Daniel Obachike's blog - Tavistock Square survivor

[Whitehall_Bin_Men]

The Angels And Agents Of Tavistock Square
http://www.the4thbomb.com/

That morning many good human values immediately came to the fore, amidst evil in one of its purest forms.
I’d hurriedly left the death strewn by the blast in my wake but was befuddled by what I saw ahead of me.
I stopped, turned round and was even more dumbfounded by what I saw.
Strangely I found myself drawn back to the scene of the crime and meandering between the angels and agents in Tavistock Square headed back towards the bus.

The angels I refer to were the healthcare professionals and staff that were quickly on hand in such shocking circumstances, trying to do whatever they could despite initially being aghast at the dead pieces of human flesh and bodies littering the square.
The agents on the other hand were conspicuous by the way they diligently adhered to their assigned tasks, proceeding busily, workman like almost as if they’d already displayed their grief and horror prior to the explosion.
Apart from the obvious foot soldiers, (the blokes in blue) there were one or two more covert ones that stuck in my mind for differing reasons.
Their cover was blown, not because of what they did, but because of what they didn’t do.
Faced with such an unprecedented and horrendous event most reactions would come down to fight or flight.
After my own flight and initial rage at all things and persons Transport For London (Bus drivers in particular), I turned to comfort a shocked victim showered with blood who had been walking alongside the bus at the time of the explosion. Those few who did neither were notable.
They stood back, observing the events and activities in its entirety, positioned in the same spot.

The man with the hat was one such individual but his case is particularly intriguing when compared to the plain intelligence officers and foot soldiers I referred to.
I was going to make a point of highlighting him in my forthcoming novel: The 4th Bomb, but editorial considerations meant his 15 minutes is surplus to requirement.
My editor felt that whilst interesting the section on him ‘acted as a diversion’ to the storyline.
The irony is, a part of me thinks that is what he was doing there that morning.

I present compelling evidence that the smartly dressed man in grey was fully aware of what was about to take place and was prepared to be part of the aftermath but got caught out because the bus blew up just a couple of meters into Tavistock Square while he was positioned 60 meters away further down from the blast.
Images show the main force of the blast went backwards and one victim, a woman died because she crossed the road from the square behind the bus at the time of the explosion.
So how can anyone 60 meters ahead of the bus to be hurled aside or sustain any kind of physical injuries.
I knew his injuries were improvised, immediately putting 2 and 2 together when I saw his hat lying on the ground next to him.
He wore a large bandage around his head and had a tear along one trouser leg that went neatly along the seam.
The bandage 60 seconds after the blast.
This was way too fast, long before any medical assistance had arrived.

The blood on my own shirt is derived from a woman who was showered with the victim’s blood.
She had been walking beside the bus at the time.
The grey suited man had no blood on him at whatsoever indicating he was far from the bus.
Even the African traffic warden on the opposite side of the road who the driver called out to said he had a piece of human flesh on his arm.
We may never know his true purpose that day.
But what it does do is single him out as someone who had prior knowledge.
Who knew in advance? Only the perpetrators?

[alkmyst]

Where's Rachel?

Well, Rachel has already left her calling card on Daniel Obechike's blog; so we know she is well aware of Daniel's impending book release; the publication of which will be timed to co-incide with Rachel's own eye-witness account.

Rachel's book will undoubtedly wax lyrical about her pre-7/7 victim status, how she was co-incidentally reading an account of her earlier life trauma at the exact same time as the explosion on her train at Kings Cross. Rachel will harp on about her cut wrist, sustained as a result of being 7 yards (initial account) or 7 feet (later, more dramatic account) from the alleged perpetrator, Germaine Lindsay.

Much of Rachel's missive will revolve around her role as the 'leader' of Kings Cross United, the survivors group of which she is the self-appointed spokesperson. She will not be able to restrain herself from devoting a chapter or two to the demonisation of the 9/11 & 7/7 Truth Campaign. Re-quoting her oft repeated, yet unsubstantiated, allegations of persecution and even death threats.

Rachel will also make great play of her participation in the London Assembly 7th July Review Committee, which was established, "... to examine the lessons to be learned from the response to the London bombings on 7 July, and in particular communications issues ..."
One could be forgiven for assuming that the UK's undisputed expert on Crisis Management (the same guy who just happened to be running an exercise on 7/7, an exercise based upon bombs going off at exactly the same three railway stations where they actually exploded), would be called to offer his counsel to the Review Committee. So why wasn't Peter Power of Visor Consultants invited to appear?

