Since we posted our original article about the exercises being conducted on the London Underground which targeted the exact same spots as the bombings that happened on the morning of Thursday 7th July, a firestorm of interest on the subject has swept the internet.

Important questions need to be asked of both Peter Power and Visor Consultants, the agency who were running the drill.

In both the ITN TV interview and the BBC radio interview Peter Power makes it clear that the team of crisis managers who were overseeing the drill quickly switched from exercise planning to real time management of the actual bombing itself.

"We had to suddenly switch an exercise from fictional to real," stated Power in his TV interview.

The company that Visor were running the exercise for is not named by Power. If Visor switched to real time management of the bombings, who else could the company be but London Underground or one of their affiliates?

If this were a strategy session for a completely unaffiliated company to London Underground, the meeting would have been cancelled and the participants would have gone home as soon as they were aware of the fact that a real attack was taking place.

Only if the exercise was being conducted for London Underground or a group responsible for part of a command structure in the aftermath of the attack would 'real time crisis management' of the event take place.

So why does Power make mention of the company being close to a property occupied by Jewish businessmen? He then makes reference to American banks. If the exercise was being coordinated on behalf of a bank then why was there a need for Visor Consultants to actively 'manage' the bombings after they had taken place and what were they managing precisely?

Visor Consultants is a PR firm. Were they responsible for telling the media that the bombings were in fact a simple power surge for over an hour? An explanation that was obviously ridiculous but gave the government time to manage the release of information about the attack.

Power has been hired by the government before and he is always used to release information after terrorist incidents in London.

Two previous examples of this are the March 2001 BBC television center bombing and the September 2000 rocket attack on the MI6 building.

Was Powers again used by the government as a conduit for information that would support their official version of events?

Today we are told that the bombers were all killed in the act of carrying out the bombing. Just like the Madrid bombers blew themselves up during a raid (pictured below).

How very convenient that all of the suspected patsies should have been blownarticles/july/ up in their own attacks even though the last word was that the attacks were not suicide bombings, but synchronized, timed bombings. This is pure media-manipulation sleight of hand. Its designed to distract from the revelation that exercises that precisely mirrored the bombings were happening in the Tube as the bombs were going off around London. Its the same trick used in Madrid - first the government tried to blame ETA and when that wouldn't stick, it turned to the old standby of Islamic Extremists. When investigators tracked the patsies to an apartment in Leganés, the so-called terrorists supposedly blew themselves up in the stand-off. Suspects dead, case closed the government said. They are trying to play the same tired hand in London.

The BBC is reporting that only one of the bombers definitely blew himself up. Which is it? All four bombers or just one? There is an attempt to muddy the waters so people will switch off and just buy whatever the government tells them, even though the government story keeps contradicting itself.

The London Times reported,

"The bombers who killed 191 people in Madrid last year also gathered at one place before separating to plant devices timed to explode simultaneously."

How could the Madrid bombers have carried out an attack from the grave? Here is the report saying they blew themselves up. How could they have bombed London if they were already dead? When another city gets bombed and they get blamed again will anyone point out that the same bombers have now been killed twice over?

The Times report is a blatant psy-op to keep the 'Al-Qaeda' drumbeat echoing in people's heads. Even though the so-called claim of responsibility is a proven hoax.

Furthermore, the New Zealand Herald reported that two Reuters employees witnessed the unconfirmed shooting by police of two apparent suicide bombers outside the HSBC tower at Canary Wharf in London. This took place at 10:30am, after the so-called suicide bombers had blown themselves up.

So let me get this straight, they blew themselves up after the Madrid bombing, they blew themselves up during the London bombing and then they were shot by police after the London bombing. So they've been killed three times over? Does that make sense to you?

Add to this that the CCTV camera on the number 30 bus was conveniently not working and we have the makings of an information lock down. They can tell us whatever they want but without any evidence to back it up why should we believe them when they've been caught lying about terrorism and creating fake terror alerts dozens of times before?

Related: London Underground Bombing 'Exercises' Took Place at Same Time as Real Attack

Related: London Bombing Archive