qaida.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050809/ap_on_re_mi_ea/egyp... ;_ylt=AsXX6gV.8h1nilRwDsH7p5gUewgF;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MXN1bHE0BHNlYwN0bWE-
The British reaction is quoted:
“A spokeswoman for London's Metropolitan Police had no comment on the release, saying it was a matter for the Egyptian authorities. The British police have said they were maintaining close contact with the Egyptians following the bombings, but haven't identified el-Nashar as a suspect.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050809/ap_on_re_mi_ea/egyp... ;_ylt=AsXX6gV.8h1nilRwDsH7p5gUewgF;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MXN1bHE0BHNlYwN0bWE-
Why was apparently el-Nashar never even officially identified as a suspect?
If explosives were indeed found in his bathtub it makes him very much a suspect.
If there weren’t then why was it widely reported?

61. A new mastermind is presented by British and American media:
Haaron Rashid Aswat, “The British al-Qaeda leader”.
Although this hasn’t been confirmed by the British police.
But why are there two completely different accounts on him?
In the first he’s questioned by police in Pakistan (July 21, 2005).
And he “arrived in Britain a fortnight before the attacks to orchestrate final planning for the atrocity. He spoke to the suicide team on his mobile phone a few hours before the four men blew themselves up and killed fifty-two other people.
Intelligence sources told The Times that during his stay Aswat visited the home towns of all four bombers as well as selecting targets in London.”

But then several days later it is reported that the very same person, Haaron Rashid Aswat, “is in custody in Zambia”.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050729/ap_on_re_eu/britain... ;_ylt=Ak0nSTkTth1.QpGy4.FjY7xbbBAF;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MXN1bHE0BHNlYwN0bWE-
Apparently “20 calls had been placed from his cell phone to some of the four suspected bombers.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050807/ap_on_re_af/zambia_... ;_ylt=AgVbjI2TbSdexfHwhLM8rDsV6w8F;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MXN1bHE0BHNlYwN0bWE-
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050729/ap_on_re_eu/britain... ;_ylt=Ak0nSTkTth1.QpGy4.FjY7xbbBAF;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MXN1bHE0BHNlYwN0bWE-
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20050807/wl_afp/britainatta... ;_ylt=Ai.001htSB8Iikd8NS.lA.GROrgF;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MXN1bHE0BHNlYwN0bWE-
Which suspects did he phone and which didn’t he ?

62. Why do “British investigators (…) caution that the calls may have been made to a phone linked to Aswat, rather than the man himself.”
It doesn’t seem very likely that a top al Qaeda would give his cell phone to somebody else.
In the new version Aswat didn’t stay in the UK but “spent time in South Africa and Botswana before entering Zambia on July 6, had been on a watch list of Western intelligence agencies who tipped off Zambian authorities.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20050807/wl_afp/britainatta... ;_ylt=Ai.001htSB8Iikd8NS.lA.GROrgF;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MXN1bHE0BHNlYwN0bWE-
Why this two completely different versions surrounding the very same person ?
The fact that it was figured out that he phoned 20 times some alleged bombers is explained “It is likely that the American National Security Agency — which has a powerful eavesdropping network — was monitoring the calls.”
This makes sense because otherwise how could they know about these calls. Yet, if this is true why wasn’t London warned of the coming terrorist attacks?
And is the statement correct:
“South African officials have declined to comment on media reports that Aswat was under surveillance and that authorities there did not act on an American request to arrest him after British security forces asked them not to.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050807/ap_on_re_af/zambia_... ;_ylt=AgVbjI2TbSdexfHwhLM8rDsV6w8F;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MXN1bHE0BHNlYwN0bWE-
And why does “Scotland Yard sources say he (Aswat) is not considered a priority in their criminal investigation into the July 7 and July 21 attacks. But senior Whitehall officials do not rule out the possibility there my be links to one or more of the bombers.”
If he orchestrate the attacks he should be a priority. And if he did calls to “some suspects” certainly it shouldn’t be too difficult to establish links to “one or more of the bombers”.