Daniel Obechike has at least acknowledged that he has written his account of 7/7 as a novel, Rachel's selective memoirs will most likely be written in a similar vein to Milan Rai's pathetic attempt to prepare the ground for the release of the Government Narrative. Rachel's book will be a blatant attempt to bolster the credence of the official version of events ... just about the time that the jury are reaching their verdict on the 21/7 dupes!

One key point to consider is the time of the train that the alleged perpetrators supposedly boarded at Luton on the morning of July 7th:

1). Panorama & Milan Rai allege that they caught the 7:48am
2). The Government Narrative alleges they caught the 7:40am*
3). Rachel North will allege they caught the 7.24am

* As a result of the efforts of the July 7th Truth Campaign, John Reid subsequently announced that this was an error!

As has been proven since 16th August 2005, the 7.48am did not arrive at Kings Cross until eight minutes after the Kings Cross departure of the underground train which exploded at Edgware Road!

As has been proven since 16th August 2005, the 7.40am was [/b]cancelled! [/b]

The 7.24am had never been mentioned by the media, the Police or the any Government spokesman until after John Reid's statement that the narrative contained an error. The reality is that there is not a single witness statement from either station staff nor commuters, nor any released CCTV images, which support the belated claim that the alleged perpetrators were on the earlier train.

Doesn't it strike you as odd that the events of July 7th were apparently a 100% success, yet the CCTV wasn't functioning anywhere! Compare that with the current media bombardment of CCTV images from July 21st, an event that was supposedly a 100% failure. Why do you suppose that is?

Daniel Obechike's account of his July 7th experience may prove to be highly significant in the unravelling of the official story ... unless he has some skeletons in the closet, in which case they will be trotted out tout de suite to undermine his credibility.

Rachel's publishers are probably anticipating an intial print run of 100,000+; Daniel Obechike's book 'The 4th Bomb' should more than double that!

Al K Myst

[ian neal]

Thanks Alkmyst

I agree the flip-flopping over which train the alleged bombers caught is fundamental to exposing the changing nature of the mainstream media/official narrative.

The narrative makes reference to several unnamed witnesses who positively identify and describe the alleged bombers behaviour.

[Pikey]

http://infowars.net/articles/january2007/290107Exclusive.htm

What line of business is the Company "Kingstar" into re: the white van
in front of the bus in the picture with the pentagram as its company logo?

Is it true that its controlled demolition?

[jason67]

This looks like the same company. The 'a' in Kingstar is small and the 'k' looks the same as well. Saying that they do loads of other general building work and I'm not sure that they would be advertising their presence at the scene of the crime....

http://www.kingstar.co.uk/demoli.htm

[flamesong]

He will be interviewed by Alex Jones today:

http://www.nfowars.net:443/stream1.pls

[johnw04]

I keep an open mind with this interview.

If the information he gave in the interview with Alex is the truth, it is ground breaking. The only reservations I have are that (1) he did appear to be reading a lot of the time, and (2) the symbol/icon for his website is a triangle with his eye in the centre (the all seeing eye).

(1) If I had a similar experience I would certainly write out my account, to logically deal with the situation so that my emotions do not compound the trauma, to avoid PTSD.
Also, if I had a chance to expose my information to the world on radio, and this may well be my only chance to do so. I would definitely make sure I wrote cue cards of my experience so I didn't skip over any relevant and key information.

(2) He may well be very familiar with the whole new world order game. He could be using the secret language of the illuminati i.e. cap stone of the pyramid with the all seeing eye in it to express this.
Or, he maybe a disinformer and using this symbolism to communicate with others. To people unfamiliar with the symbolism it would not register at all.

I myself sway toward believing him, (about 75% - 25% ) , I think that the symbolism is widely known about today. Nevertheless, I like to keep an open mind and look forward to his book and future revelation he talked about in the interview.

Be True-to-soul.
Sinnerwithsoul.

[Bushwacker]

I am very dubious about his account. A bomb goes off on the bus he is travelling on blowing it apart, he gets out, presumably in a state of extreme shock, but he knows exactly where other witnesses were standing? The bus driver says the mass of people in road in Euston Road meant that he was hardly moving, and the police directed all traffic into Tavistock Square, but he has a story about two cars arriving and directing the bus alone into the square? Now he is writing a novel based on his experience. I have no idea what he is up to, but I certainly do not accept his story at face value.

[marky 54]

[rodin]

If this Obachike geezer is kosher the drinks are on me (and I am an archetypal Scotsman)

[Rachel]

As you have absolutely NO IDEA about the contents, print run, or timing of my book, 'Al K Myst', I'd appreciate it if you prefaced your ill-informed and factually incorrect witterings with something along the lines of...

