7/7 and the Government’s response

The events of July 7 th 2005 Known as the 7/7 bombings. A series of coordinated bomb blasts. They hit London's public transport system during the morning rush hour. At 8:50 a.m., three bombs exploded within fifty seconds of each other on three London Underground trains. A fourth bomb exploded on a bus nearly an hour later at 9:47 a.m. in Tavistock Square. The bombings killed 52 commuters and the four suicide bombers. 700 people were injured. The series of suicide-bomb explosions was the largest and deadliest terrorist attack on London in its history. Four bombs: Three on underground trains; One on bus Victims: 26 at Russell Square; 13 on bus at Tavistock Place; 7 at Aldgate; 6 at Edgware Road Suicide bombers: Hasib Hussain; Mohammad Sidique Khan; Germaine Lindsay; Shehzad Tanweer

The Government’s Response (a) Emergency services Emergency services responded rapidly, following well-rehearsed plans. Something like this had been expected Chaos in the city's transport system Mobile phone network closed down However, rescuers underground had problems communicating with those at street level Following the attacks, plans to have full mobile network coverage underground

The Government’s Response (b) Policing Police examined about 2,500 items of CCTV footage and forensic evidence from the scenes of the attacks. This enabled the four bombers to be identified and named. Arrests and raids: 11 properties in the north of England and 1 in London. One man was arrested. Undercover armed police teams were under orders to shoot to kill if a suggestion that a terror suspect was carrying a bomb and he refused to surrender if challenged.

The Government’s Response (c) Political Al Qaeda blamed. Government calls for a toughening of the Anti-Terror legislation. “The rules of the game are changing!” claimed the Prime Minister Tony Blair. Refusal to set up a Public Inquiry. Tony Blair “An independent inquiry would undermine support for the security service!” Many in Britain linked the attacks with the war in Iraq. The government denied this, saying Al-Qaeda had attacked before the war. But bomber Mohammad Sidique Khan – in his video message – blamed Western attacks on Muslim countries

New anti-terror bill 19th July Home Secretary Charles Clarke announced in Parliament the fast-tracking of a trimmed-down anti-terror bill, for which cross-party support had been secured, was to become law by the end of the year. The new law would make criminal 'acts preparatory to terrorism' (possibly to include the accessing of any websites offering knowledge of terror tactics and bomb- making information), seeking or providing terrorist training domestically or overseas, and 'indirect incitement to terrorism'. Extending the time limit for detaining terror suspects without trial from 14 to 90 days. Banning the "glorification" of terrorism. No right to Bail for those charged with terrorist offences.

Responses Opposition parties complained they had not been consulted. John Denham, Labour chairman of the Commons home affairs committee, said the plans were "half-baked". When the detailed law plans were published later, two proposals provoked particular opposition: extending the time limit for detaining terror suspects without trial from 14 to 90 days; and banning the "glorification" of terrorism. In November, MPs voted down the 90-day proposal in a dramatic defeat for the prime minister and voted instead for a 28-day limit. Other parts of the wide-ranging Terrorism Bill, including the glorification offence, were passed in 2006.

Responses Small demonstrations, most organised by campaigners opposed to the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and the broader War on Terror. The scenes of 7 July continue to haunt British politics and society "The last few days really give the sense that the government has got into a real state of nerves," he said. The GLA (Greater London Authority) conducted its own enquiry.

Key findings of the London Assembly report There were failures of communication between the emergency services, as well as within each organisation. Police, fire and ambulance staff all used different radio systems. Some staff could not communicate with each other or with their control rooms, and rescuers at ground level could not talk to their colleagues underground. The Fire Brigade, for example, had to use people running up and down escalators to get information. It was "unacceptable" that, 18 years after being recommended by the report into the 1987 King's Cross fire, there were still not digital communications which would have enabled communication below ground level. There was an over-reliance on mobile telephones, especially by the London Ambulance Service. Officials should have been aware the mobile network would become congested after a major incident. Radio systems also need to be used more effectively. In some instances, the ambulance service had one member of staff monitoring two channels.

