July 7th Alternative Hypotheses
What else might have happened?
Introduction
The original version of this article was first written in early 2006, with the headings of each hypothesis adapted from an even earlier incarnation. Almost immediately after the terrible event itself, rumours and accusations began to appear on the internet, inevitable comparisons were made with previous attacks such as 9/11 and the Madrid train bombs and hypotheses relating to these previous events were applied, along with others which related specifically to events of July 7th 2005. In the absence of any serious questioning from mainstream sources, the intention of this article was simply to list the various potential alternative scenarios as a record of what had been proposed and why.
The scant quantity (and quality) of information sources available at the time is reflected in the original article and nearly four years after the bombings in London of July 7th 2005, much of the information contained in the original article is out of date, no longer as relevant, or has been clarified or expounded upon to raise different questions.
Over the last couple of years, more information has been drip-fed to the public regarding background events to July 7th – such as the knowledge of the suspects which the security services possessed, other individuals implicated in the media and peripheral individuals and events. It is for this reason that the article has been updated to include all relevant information that was later made available; the headings of each hypothesis remain the same but the analyses have now been substantially rewritten and extended so that each hypothesis is evaluated, and the merits and flaws of each one discussed.
The writing of this article occurred as the trial of the three men accused of conspiring with the deceased July 7th suspects ended with the jury failing to reach a verdict. The defendants were later retried and found not guilty of the charge that they had conspired with the alleged London bombers.
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign have often been referred to as 'Conspiracy Theorists' and the original intent behind this article was to demonstrate exactly how many suggested 'conspiracy' scenarios could have occurred to have engendered the horrific event that was the London bombings. Most of these hypotheses, if not all, do not even qualify for 'theory' status since they remain untested, unproven and with an unsatisfactory quantity of data to validate them – including what is commonly referred to as the 'official conspiracy theory', since not only is there still a paucity of evidence to prove it beyond reasonable doubt, but it is also contradicted by other 'official' information.
J7 has never promulgated any of these hypotheses above any other since the purpose to our campaign is to try and establish the facts, something we will continue to campaign for until this end is achieved and the full truth about what happened on 7th July 2005 is known.
Almost three years after this article was first written it is shameful and saddening to note that we are still no closer to a coherent, cohesive and factual account regarding how 56 people came to lose their lives in London on July 7th 2005.
Here we discuss a short sample of possible alternative hypotheses to the official conspiracy theory about how 7/7 came to be. It is by no means a complete or comprehensive list, merely a few possible alternatives for consideration. There are, of course, many other possibilities.
Note: All comments on the J7 Alternative Hypotheses articles will be added to a single comment thread. When commenting, please specify the hypothesis to which you are referring.
Alternative Hypotheses Navigation
1. al-Qa'ida mastermind recruited British Muslims as suicide bombers
2. al-Qa'ida mastermind recruited British Muslims, but duped them in so far as the latter did not know they were going to die in the explosions.
3. Homegrown and autonomous action by four British Muslims with no mastermind.
4. Any of the above plots could have been monitored by one or more secret 'service' (MI5, MI6, CIA, Mossad, GIA) but they let it happen on purpose in order to exploit the subsequent situation.
5. The men thought they were going to strike a blow for Palestine, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc and go to Heaven as 'martyrs' because they had been groomed and encouraged and equipped by an al-Qa'ida mastermind who was actually working for one of the State agencies or a rogue network straddling one or more of them with their own agenda.
6. The four men thought they were going to be delivering drugs or money to various locations round London, but were deceived, set up and murdered along with the others on their tubes and bus when their back packs exploded.
7. As above but the men thought they were carrying dummy 'bombs' because they were participating in an exercise testing London transport's defences against backpack bombers.
8. The four men were chosen or lured in to be patsies in a classic 'false flag operation' or frame-up by a network involved with one or more of the intelligence services.
9. The original story of a 'power surge' was correct, if one understands the term 'power surge' outside of its implied electrical context.