''I have no idea about what the contents of Rachel's book will be but in my personal opinion, based on not having seen anything of the book, it might include...''

before launching into yet another spiteful and pointless personal attack on me.


Thanks.

[Pikey]

Rachel North, the 'leader' of Kings Cross United, the survivors group of which she is the self-appointed spokesperson, states:-

[Linda]

Enough said Pikey.

Not worth the hassle.

[Rachel]

Sorry to disappoint you boys, but I have no desire to hang about with you chumps on this oddball site.

I have been here once before, yes indeedy, and I contributed on a thread devoted entirely to speculation about who I am, and what I believe, to let you know ...erm.. wait for it...who I am and what I believe. .

I thought evidence instead of speculation as to who I am and what I believe might be what 'truthseekers' actually sought.

You know, as that was what you were actually fervently discussing.

Alas, no. It was the thrills of more internet BB speculation you wanted, not a reality check. Rachel is a team of M15 agents! A lizard! A shill! A spook! A terrorist! A hologram! A hacker! Boo, hiss, Rachel, don't actually turn up here and present evidence of you actually being real. Noooooooooooo!

I soon realised that I'd rather spoiled your fun, you know, the person you were speculating about actually bothering to turn up and set you straight, as you much prefer speculation to facts, but there you go. It was too fascinating by then to resist.

A bunch of complete strangers talking about you, for pages and pages, speculating that you are a team of rogue agents! And then when you turn up, they will do backflips rather than drop their exciting little theory! I mean guys, come on. What would you do? Anyone would be amused and amazed in equal measure. It was, and still is, one of the funniest and oddest experiences I have ever had, being the subject of that bonkers thread.

You managed to successfully ignore all the evidence that you had a real live person talking to you ( not, sadly, a team of M15 lizards) for over, I think, 30 pages. Quite a feat! I guess that's the power of group-think, y'know, when you have your 'paradigm shift' and you Want To Believe.


You seemed to wake up and realise eventually that you ( as a group) didn't come across too well, and the ignorant pack-bullying mentality seen on the thread eventually embarassed you so much that the thread was locked. But not before the thread had become famous in the annals of the internet as a classic of its genre. Conspiraloon-tastic!


Own goal for the 9/11-ers, but never mind chaps.

And I have not bothered to return and engage since, as even the funniest comedy material becomes wearisome after it repeats ad nauseaum. And that's all this site ever does. Loop, loop, fruitloop loop. Same old same old fact-free, evidence-free speculations based on imaginings and unprovable, unproven hypotheses. *Yawn*

Perhaps if I ever write a comic novel, rather than a book on PTSD, I'll remember some of the characters here, as material inspiration. Because you really couldn't make some of you up. Even with the imaginations some of you clearly rejoice in possessing.

But get involved with the 9/11 Truthers? No. I have a life, sorry. it's just so du-u-u-u-u-u-ll.

However, as I said, I do however object to someone pretending they have read my book when they have no idea of

a) its publication date
b) its print run
c) its content
d) Or anything else about it, except possibly the title, which is still TTBC and the price, which is TBC



Therefore I popped in just one more time - to point out that the poster here was speculating about something he knows knows nothing about - and was in fact merely projecting his own imaginings and then reporting them as if they were fact.


Par for the course round here, I know, but since I am the author of the book, and therefore know 100% what is in it, I simply ask 'Al K Myst' to preface his ( incorrect) guesses about something he knows nothing about with the disclaimer that he admits he knows nothing about the book at all and therefore his post is merely ill-informed guesswork.

The only people who have seen the book are me, my publishers and my agent. None of whom are 9/11 'truth hunters'


Do carry on speculating about 9/11 and indulging your morbid little hobby if you must, but please leave my book out of it, as you have no idea what you are talking about. And in fact, almost all that you have guessed, is wrong!



Toodle pip lads, and watch out for the alien reptile overlords! And don't forget the tin foil hats.

Remember, just because you're paranoid it doesn't mean that there isn;t a vast conspiracy of specially -trained agents with nothing better to do than obsessively monitor the internet for fruitbattery.

*mwah* Stay alive and be very very careful. Because you never know, do you? And you never, ever will.

What a hassle that must be. I wonder your minds don't give way entirely.
Tee hee.

xxx

[Linda]

Byeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Rachel, and take your book with you.

[Bushwacker]

Exactly, Rachel, truth is the last thing these ironically named truth-seekers want, it is way too dull, they need exciting theories to give them the thrill of pretending to know something the "sheeple" don't!