Incidents occurring on the London Underground BEFORE the blasts:
Apparently there occurred problems in the London Underground before the blast:
“(T)he Northern line had been suspended since 6.30am on Thursday because of a defective train at Balham.”
(Evening Standard, 7/13/05)

63. Is the following list correct?
According to 'Transport for London', on 7 July 2005, the day of the London terror attacks:
- the Bakerloo LLine was "suspended between Paddington and Elephant and Castle in both directions from 08:07 due to a defective train in Piccadilly Circus"
- the Northern line was "suspended beetween Morden and Stockwell from 06:29 due to a defective train at Balham"
- the Piccadilly Line was "suspended between King's Cross St Pancras and Arnos Grove from 07:57 to 08:28 due to a defective train at Caledonian Road"..." But there are also accounts of fire”
What were the reasons for theses incidents and is there any connection to the blasts at 8:51?

Bus no. 30:
64. Bus driver George Paradakis said: “My bus had been diverted because there were thousands of people coming out of the tube. There were many people who were trying to get on the bus at once.” (Sunday Herald, 7/10/05).
Who gave the official order?

65. Why was it the only bus in whole London? Other buses certainly should have been effected by the masses of people leaving the tubes as well!

66. Leaving aside the odds that an experienced busdriver gets lost in the centre of Lon


66. Leaving aside the odds that an experienced busdriver gets lost in the centre of London: Why would George Paradakis stop to ask the name of the street and his way? Why doesn’t he ask CentreCom or a controller per radio? Keep in mind that the bus is tracked by an automatic transponder.

The busdriver George Paradakis:
67. According to George Paradakis he helped wounded people after the blast happened at 9:47. Then he walks west for seven miles and “and sought help only once he reached the Central Middlesex Hospital in Acton, West London, at about 10.50am.” http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22989-1687566,0...
How could he have managed this in this short time? Why did the police not interview him after the blast?

68. Is it true that busdriver George Paradakis was “taken into hiding by police”?
If so: Why?

A shooting on 7/7?
69. A Reuter’s journalist believed to have witnessed that police shot somebody on 7/7.
“A New Zealander working for Reuters in London says two colleagues witnessed the (b]unconfirmed shooting by police of two apparent suicide bombers outside the HSBC tower at Canary Wharf in London.
The New Zealander, who did not want to be named, said the killing of the two men wearing bombs happened at 10.30am on Thursday (London time).
Following the shooting, the 8000 workers in the 44-storey tower were told to stay away from windows and remain in the building for at least six hours, the New Zealand man said. (…)
Canadian Brendan Spinks, who works on the 18th floor of the tower, said he saw a "massive rush of policemen" outside the building after London was rocked by the bombings.”

Is this story correct?
If it isn’t what might he have witnessed?

Bombing drill on 7/7:
70. On 7/7 it is undisputed that Vizor Consultants held a bombing drill in London Underground. Peter Power, Managing Director of Vizor Consultants revealed himself on 7/7 on BBC. The following quote is from a later interview:
“POWER: At half past nine this morning (7/7/05) we were actually running an exercise for a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning, so I still have the hairs on the back of my neck standing up right now.
HOST: To get this quite straight, you were running an exercise to see how you would cope with this and it happened while you were running the exercise?
POWER: Precisely, and it was about half past nine this morning, we planned this for a company and for obvious reasons I don't want to reveal their name but they're listening and they'll know it. And we had a room full of crisis managers for the first time they'd met and so within five minutes we made a pretty rapid decision that this is the real one and so we went through the correct drills of activating crisis management procedures to jump from slow time to quick time thinking and so on. »

See also: http://www.cbc.ca/MRL/clips/rm-lo/charles_disasters0507...
What are the odds of this coincidence? Was the possibility of inside information that might have gotten into the hands of the alleged bombers investigated?
What is the result? What’s the name of the company for which the exercise was conducted?

