London 7/7 - Tube and Bus Bombings 07/07/2005

What can only be described as "the incredible coincidence event".

The main notable issue with the 7/7 bombings was that (like 9/11 amongst numerous other so-called terrorist events) a training exercise was taking place at the same time. In this instance the training excercise was taking place at the exact same locations at the exact same times as those where the bombs went off. This was confirmed by the man who organised them - Peter Power of Visor Consultants. Lets be clear, Mr Power says the scenario was not exactly identical, but was, "The same times and locations and that sort of thing."

Visor consultants are also a private firm who were training our public services. Being a private profit making organisation they have the incredible convenience of not being subject to the same right of data access, nor the same level of public scrutiny as they would be if they were a public body.

The likelihood of it being pure coincidence that there was a training exercise at the same time and locations as the real attack is so remote as to be beyond the rational comprehension.It is notable that some people spend huge amounts of energy, research and time debunking so called conspiracy theories and no time at all debunking the main stream media which they appear to accept as verbatim fact. Particularly notable is the actuarial evidence concerning the 7/7 coincidence argument. The coincidence of the events taking place at the same locations and at the same times was calculated to be 1 in 300 tretagillion (actually it was one in 3,715,592,613,265,750,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000).

Now this figure is NOT the same as calculating the likelihood of your house having a fire, nor even of something so remote as being hit by lightning. These are regular occurrences that happen every day, in fact the UK fire service estimate that there is a house fire every 8 minutes in the UK alone. Your chance of being hit by lightning are estimated to be around 1 in 3 million. These are unlikely but very possible events. Now the likelihood of three bombs being set of at the same locations as a training excercise is quite rare. Say we take the incidence of a lighting strike for example, given that more people in the UK are struck by lightning in one year than the collective terrorist attacks within UK borders over the last 3 decades.

Now the probability of you being hit by lightning is 1 in 3 million. Now what is the probability of three connected targets lets say you, your uncle and your best friend all being hit by lightning within the same year. On a basic level it would be 1 in (3000000x3000000x3000000), which is about 1 x 3 with 18 zeros behind it...pretty unlikely huh? But we need to add more for this to even approach the level of coincidence that is associated with the London bombings.

The chance of being attacked by a shark are estimated to be around 1 in 11.5 million. So what are the chances of being bitten by a shark and being struck by lightning in the same year - that would work out around 1 in 34,500,000,000,000.

How about the chance of you, your Uncle and your best friend all being hit by lighting and bitten by a shark in the same year? Now we're getting close. Of course real actuarial calculations are not so base as this, although they are averaged out for more widescale insurance policies such as fire etc. but for an entirely accurate figure on this they are likely to ask questions such as do you go scuba diving near the coral reef, do you climb mountains during the storm season, and so on.

Now consider a more down to earth example, a firebomb is thrown through your window, you run outside and see a man running away, you run after him and stop him and find he smells of petrol and is carrying a lighter but no cigarettes. What is your conclusion going to be? Perhaps it is a coincidence but image the police turn up and say to the man "Hi Peter, on your way we'll deal with this", and then they turn to you and say this man had nothing to do with it, to suggest he did is crazy talk and we will not even be questioning him in relation to the incident. You would at least realise that the police certainly had no interest in finding the perpetrator and bringing them to justice. Perhaps you would also think these guys may know the suspect in some way? Would this really be so unreasonable?

So you see the utter ludicrous nature of dismissively accepting this as a pure coincidence as opposed to thinking, "Hang on a minute here!, Maybe there IS some connection and there's something a bit fishy going on that needs thorough investigation."

Of course dismissively accepting the ludicrous is exactly what the main stream media and the government wants you to do. Which obviously makes it even more suspicious.

That there is some connection therefore between the planned training drill and the explosions is quite clearly obvious. If I were a detective investigating this as a crime and I dismissed this line of investigation outright without any consideration of a potential connection that would simply be outrageous. In fact such an obvious ommision in and of itself would be ludicrous.

One of the other key deceptions with the official story is that the alleged terrorists were on the 7.40am bus from Luton Station to Kings Cross, however on the morning of 7/7/05 this bus was cancelled, they could not have been on it.

There are numerous other flags which suggest all is not as it has been reported nor investigated when it comes to explaining the planning and execution of the bombings on 7/7/2005.

The links with this bombing suggesting Al Qaeda links are connected directly with MI6, as with the connections between Al Qaeda and the CIA on 9/11.

One witness reported that the explosion left the torn edges of the base of the tube train after the explosion pointing upwards. This suggests an explosion from underneath the train not from within it. Why not more people? Well, most people close enough of course would not be in any fit condition to see this and anybody further away would hardly be stopping to take a closer look at the blast scene. One person does not make for conclusive evidence, however it does demand further investigation. In the same way that of one person identified you at the scene of a murder the police would still label you as a suspect and investigate your possible involvement even if this turned out to be false.

Peter Power of Visor Consultants Confirming The Training Excercise on 7/7/05

Peter Power of Visor Consultants - The 7/7/05 Training Excercise - Same Times and Locations

An Inquiry into the London Bombings of July 2007 Pt1