J7 Decline to participate in BBC's Conspiracy Files

J7 Decline to participate in BBC's Conspiracy Files

bbc conspiracy files logo

after the second anniversary of 7th July 2005, J7: The July 7th Truth
Campaign was contacted by Chris Alcock of the BBC who advised us of
plans for a BBC documentary covering the events of 7th July 2005. No
detail about the nature of the 'documentary' was provided until five
months later, in December 2007, when another BBC employee, Assistant
Producer Susan Prichard, advised us by email that the BBC production in
question, rather than being a serious documentary effort for which the
BBC was once well known, was in fact an episode of BBC2's risible Conspiracy Files series.

anyone that missed out on the 'privilege' of watching the first four
episodes of the Conspiracy Files, previous programmes have covered the
events of 11th September 2001, the death of weapons inspector Dr David
Kelly, the murder of Dodi Fayed and the Oklahoma bombing. Some episodes
of the first Conspiracy Files series are available to view online and
links are provided below:

learning that our assistance was being requested in connection with the
production of an episode of the formulaic Conspiracy Files rather than
a serious, honest, open-minded and in-depth documentary that examined
the official Home Office account of events — the original 'conspiracy theory'
about what happened — the lack of evidence to support it, the errors
exposed by J7's ongoing research and the numerous anomalies and
inconsistencies in the story the government has endeavoured to fob the
British public off with in place of a full and independent public
inquiry outside of the Inquiries Act 2005, J7 issued a response to the
BBC declining to participate in the programme and outlining our reasons
for reaching this decision. What follows is a full copy of the J7
response to the BBC request to participate in its Conspiracy Files
series. Much of what is written below is equally applicable to other
broadcast and print media:

Dear Susan,

you will be aware, earlier this year, J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign
was contacted by Chris Alcock with regard to our participating in a BBC
programme, although the programme in question was never identified. We
cooperated fully with Chris, providing him with links to further
information and avenues of investigation and Chris also took it upon
himself to directly contact several of the highly respected authors and
academics who have written articles for J7 that are published on our
web site. In none of these communications was the nature of the
programme in question mentioned, although all those contacted were
primed for a possible appearance in a BBC documentary examining the
events of 7th July 2005.

It is difficult
to express how appalled and disgusted we felt when we learnt, as we did
from your email of last week, that the 'documentary' for which Chris
Alcock was soliciting participants is in fact an episode of BBC2's
risible Conspiracy Files series.

For the
sake of clarity, it is worth establishing precisely, according to
dictionary definitions, what the term ‘conspiracy theory’ means. While
the definition of what a ‘theory’ is requires little or no
clarification, in law, for it is under the law which alleged criminals
are charged for their crimes, a conspiracy is defined as, “an agreement
by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful
act.” Therefore, by the very definition of the term ‘conspiracy theory’
any theory about how the events of 7/7 came to be that involves two or
more people making it happen, is in fact a ‘conspiracy theory’. As
such, the official government narrative, which is based on four, young,
British Muslim men conspiring to kill themselves and others is,
technically, by the legal and dictionary definitions of a ‘conspiracy’,
a ‘conspiracy theory’. As there has been no due legal process – recall
the phrase “innocent until proven guilty” – by which the four accused
have had their guilt established beyond reasonable doubt, nor has there
been an Independent Public Inquiry held outside of the constraints of
the Inquiries Act 2005, the official version of events remains
precisely a 'conspiracy theory'.

