View Full Version : 7/7 and the patterns of bomb damage

Paul Rigby
10-12-2010, 07:51 PM
This continues to puzzle me.

Aldgate victim Lee (Patrick) Baisden was, by seemingly universal agreement, positioned right next to the bomb; and was found, terribly injured, half-in and half-out of the hole blown in the train carriage floor:



15 I now turn to say something about each individual
16 deceased.
17 Lee [Patrick] Baisden, who worked, in fact, for the London
18 Fire & Emergency Planning Authority as a finance and
19 procurement officer, was probably standing very close to
20 the bomb. We can see his name at number 6, immediately
21 adjacent to the red cross.
22 The bomb blew a hole in the carriage floor and
23 Mr Baisden's body was seen by a number of witnesses to
24 be very near the crater that it left.
25 According to the pathologist, Dr Nicholas Hunt -- and I don't


1 intend to detail all the injuries -- he had flash and
2 deep burns over his entire face and neck and the lower
3 parts of both legs had been amputated.

Above link and quotes from here:


More on the unlucky Mr Baisden:


Mr Baisden had been working with the fire brigade for 18 months and on the morning of 7 July left for work an hour later than usual.


Lee Baisden, 34, an accountant for the London Fire Brigade, from Romford, Essex, was one of seven passengers to die in the blast that morning.

Records suggest he was standing very close to the bomb on the Circle Line train, Mr Keith said.

He added: "The bomb blew a hole in the carriage floor and Mr Baisden's body was seen by a number of witnesses to be near the crater that it left."

Now compare and contrast with the mess made of the alleged rucksack bomber not much further away, Tanweer, who is reportedly identified by spine found on the tracks. Would a matter of inches - OK, a couple of feet - really account for the discrepancy in the wounding patterns?

Paul Rigby
10-13-2010, 08:09 PM
The alleged disposition of passengers within the exploded carriages:


Two different versions of same in the Edgeware Road case. The first at the above link, the second below:


David Guyatt
10-14-2010, 10:54 AM
Curiouser and curiouser, said Alice...

Whenever I see two completely different explanation of the same event I'm inclined to think disinformation.

Off topic but a point in case being the British hostage recently killed in Afghanistan who was (firstly) killed by a suicide bomber and then we learn it was as a result of the US SpecForces rescue team tossing in a grenade to "clear" the room before entering -- and clear it they did. Please tough guys, if ever I'm taken hostage, leave me be, okay. That way I might make it home alive.

Paul Rigby
10-14-2010, 07:22 PM
Whenever I see two completely different explanations of the same...

...spooky term, it's invariably worth a second look:


Cleanskin (security)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Within the vernacular of counter-terrorism agents and police officers, a cleanskin is an undercover operative whose identity is not known to the forces he or she is tasked to infiltrate. This is usually because such an agent has not conducted any prior undercover activity.

The phrase entered wide currency with a slightly different meaning in the United Kingdom following the London bombings of 7 July 2005. The four bombers involved in those bombings were reported in the press to be "cleanskins", according to police sources, meaning that their profiles did not fit the expected profile of bombers.

Terrorist organizations, smugglers, and others performing secretive activities prefer to subvert cleanskins as there is less chance that they will arouse suspicion. For example, a person with previous convictions for importing drugs is more likely to be detained than a person never convicted.

The word cleanskin originally comes from Australia, and refers to an unbranded cattle, with the earliest references being around the 1860s. The word then evolved to mean a person against whom no conviction has been recorded, a person who was 'clean'.

So, as well as the never-before seen, possibly 'unique' explosives allegedly used on the day, 7/7 also managed to rewrite the language of the intelligence community, in the United Kingdom but nowhere else, if the wiki entry is in any way correct?

Before 7/7, a 'cleanskin' was an intelligence asset unknown to those they were tasked to infiltrate; after 7/7, a 'cleanskin' has no connection at all to the intelligence services, other than by virtue of being entirely unknown to them.

In changing the meaning of the term, MI5 avoided what it considered lying; but effectively revealed it was not telling the truth.