The People's Inquiry into July 7th

"We need an official inquiry - now. Not a whitewash inquiry like Lord Hutton's. Or a punch-pulling inquiry like Lord Butler's. But an inquiry run by plain Mr or Mrs somebody."

Former Gov't Intel. Officer, Crispin Black
London 7/7 - The London Bombs: What went wrong?

7/7 Public Inquiry - A series of Public Insults

• Insult 1: The first public insult from the government came with the first refusal to hold a public inquiry - as refused by Tony Blair himself, just three days after the incidents.
• Insult 2: The second refusal of an independent public inquiry, and the offer of a mere 'narrative' to explain away 52 deaths and 700 injured, issued via former Home Secretary Charles Clarke on December 15th 2005
• Insult 3: The publication of the official Home Office 'narrative' which tells us no more than we already knew through careful and diligent reading and analysis of the many and varied reports that existed in the public domain.
• Insult 4: A strenuous third refusal of an Independent Public Inquiry by the new Home Secretary, John Reid, despite the calls from survivors and their families and various other sections of the community.

On May 11th 2006, the government finally told their July 7th story so far in a compilation of over ten months of police, intelligence and security agency reports, and it still fell foul of all the independent research and evidence gathered by J7 researchers.

With the many refusals of a public inquiry and the issuance of an official narrative that raises more questions than it answers, we think the government has made its position on the issue of a public inquiry into the events of July 7th perfectly clear, hence why we set-up the Independent People's Inquiry Forum .

If you think that perhaps, one day, Public Pressure will eventually force the government into conducting a much demanded Public Inquiry, the Inquiries Act 2005 gives the government ultimate power over the nature and scope of all inquiries. So, since the act came into force, there has been, and can be, no such thing as a truly Independent Public Inquiry, because they're all government 'inside jobs'.

The Inquiries Act 2005 was, in part, brought about in response to the call for a full and Independent Public Inquiry into the brutal murder of Pat Finucane. He was shot dead by two masked men on 12 February 1989 in front of his wife and his three children at their home in Belfast, Northern Ireland. He was shot 14 times, including at close range. In the aftermath of his killing, evidence emerged that police and military intelligence agents had colluded with Loyalist paramilitaries in his murder, as well as allegations of an official cover-up of such collusion.

Amnesty International has called for judges to boycott of all inquiries under the Inquiries Act 2005, specifically in support of Pat Finucane's widow and case, and has also demanded that the act be repealed. To date, the UK government has not been able to identify any judge willing to take on the inquiry under the flawed terms of the Inquiries Act.

The July 7th Truth Campaign supports the joint calls of Amnesty International, The Law Society of England and Wales, the Finucane Family Campaign and many other legal, human and civil rights organisations, in their opposition to any inquiry conducted under the Inquiries Act 2005.

The July 7th Truth Campaign calls on all judges to boycott any public inquiry held under the Inquiries Act 2005, and to boycott any inquiry into the events of July 7th 2005 held under the act, should one ever be granted.

In the interim, what option is left to those who seek the truth about what happened, except to conduct an Independent People's Inquiry, by the people, and for the people?

July 7th Inquiry in the context of the Global Media

In chapter 2 of his April 2006 book, '7/7 The London Bombings - Islam & The Iraq War', writer and activist Milan Rai used the following Chomsky/Herman quote to place media coverage of July 7th into a useable context:

"That the media provides some information about an issue... proves absolutely nothing about the adequacy or accuracy of media coverage. The media do in fact suppress a great deal of information, but even more important is the way they present a particular fact - it's placement, tone, and frequency of repetition - and the framework of analysis in which it is placed.

The enormous amount of material that is produced in the media and books makes it possible for a really assiduous and committed researcher to gain a fair picture of the real world by cutting through the mass of misrepresentation and fraud to the nuggets hidden within.

That a careful reader, looking for a fact, can sometimes find it, with diligence and a skeptical eye, tells us nothing about whether that fact received the attention and context it deserved, whether it was intelligible to most readers or whether it was effectively distorted or suppressed."

Edward Herman & Noam Chomsky,
Propaganda Mill: The Media Churn out 'The Official Line'

In summary, adds Rai:

"Careful reading is needed to overcome what Chomsky and Herman have called 'brainwashing under freedom".

Many concerned individuals have been reading carefully, finding facts and gaining the more complete picture of the real world to which Herman and Chomsky refer, and of events on July 7th.

By doing so, we are cutting through the mass of misrepresentation and fraud, to find the nuggets hidden within and to give these nuggets of information the context and attention they deserve.

If you feel moved to join together with us in this quest for the truth about the events of July 7th, the campaign calling on the government to RELEASE THE EVIDENCE to support the Official Home Office narrative, please join the July 7th People's Inquiry Forum.