The July
7th Truth Campaign has never posited an alternative theory of what
happened on 7/7, ‘conspiracy theory’ or otherwise. Therefore, the July
7th Truth Campaign cannot be defined, nor dismissed, as ‘conspiracy
theorists’ in the traditional, pejorative sense, nor even the legal
sense, of the term for the simple reason that, unlike the ‘conspiracy
theorists’ which you are no doubt seeking for your programme, we do not
promote any alternative ‘conspiracy theory’ about what might have
happened that fateful day. Instead, the basis of the July 7th Truth
Campaign has, since its inception, been that of endeavouring to uncover
real, tangible evidence about the events of 7/7 and to challenge the
official government narrative in instances where evidence proves the
falsehoods in this narrative.

there exists in the public domain absolutely no evidence to support the
Home Office narrative, much less evidence which proves it beyond
reasonable doubt. Rather, there is evidence in the public domain that
directly contradicts the version of events outlined in the Home Office
story, evidence that has twice resulted in the Home Office amending the
highly flawed narrative that was ten months in the making. It is worth
noting that as a result of these two amendments forced by J7’s
questioning, the official Home Office narrative has become more
convoluted and even less coherent than it was originally featuring, as
it now does, a scenario in which the four accused allegedly don their
rucksacks on two separate occasions outside Luton station, once at 0649
and then again at 0714.

The BBC is an
organisation funded by the licence-fee paying British public and the
State, which itself is funded by the tax-paying British public. The BBC
and the State are both public service organisations and, as such,
should serve the public who fund their existences. Yet, with regard to
the events of 7/7, neither the government nor the BBC can be described
to have served the public in any respect, unless promulgating factually
inaccurate, unsubstantiated speculations is considered to be a public
service. In fact quite the opposite of serving the public has occurred,
and both organisations have repeatedly performed a shameful disservice.

The events of 7th July 2005 resulted in
the single biggest loss of life in London since the Luftwaffe bombings
of the second World War and, in the two and a half years that have
passed since, the behemoth that is the BBC has never yet found within
itself the resources, time or inclination to address — with the level
of detail, gravitas and import that such an event deserves – precisely
what happened on 7th July 2005, how it happened, or who was responsible
for making it happen. Further, the BBC has never endeavoured to tackle
the many unanswered questions, anomalies and inconsistencies in the
official version of events outlined in the Home Office report dealing
with the subject, despite the plight of the bereaved families whose
questions about their loved ones have yet to be satisfactorily
answered, and despite the continued efforts of the July 7th Truth
Campaign to analyse the validity, or otherwise as is more often the
case, of the official version of events. Where is the BBC programme
championing the cause of the bereaved families and assisting them to
obtain the truth from the authorities about how their loved ones died?
As one bereaved family member summed up when they contacted us by
email, “Yes, we do need the truth to come out (personally speaking I
don't believe it has yet) but truth is what it has to be for proper
closure.” Indeed, the father of 18 year old Hasib Hussain, accused of
perpetrating the explosion on the number 30 bus, when doorstepped by a
BBC journalist and TV crew, despaired at having never been shown any
evidence of his son’s involvement or guilt.

is beyond comprehension that the BBC is not endeavouring to hold the
State to account – a state which is already proven to be mendacious, to
have lied about Iraq’s WMD, and that has been complicit in the
slaughter of over a million Iraqi civilians — for its production of a
speculative, unsubstantiated and entirely evidence-free 'narrative'
that is little more than an egregious insult to the victims, their
bereaved relatives, and those who survived the event. That the BBC's
approach appears instead to be one that will endeavour to portray the
July 7th Truth Campaign, or anyone with perfectly legitimate and
unanswered questions to which we all deserve answers, as 'Conspiracy
Theorists' is still less comprehensible. This approach is as
distasteful as it is abhorrent.

We also
noted with extreme interest the following line in your email with
regard to your proposed episode of the Conspiracy Files:

our focus will be on establishing the evidence and building up as
definitive an account as possible of what happened.”

the best of our knowledge, “building up as definitive an account as
possible of what happened” on 7/7 is not the function of the BBC, for
the task of piecing together the story behind what Sir Ian Blair
termed, “the largest criminal inquiry in English history”, is the job
of the State in the form of the government and police. If you are
indeed interested in building up such an account we can only suggest
that you, the bereaved families, the survivors who have been all but
forgotten as far as the media is concerned and your viewing public
would be far better served by an episode of the Conspiracy Files which
features representatives from the government and police who have access
to information that has hitherto not been made public. After all, it
was the Home Office branch of government that produced the official
‘conspiracy theory’ about what happened on 7th July 2005 in the form of
a 'narrative' – a story — that the July 7th Truth Campaign has proven
to be based on information that was neither factual nor truthful.