Key findings of the London Assembly report There was a lack of planning to care for survivors or traumatised relatives and friends of those affected by the bombings. As many as 6,000 people were likely to have been severely psychologically affected, about half of them through direct experience. But the majority were still not known to the authorities or support networks. A casualty bureau for people who were worried about missing relatives or friends had been set up "too slowly". The ambulance service had a "lack of capacity" to bring equipment and medical supplies to a major incident at multiple sites. There was a lack of basic equipment, including stretchers and triage cards, and too few essential supplies such as fluids at the affected sites. Meeting points are identified on the tube network for the emergency services but not for survivors. The NHS only put hospitals with accident and emergency services on alert and - ignored specialist hospitals who may be closest to the scene. Great Ormond Street children's hospital, near the Russell Square site, was never alerted - although a field hospital was set up. There had been a "general failure" to maintain records of the emergency services' response to the bombings. There were "incredible acts of courage and resourcefulness" by the emergency services, Underground workers, health professionals, and members of the public. But emergency plans tend to cater for the needs of the emergency and other responding services, rather than explicitly addressing the needs and priorities of the people involved.

21 st of July Attempts to detonate 4 more suicide bombs on London’s Public Transport fail. The men escape the scenes.

22 nd July Jean Charles de Menezes (7 January 1978 – 22 July 2005) is shot in the head at least 3 times by plain clothed Police officers, after he had boarded an underground train at Stockwell Station.

Further developments The Forest Gate raid, Two Muslim brothers were arrested, one was shot. Later both released without charge. Calls for the resignation of the Head of the Metropolitan Police, Sir Ian Blair.

Source A The rules of the game are changing! - Prime Minister Tony Blair. Source B The Archbishop of York, Dr John Sentamu, yesterday compared the government of this country with Uganda, his country of birth, under Idi Amin, and described Britain as veering towards a police state. I would not put it so starkly, but he does have a point. It is little more than a year since Tony Blair tried to tell us that the right to lock people up without trial for 90 days was essential to our security. The claim came in the aftermath of a terrorist attack that left more than 50 dead. This same claim was again made last week - after frightening accounts of a plot to behead British citizens were splashed across the front pages. So it is timely to consider how much truth there was in those bald assertions last year. Are such draconian measures necessary? Indeed, are they effective at all, or could they have the opposite effect to that intended? - David Davis, writing in the Guardian. Tuesday February 6, 2007 Source C 7 July changed Britain and by definition British politics. The balance between security and liberty has altered and a debate about how far it should shift towards security and safety had taken hold in a way not seen after the 11 September 2001 US terror attacks. - Mr. Malik, a Labour member of the Commons home affairs select committee

Source D The bombings were the deadliest attack in London since a V2 rocket killed 131 people in Stepney on 27 March 1945, near the end of World War II. They were the deadliest post-World War II incident in the capital since the Great Smog of 1952 that killed 4,000 people.V2 rocketStepney27 March1945World War IIGreat Smog of 1952 The London Underground had been targeted by bombers before. In January 1885 a bomb exploded on a Metropolitan Line train at Gower Street (now Euston Square) station, and in February 1913 a crude bomb - probably the work of Suffragettes - was discovered at Westbourne Park station. Bombs planted by the Irish Republican Army (IRA) exploded at Tottenham Court Road and Leicester Square station on 3 February In August and December 1973 the Provisional Irish Republican Army (IRA) left several explosive devices in the tube network, and again in February and March On 4 March 1976, eight people were injured by a bomb in Cannon Street; 11 days later, nine people were injured by a premature explosion at West Ham tube station. Seconds after that incident, Julius Stephen, the driver of the train, was shot dead when he attempted to pursue the fleeing bomber. On the same day, a further device found at Oxford Circus station was defused, while on March 18 another bomb exploded on an empty train at Wood Green station as it was preparing to enter the reversing siding there.Metropolitan Line Euston SquareSuffragettesWestbourne ParkIrish Republican Army (IRA)Tottenham Court Road Leicester Square3 February1939Provisional Irish Republican Army (IRA)4 March1976Cannon StreetWest Ham tube stationOxford CircusMarch 18Wood Green

Answer these questions: 1.Look at all the sources. Do they agree with each other? 2.Source D has come from the Wikipedia website. How reliable is it? 3.“The changes to the Anti-Terror Laws would have taken place even if the 7/7 attacks had not occurred”. Do you agree?