Tue30Jun - LONDON - Kollerstrom BBC talk meet Conway Hall

kbo234 · Posted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 6:51 am Post subject:

[quote="Dogsmilk]........you keep banging on about what a mighty truth warrior you are after all.

[/quote]

No I don't, nor have I ever. I just say what I think.

Dogsmilk · Mighty Poster Joined: 06 Oct 2006 Posts: 1616

astro3 · Posted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 9:33 am Post subject:

The Conway Hall room bookings lady apologised to me for the cancellation, and explained that although they believed in freedom of speech, the sheer volume of threatening phone calls they had received meant they could no go ahead with it. They only have two elderly curators she explained, and so they could not cope with a meeting where persons were threatening to disrupt it.

I will comment later on about Prole's allegations of plagiarism, above: I may here just say that in the early days I reckon I was the second most prolific contributor to the J7 site, after Beverley. I gave them their Timeline, I did the section on Train Times (to which Ant has added an intro) and the CCTV section. I have the original texts which I submitted. Also, I submitted two extensive essays on MSK and on Edgware road, which although they did not as such use, they had in front of them when the were composing their sections. And I reckon they actually used more or less all the material in them. I'm not complaining about this at all. We were sharing the stuff, we drew from a common pool. but now Prole is trying to make out I have come along and just 'taken' stuff from them. I hoped that I had put in proper acknowledgements when I quoted either text from the site or one of the J7 members writing on other sites. She has submitted a list to my publisher, where she felt proper acknowledgement had not been given, and I have carefully made the required adjustments. I'm sorry that she wants to make these extravagent claims (as she has likewise attacked the work of Daniel Obachike, Muad'Dib and Tony Gosling).

Prole · Posted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 9:36 am Post subject:

astro3 · Posted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 9:36 am Post subject:

The Conway Hall room bookings lady apologised to me for the cancellation, and explained that although they believed in freedom of speech, the sheer volume of threatening phone calls they had received meant they could no go ahead with it. They only have two elderly curators she explained, and so they could not cope with a meeting where persons were threatening to disrupt it.

I will comment later on about Prole's allegations of plagiarism, above: I may here just say that in the early days I reckon I was the second most prolific contributor to the J7 site, after Beverley. I gave them their Timeline, I did the section on Train Times (to which Ant has added an intro) and the CCTV section. I have the original texts which I submitted. Also, I submitted two extensive essays on MSK and on Edgware road, which although they did not as such use, they had in front of them when the were composing their sections. And I reckon they actually used more or less all the material in them. I'm not complaining about this at all. We were sharing the stuff, we drew from a common pool. but now Prole is trying to make out I have come along and just 'taken' stuff from them. I hoped that I had put in proper acknowledgements when I quoted either text from the site or one of the J7 members writing on other sites. She has submitted a list to my publisher, where she felt proper acknowledgement had not been given, and I have carefully made the required adjustments. I'm sorry that she wants to make these extravagent claims (as she has likewise attacked the work of Daniel Obachike, Muad'Dib and Tony Gosling).

Prole · Posted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 10:14 am Post subject:

Chi_of_life · Validated Poster Joined: 23 Apr 2007 Posts: 106

TonyGosling · Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 10:14 am Post subject:

It seems a great pity that people have to pre-judge Nick and Daniel in their stupendous effort to get this meeting off the ground in London, of all places, the Belly of the Beast.

Any decent or honourable 7/7 Truth campaigner would see this as a great opportunity to clear up their doubts and save their criticisms for the event itself. Otherwise they, like ol' Johnny Void, will be seen as trying to dominate rather than play their part in getting to the truth about what eally happened on 7/7.

I know its a long shot but can we keep the bitterness and emotion out of our doubts about other campaigners and work with each other rather than against?

If, ultimately, after one group or individual decides not to work with another ... those that attack other groups ... making public statements that y or z is a liar or lunatic will stand out as a probable wrecker for all to see. Because they are putting their own pride before the success of the wider movement.

One thing's for sure, with all these wrecking tactics around at least some of us must be touching a nerve.

Please don't distract from the main mission which is exposing the BS in the 7/7 official 'Narrative', getting an independent inquiry and getting the real 7/7 perpetrators behind bars.

Stefan · Banned Joined: 29 Aug 2006 Posts: 1219

I for one am not prejudging Nick or Daniel, living in London I have had plenty of first hand experience of both from which to draw my conclusions.

Who is being a "wrecker"????

The person who takes every opportunity to associate questioning 7/7 with holocaust denial?

The person accusing every activist under the sun of being an agent?

No, to Tony Gosling, the "wreckers" are those who actually stand up to those people.

Anyone questioning ANY questionable charecter - Kevin Barratt, Nick Kollerstrom, Daniel Obachike gets reprimanded by Gosling.

Is this guy the worst judge of charecter ever born, or does he really think self-contradictory "eye witnesses", holocaust denying 7/7 "researchers" and no-planes promoters are our best hope at getting to 9/11 or 7/7 truth??????