July Truth Campaign has been consistently appalled by the fact that,
with regard to coverage of anything 7/7 related, the efforts of the BBC
have been disingenuous, deceitful and downright dishonest and that no
effort has been made to rectify this. There are countless examples
where the BBC has, either wittingly or unwittingly, placed
misinformation into the public domain, whether this be in ‘news’ items
or ‘documentary’ programmes. We outline below a few of the more blatant
examples of the BBC’s wilful ignorance of the few facts that are known,
or dubious tactics employed:

  • Just one week after 7/7, the BBC broadcast an episode of Real Story
    with Fiona Bruce which gave considerable time to the eye-witness
    testimony of Richard Jones, an individual who has given many and varied
    versions of what he claims to have seen aboard the number 30 bus which
    means that, at best, he is an extremely unreliable witness.
    Furthermore, none of his accounts bear any relation to Hasib Hussain.
    The BBC has never revisited the testimony of Richard Jones.
  • On
    the afternoon of 7th July 2005 information came to light via BBC Radio
    Five Live’s Drivetime programme about a private company running a
    terror rehearsal operation at the time that real explosions were
    reported to have occurred on the London transport network. This
    information was revealed by the Managing Director of Visor Consultants,
    Peter Power who, in his own words, was rehearsing, “simultaneous bombs
    going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened.” Since
    the day of 7/7, the BBC has used Peter Power as an ‘independent’
    security consultant with monotonous regularity across its entire
    broadcast media yet, curiously, he has never been questioned about his
    activities on the day of 7/7 while strenuously making the case for 90
    days internment and how the British people must live in fear of another
    attack as part of what he calls ‘new normal’. Mr Power has also
    revealed ‘mock broadcasts’ were used as part of his operation and that,
    “there was a few seconds when the audience didn't realise whether it
    was real or not.”. Mr Power also featured in a Panorama programme
    broadcast in May 2004 in which a fictional attack on the London
    Underground took place, with three explosions occurring on underground
    trains, followed by another explosion above ground about an hour later.
    It was the BBC that put together ‘mock broadcasts’ featuring a
    bona-fide newsreader, Kirsty Lang, who, no doubt coincidentally, just
    happened to be the ‘relief presenter’ for BBC World on the day of 7/7.
    This is an irregularity on a par with the efforts of another BBC World
    presenter, Jane Standley, who announced on 11th September 2001 that WTC
    Building 7 had collapsed despite it not being hit by a plane, yet the
    building could be seen standing proudly in the background of her report
    before the feed fizzled out. WTC7 Building 7 went on to collapse 23
    minutes after Jane Standley’s premonitory collapse report announcing it
    had already done so. Standley and BBC World’s amazing, prophetic
    foresight was never mentioned during the 9/11 Conspiracy Files and
    would have made for far more relevant and compelling viewing than the
    interview with a writer of the X-Files.
  • BBC
    news stories about the events of 7th July 2005 have regularly and
    shamefully been presented with a backdrop that deceitfully shows
    footage of three of the accused taken from 28th June 2005, some 9 days
    before 7/7. The severity of this deception is further amplified by the
    fact that this footage has often appeared in edited form so that the
    actual time and date stamps are not visible. The lack of any CCTV
    footage from the day of 7/7 has never been questioned by the BBC, nor
    has the fact that, in the one CCTV image allegedly showing all four
    perpetrators outside Luton station, three of the faces are completely
  • On
    27 October 2005, a BBC Horizon programme aired, “The 7/7 Bombers – A
    Psychological Investigation: What makes someone want to blow themselves
    – and others – up?”, featuring forensic psychiatrist Marc Sageman and
    Dr Andrew Silke, which claimed to offer a psychological profile of the
    suicide bombers. The programme stated that the accused caught the 0748
    train from Luton to King's Cross and that they arrived at King’s Cross
    at 0826. This was not the case and yet no amendment or apology for the
    inaccurate version of events outlined in that programme has ever been
    issued by the BBC. In response to a complaint about these factual
    inaccuracies, the laughable explanation was that while “re-tracing the
    journey of the 4 bombers, he [Silke] was not re-enacting it so there
    are some bits of his journey that do differ from the journey of the
    bombers.” Quite what the point of re-tracing steps that obviously
    weren’t taken by the accused remains a mystery. That the train times
    had been supplied to the programme makers by the Metropolitan Police
    Specialist Operations office was also worthy of comment and
  • There
    are several documented examples demonstrating the BBC’s guilt in
    editing stories on the BBC News web site where phrases implying details
    about the alleged bomber’s journey, such as, “Passengers on the 0748
    Thameslink from Luton to King's Cross”, have been edited out, yet the
    ‘last edited’ date and time has, rather disingenuously, not been
    updated to reflect these amendments. This is in direct contravention of
    the Press Complaints Commission guidelines which specify, “A
    significant inaccuracy, mis-leading statement or distortion once
    recognised must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence, and –
    where appropriate – an apology published.”
  • The
    BBC, along with the Metropolitan Police, claimed that the explosion on
    the Piccadilly Line train occurred by the first set of double doors on
    carriage one. The BBC web page containing this information was
    accompanied by a graphic showing this as the alleged seat of the
    explosion. Without any explanation, the BBC then changed this
    information to say that the explosion occurred by the second set of
    double doors and the graphic was updated accordingly. Curiously the
    Metropolitan Police – whom one might think would be the source for such
    information – have never amended or updated their account of the
    explosion being by the first set of double doors.

