Muhammed Khan -- London bomber?

[Don1]

There is an interesting coincidence afoot here on some DU pages that have gone little noticed. The name Muhammed Khan appears in news releases as one of the 4 suspects in the London bombing. At the same time, the name Muhammed Khan appears in the Conservative Idiots posting, too. Apparently, someone named Muhammed Khan was outed by the Bush Administration as a double agent, undercover in Al Qaeda a couple of years ago. More info here:
http://www.juancole.com/2004_08_01_juancole_archive.html#109185597245383648

Now, it also appears that the British government was doing a security training exercise at the same time on the trains:
http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/july2005/090705bombingexercises.htm

And as many of us have heard Tony Blair rejected the need for an inquiry into the bombings:
http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=770052005

And mayor Giuliani was also having dinner 100 feet away from a train that exploded.
http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=6990

While I am sure that conspiracy theory buffs are all claiming that the London bombings were the result of some malevolent government, I would like to offer a more rational hypothesis. This hypothesis will try to make consistent all of these data while at the same time, remain less wildly offensive against the government.

Let's suppose that Giuliani was working on the training exercises (and crisis management). This would make sense given
(1) his 9/11 experiences; and
(2) the fact that he and his former chief of police have been in the security business for quite a few years. Recall that his former chief of police was in charge of security guards for Saudi royalty. And recall that he was in charge of training Iraqi security forces.

Now, let's assume that there was a mole in the training exercise forces, a double agent. It would have to be someone that the government would trust...someone that worked for them before, perhaps. Muhammed Khan maybe? Muhammed Khan (or the other man by the same name) did in fact work for the British and the US outed him because they thought he was Al Qaeda (and not a double agent). BUT perhaps, the US was correct. Perhaps he was Al Qaeda and was a double agent the other way around, claiming to be in service of British intel?

Now the only thing left to explain is why Blair would reject an inquiry. It could be because he does not want to embarass Giuliani and the US. Or it could be that Blair and the British government were responsible for contracting out the security/crisis management company in the first place. This would then make them accountable partially for the events that unfolded.

Seem reasonable?

[allemand]

1. Not the same Mohammad Khan.

There are millions of Khans in Pakistan, India and Britain, and quite a few Mohammads too...

;-)

[theboss]

2. This strikes me as seeing two John Smiths

It's a pretty common name.