71. Was there any reason that the same day a terror drill of New York Underground was taking place or is this pure coincidence?

72. Why did Vizor Consultants do the terror exercise when the exercise “Atlantic Blue” held in April 2005 had basically the very same scenario?
“A massive anti-terror exercise carried out last April to find out how safe London's transport systems were from attack raised concern over the vulnerability of passengers, The Observer can reveal.
Washington sources have revealed that the biggest transatlantic counter-terrorism exercise since 9/11 - which included 'bombs' being placed on buses and explosives left on the London underground - raised fears over the vulnerability of 'soft targets' in the capital. »

The Guardian reported: “The anti-terror drill, codenamed Exercise Atlantic Blue, involved 10,000 personnel in the UK and 2,500 in the UK. It was billed as the biggest test of the anti-terror defences of both the UK and the US and was designed to improve security. The exercise featured simulated explosive, biological and chemical attacks and, in the case of London, concentrated on testing security weaknesses in the transport system.”
(Moreover it should be noted that “Atlantic Blue” “coincided with a major international summit.” http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=756822005 Which has strange parallels to 7/7 with the G8 summit just taking place.)
What have been the improvements after “Atlantic Blue”?

Giuliani and Netanyahu:
73. Coincidentally Former Mayor of New York, Rudolph Giuliani was on 7/6 in Yorkshire, where the police did its first investigations, then he was in London on 7/7:
« Former Mayor of New York, Rudolph Giuliani, was only yards away from the first explosion”
What was the reason for Giuliani’s stay in London on 7/7 ? (911 research Greg Nixon phoned Giuliani’s press secretary but only received the answer: “business”).
Did he in any way participate in Vizor’s terror drill?

74. Israeli Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stayed on 7/7 in the same hotel as Giuliani. There were conflicting reports if Netanyahu was warned before the attacks or not. The “Jerusalem Post” writes:
“There were reports on Israel Radio that Scotland Yard had received early warnings of an imminent terrorist attack, and had shared details of these warnings with the Israeli Embassy in London.
However, staff at the Israeli Embassy have flatly denied the claim.”

Did Scotland Yard receive early warnings?
Was Netanyahu warned?
If yes, when was this the case?

The financial marked before 7/7:
75. The English Pound lost about 6% against the US-Dollar the days before 7/7. Is there the possibility of insider trading? If yes, was it investigated and what was the result?

76. Two days before the London subway bombings, Fed-Master Alan Greenspan flushed nearly $40 billion in liquidity into financial markets. This was a very surprising and so far unexplained step. Was there any connection between his decision and 7/7?

77. It is claimed that the UK received some warnings prior to 7/7:
“Spanish security sources are said to have warned four months ago that Nasar had zeroed in on Britain as a likely target, The Sunday Times reported.”
Saudi Arabia officially warned Britain of an imminent terrorist attack on London just weeks ahead of the 7 July bombings after calls from one of al-Qaeda's most wanted operatives were traced to an active cell in the United Kingdom.”
“A confidential report by France's intelligence service that was finalised days before the July 7 London bombings pointed to the threat of an Al-Qaeda attack on Britain, the French daily Le Figaro said.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20050808/wl_afp/britainatta... ;_ylt=As.JPzuo38DiigCmrw1qdo6ROrgF;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MXN1bHE0BHNlYwN0bWE-
Is this correct? And who was “one of al-Qaeda's most wanted operatives”?
If it was Aswat then why wasn’t he considered being the mastermind of 7/7 right away?

Last but not least:
Why does Premier Tony Blair rule out a bomb inquiry? http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,54...

Is not the security of British people, the need to know what could have been done better next time to prevent the bomb explosions, enough to prove the necessity of an

Special Thanks to Team 8+ and members of the Team8+ Forum!