the following information will serve little or no use in the production
of an episode of the Conspiracy Files dealing with 7/7, as
‘researchers’ and/or ‘journalists’ you may be interested to note that,
while the July 7th Truth Campaign is the only organisation that has
been openly and publicly challenging the government on their flawed and
inaccurate story of 7/7 since the day the incidents occurred, the
government is also being privately challenged by families of the
bereaved and survivors with regard to the accuracy of the report. In
particular, the government has been taken to task over discrepancies in
the alleged locations of the blasts on the underground trains. Another
fact that the BBC has failed to investigate is that in August 2006, the
then Home Secretary, Dr John Reid, responded that, over a year after
the events occurred, a final forensics report had not yet been received.

recently, after Coroner Dr Andrew Reid sent, unsolicited and without
warning in early December, post-mortem reports to the bereaved, at
least one family member has noted that there were “fundamental”
differences between what they saw when they viewed their son's body and
what the post mortem report said. This too has received no further
comment or investigation from the BBC.

way of conclusion to this communication, the magnitude and importance
of the events of 7/7 and the repercussions of those events must not be
underestimated. The official yet unsubstantiated story has been seared
into the public consciousness as the 'first suicide-bombings' on
British soil, a concept only trumped by the fact that this also
qualifies the official story of 7/7 as the first 'suicide bombings' in
the whole of Western Europe. The Home Office narrative of 7/7 is
repeatedly used as unquestionable justification by the State and its
corporate advisor apparatchiks to institute increasingly repressive
legislation, including the widely abused 28 days detention without
charge while the authorities struggle to uncover the evidence required
to bring charges in a court of law. It wasn’t that long ago evidence
was required before arrests were made.

understand a little more about the wider context of 7/7 and everything
that has happened since, one need only look to the words and wisdom of
the Ministry of Defence who, on page 81 of a March 2007 report
entitled, “The DCDC Global Strategic Trends Programme 2007-2036 (Third
Edition)”, noted what the State considers to be a core threat in the
foreseeable future:

The Middle Class Proletariat
The middle classes could become a revolutionary class, taking the role
envisaged for the proletariat by Marx. The globalization of labour
markets and reducing levels of national welfare provision and
employment could reduce peoples’ attachment to particular states. The
growing gap between themselves and a small number of highly visible
super-rich individuals might fuel disillusion with meritocracy, while
the growing urban under-classes are likely to pose an increasing threat
to social order and stability, as the burden of acquired debt and the
failure of pension provision begins to bite. Faced by these twin
challenges, the world’s middle-classes might unite, using access to
knowledge, resources and skills to shape transnational processes in
their own class interest.

official story of 7/7 has been used to demonise and dehumanise the
Muslim community, in much the same way that the Jewish community was
demonised in 1930s Nazi Germany following a similarly questionable and
catalysing event, the Reichstag fire, and has proved to be the enabling
factor for the rapid and unchallenged institution of more Draconian
laws that impose unprecedented restrictions on the civil liberties of
everyone. It is worth remembering that the far-reaching scope of the
law, “anti-terrorist” or otherwise, is applicable not just to the
Muslim community but to each and every one of us and the State has no
qualms about using its laws against anyone and everyone from whom it
perceives a threat to what State actors refer to as, “our way of life”.

factors are testimony to just how seriously 7/7 requires honest,
principled and open-minded investigation to get to the facts and the
truth about what happened. Only the truth will stand up to rigorous
investigation and questioning yet, to date, this questioning and
investigation has fallen to ordinary members of the public who have
taken it upon themselves to do so, ordinary members of the public like
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign.

The July
7th Truth Campaign would be more than happy to participate in any
serious programme that honestly examines 7/7 in its correct historical
and political context, the government narrative, the lack of evidence
to support it, the nonsensical amendments that have been made to the
narrative, and the ever increasing list of unanswered questions that
engulf the events of 7/7.

However, we do
not feel that the Conspiracy Files is the vehicle that will facilitate
this, nor will it treat the event or issues arising from it with the
level of seriousness that they demand, and nor will it further the
cause of the July 7th Truth Campaign’s quest for the truth about what
happened on 7th July 2005. As such, the July 7th Truth Campaign has no
intention of participating in the proposed episode of the Conspiracy
Files and can only hope you will take on board the points we have
raised in this communication in consideration of your public service
duty to the people of Britain, a people that includes at least 56
families whom, through your continued refusal to honestly address the
events of 7/7, you have hitherto failed abysmally.

For truth and justice,

J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign

Well done J7

It is now seriously time for us to consider either the abolition of all or most of the BBC, or at the very least, putting it up for sale to operate and to stand or fall by its own merit in the commercial world.

HatTip CJB


About IanPJ

Ian Parker-Joseph, former Leader of the Libertarian Party UK, who currently heads PDPS Internet Hosting and the Personal Deed Poll Services company, has been an IT industry professional for over 20 years, providing Business Consulting, Programme and Project Management, specialising in the recovery of Projects that have failed in a process driven world. Ian’s experience is not limited to the UK, and he has successfully delivered projects in the Middle East, Africa, US, Russia, Poland, France and Germany. Working within different cultures, Ian has occupied high profile roles within multi-nationals such as Nortel and Cable & Wireless. These experiences have given Ian an excellent insight into world events, and the way that they can shape our own national future. His extensive overseas experiences have made him all too aware of how the UK interacts with its near neighbours, its place in the Commonwealth, and how our nation fits into the wider world. He is determined to rebuild many of the friendships and commercial relationships with other nations that have been sadly neglected over the years, and would like to see greater energy and food security in these countries, for the benefit of all. Ian is a vocal advocate of small government, individual freedom, low taxation and a minimum of regulation. Ian believes deeply and passionately in freedom and independence in all areas of life, and is now bringing his professional experiences to bear in the world of politics.
This entry was posted in Main Page. Bookmark the permalink.