Chi_of_life · Validated Poster Joined: 23 Apr 2007 Posts: 106

Stefan · Banned Joined: 29 Aug 2006 Posts: 1219

Prole · Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 11:07 am Post subject:

TonyGosling · Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 11:08 am Post subject:

Gross exaggeration does the 7/7 truth cause no credit whatsoever.

Chi_of_life · Validated Poster Joined: 23 Apr 2007 Posts: 106

Stefan's maniacal fervour on forums and my blog suggests We Are Change UK's days are numbered.

Prole · Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 11:35 am Post subject:

Prole · Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 12:33 pm Post subject:

Tony I've just read through the controversy thread and given that the subject of Daniel's talk is MOD & WAC in all faireness and in the spirit of truth & justice, you should put them back on this thread.

The removed posts are here (for anyone including me who had no idea this had happened):

http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=17593

Stefan · Banned Joined: 29 Aug 2006 Posts: 1219

Prole · Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 1:07 pm Post subject:

Stefan · Banned Joined: 29 Aug 2006 Posts: 1219

Now I'm not "Validated" anymore. You're such a child Tony...

Prole · Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 1:44 pm Post subject:

TonyGosling · Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 11:42 pm Post subject:

If you don't like it just don't go.

Anyway, how did this go btw?

kbo234 · Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 11:45 pm Post subject:

Any news from tonight's meeting? Anything meaningful happen?

Stefan · Banned Joined: 29 Aug 2006 Posts: 1219

It was farcical.

Everyone having paid £5 he led us around Holborn for a while, getting lost once before stopping at a closed down Thai restaurant which Daniel told the "crowd" (12-15 people including 4 of us by my count) the security services must have had shut down to stop his vital info getting out there. Locals said it had been closed for at least a week though.

Then he proceeded to take us to a loud bar on Kingsway which the manager told us was free to reserve an area in. So essentially he charged everyone a £5 (and no doubt had a refund from Conway Hall as well) to sit in a pub.

Despite this, he seemed to think he owned the place. His hired security man at one point tried to stop me going outside for a cigarette, asking Daniel if I had his permission to walk around freely in a pub. He continually walked up to me and anyone unfortunate enough to be chatting to me and put his camera in their face and took pictures of them, no doubt to put on his website and claim they are MOD too.

He refused to let anyone film the talk, which essentially consisted of him holding black and white photos taken off facebook of various members of We Are Change London and simply stating they were "MOD" and "selected" to destroy the "7/7 Truth movement".

He didn't demonstrate how he knew this, show any evidence for it, or explain exactly how the group is doing any damage. Any time anyone tried to make a counter point he just spoke over them. His facts were all over the place.

His main claim to demonstrate that We Are Change London are MOD is that we don't do any activism based around 7/7. Of course we have given out thousand upon thousand of DVDs with Ludicous Diversion and other films on, dedicated an entire episode of our radio show to the topic, have interviews with Nafeez Ahmed on the subject on our website, have confronted Peter Power and rung the terror hotline to report Peter Power to them so many times they started hanging up when they recognised Gareth's voice. By contrast Daniel's efforts for 7/7 truth is to approach people at protests and try and sell them his book for a fiver.

And what if we didn't focus on 7/7 at all? Would that qualify as evidence of being MOD? Only in the strange mind of Daniel Obachike...

I think what he means when he says we don't do "7/7 activism" is we don't promote his book. Which is all he ever does.

The reason for that is it is just wierd. It has more than one version of events in it, and the general story of both his journey and events afterwards make no sense whatsoever. The review of the book on the J7 Truth Campaign website, which we link to on our site and promote whenever we can, explains pretty clearly why he should not be taken seriously. He gave a pretty compelling argument for that himself last night.

IanFantom · Posted: Wed Jul 01, 2009 10:46 am Post subject:

I've met this style of argument in my own research on a different topic, in a membership association, when the committee was trying to take over and control my work, and suppress information they didn't want the members to know about:

Stefan · Banned Joined: 29 Aug 2006 Posts: 1219

TonyGosling · Posted: Wed Jul 01, 2009 11:07 am Post subject:

There's nothing to stop you filming Daniel in the street Stefan, it's a public place.

Have you ever thought that your belligerent and sometimes abusive approach might encourage people to believe you are putting your own personal issues above the common cause of getting to the truth about 7/7?

Can't you just let Daniel the eyewitness express himself in his own way and allow onlookers to decide for themselves based on his evidence? Remember, he may have been, and may be, under much more pressure than you.

Don't blame Daniel, blame whoever has stopped the 7/7 public enquiry where Daniel would have his day in the witness box.

Stefan · Banned Joined: 29 Aug 2006 Posts: 1219

TonyGosling · Posted: Wed Jul 01, 2009 11:32 am Post subject:

I'm not backing either horse.

IanFantom · Posted: Wed Jul 01, 2009 11:48 am Post subject:

In responsed to Tony's question:

Prole · Posted: Wed Jul 01, 2009 12:30 pm Post subject:

	9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> The Accelerationists' Armageddon Project For WWIII, Economic Crash, Starvation & Deadly Pathogens Rampant	All times are GMT Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
Page 3 of 5