[paul wright]

Nice to see you back Rachel. I still support your demand for an independant enquiry with all the evidence submitted.
I'd picked up that you want to exclude evidence that the official story was wrong and even impossible in many of it's parts, and that severely wrong information was repeated in the narrative
It would be good to have a debate without name-calling on the many issues still extant

[numeral]

[numeral]

Hi Rachel

Nice to see you back on this forum. Ignore the love bombs - they are just trying to get you to join the community.

Did you ever hear from John Reid about the 7.40 train mistake? He said he would let you know.

[Rachel]

[scar]

[ian neal]

For the information of all posters.

There was a very positive and constructive meeting in Bristol this weekend to discuss the moderation and future design of this forum as well as the development of the campaign website www.911truthcampaign.net . More on these wider discussions and decisions to follow in due course.

At this meeting it was agreed that there would be renewed resolve amongst the moderators to stamp down on abusive posting. One of the key examples of abusive posting is when evidence-free accusations and speculation are made that a poster is a shill. In other words that someone is not being honest and is in some way not what they claim to be.

If anyone has evidence that they wish to present that is a different matter. If anyone wishes to present such a case I recommend they contact me in the first instance to discuss further, other wise any accusations of shill or the like against Rachel or anyone else will led to a ban.

I say all this, because as one of the moderators I will not tolerate any repetition of the type of abuse that occured on the thread to which Rachel refers.

My understanding based on Rachel's writings is that she does not support the need to reopen the 9/11 investigation and so technically this makes her a 'critic'. However, presuming Rachel is only here to discuss July 7, I am willing to allow Rachel to continue to post in the July 7 section.

And just in case readers are not absolutely crystal clear, I restate that the views expressed on this forum do not in any way represent the views of the 911 Truth Campaign (Britain & Ireland)

Thank you

[scar]

[Rachel]

[ian neal]

As far as I'm concerned I have not seen any evidence that would lead me to think you are anything other than who you say you are, Rachel. Period.

We don't know each other other than through our exchanges in cyber space and the briefest of encounters at the London meeting that you attended (I left before your exchange with David Shayler), so my opinion is based on limited knowledge and therefore my endorsement of your genuineness can be no more than what I say above.

That said you can be sure that I am working on the presumption that you are genuine. Indeed I assume everyone is genuine unless given very strong evidence to think other wise.

Thanks and bye for now

[The Watcher]

[Micpsi]

Rachel, you said: "That bloke in the pic is from the Piccadilly line explosion. Rescued by a member of the LU Emergency response team, I think, and on route to (I think it was), British Transport Police building. I'm not 100% because I haven't met him personally but it ties in with what the station manager mentioned to me a while back. Note his grey face and dirty white shirt from the tunnel dust and smoke. Not sure what Daniel is on about re. agents, but its a novel he 's writing I think, not fact. "

Sorry, but this is inconsistent with what Daniel states on his website http://www.the4thbomb.com/index.html: "... while he lay rolling about in agony on the pavement 45 metres ahead of the bus wailing loudly without a speck of victims blood on him." Daniel has made the point both in his website and in his interview with Alex Jones that the man was not only too far away from the bus to have been injured by the explosion but was situated in front of it, whereas the bomb exploded towards its back. So he could hardly have been caught up in a second bomb attack and been injured by it! Yet this is how he reacted to it, according to Daniel, and how you interpreted the photo.

Your explanation simply does not wash, although you admit you are uncertain about it. It would of course explain why the man had a bandage around his head before paramedics and others arrived on the scene. But why would he have been "rolling about in agony 45 metres ahead of the bus" if he had - according to Daniel - been too far away and on the wrong side of the bomb blast? According to Daniel's interview, he passed the man on the ground as he ran away from the bus. There could not have been any LU Emergency response team members assisting him at the time from the Piccadilly Line explosion, as you interpret the photo to show, or else Daniel would have noticed them and would not have become suspicious about finding a man on his own, wearing a bandage within one minute of the explosion and before any professional assistance had arrived! Why would Daniel lie about that, given that he was on the bus that day?

I think therefore you need to compare notes with Daniel.

[Prole]

A couple of newsreel clips which show bandage man complete with LU staff:

http://atvs.vg.no/player/index.php?id=1495
3/4 of the way through is an extended version of the 'bandage man' scene and shows about 10 seconds of him walking down the street.

and here:

http://atvs.vg.no/player/index.php?id=1496

[ZUCO]

All eye-witness testimony is unreliable. I vaguely remember writing an essay about it in college. The brain remembers what it can and the "constructive memory" fills in the blanks. As we are unable to determine what is real and what is "constructed" then ALL of the testimony must come under scrutiny.

[illeagalhunter]

I heard this guy on Infowars ,his story makes you think it was false flag terror.Who wa sthe guy with the blanket round his sholders.