Rachel from N.London on Alex Cox's Forum

[ianrcrane]

Acknowledgment to Mahatma Ghandi for the following:

"First they ignore you,
then they laugh at you,
then they fight you,
...then you win."

I sense that we are making real progress!

Ian R. Crane

[orestes]

[Steven Collins]

Info of general interest for this thread for all, even Rachel:

Government have no cash for inquiry but ID cards budget is ok

The Home Secretary, John Reid, has announced that the Home Office cannot spare any funds for a full public inquiry into the bomb attacks that
took place in London last year. But how does that square with the money
to be spent on ID cards, which in any case will not prevent such
incidents from occurring? The home office in response to a written
question on 10th May stated that they have evaluated the effectiveness
of ID cards in contributing to preventing and disrupting terrorism, but
they went on to say that "for reasons relating to national security, it
is not possible to go into details". In fact the recently released
"narrative" into the events of last July reveal that the police were
able to identify the "bombers" from membership and credit cards within
just a few hours. If a full public inquiry would be a misdirection of
funds, what would compulsory biometric ID cards be?
---------------------------------------------------------

Please note I did not author this info, it came in my NO2ID email.

Steve

[numeral]

Has anyone seen reports of the funerals of Khan and Lindsay?

[brian]

Any objective person reading the recent posts could only conclude that Rachel, whatever her motive, is the one behaving in the manner she attributes to others. Her posts are nothing more than vitriol, obfuscation and downright malice.

She has no interest whatsoever in the facts of the matter, her tiresome repetition of some accusations made against her from other sources is all she repeatedly offers - this ad nauseum.

The glaring anomolies in the official account are of no consequence to her when she herself was a victim and could easily been a fatal one. This attitude, after she has been shown incontravertible evidence that similar supposed terrorist bombings have been the work of state intelligence agencies, is surprising if not suspect.

Pray tell Rachel what your colleagues found so amusing - or was that just another throw away line that bolstered your defences and your ego? I see nothing amusing about people showing genuine concern and interest in the truth of what happened that day when so many lives were lost and many more shattered. I see your self congratulary attempt at ridicule, I do not find it in any way amusing.

Whatever the reasons behind your bizzare behaviour I say again, you are not fit to be directing any call for an inquiry as it is perfectly obvious an examination of the facts is not on your agenda.

Quite frankly, you should be ashamed of your contibutions.

[Rachel]

Oh dear Brian, got out of bed the wrong side this morning? Sense of humour failure again?

I passed the thread and its highlights round my office and people were literally howling with laughter at you all, because it really, really is funny, reading this site. You are all so serious about it all. Questions, questions, no attemopt to answer them, no attempt to consider which was the more likely version of the truth - that suicide bombers did it - but instead this obsessive harping on about monor details as if it proves a great conspiracy. So po-faced, so barmy, so endearingly eccentric I suppose, in the great British tradition. I am getting quite interested in this little local drama. And so are others.

If I can have a laugh after all this grief and stress, then surely you can? Can't you see the inherent humour in all this? (That is, in the response of the conspiracists to 7th July, not the events itself. Although there are jokes made at survivor get togethers, quite a lot of them) Can't you see how it would make an excellent, hugely funny documentary?


No probably not. But after all this time, I can now see the funny side with you lot. There's no point getting annoyed with you, I now see, so I might as well enjoy the ride - and tap the rich vein of comedy to be had on these boards. After all, 22 pages of strangers banging on and on and on about me is quite some reading. I've never been thought to be a spook or a shill before. It's like being Mr Ben. What next?

And if you find it unsettling, or even a little distressing, well, I'm sorry, but after six months of nonstop abuse from you lot, I really, really find that rather a good example of comedic irony as well. Touche, chaps. It could be worse. YOu could have been suicide bombed on the way to work, after all, couldn't you?

[numeral]

Has anyone seen reports of the funerals of Khan and Lindsay?

[johnnyhotshots]

[Rachel]

I'm laughing at conspiracy theorists, not 7/7. What else to do? Take you seriously? Let it get to me? After all this abuse, and all this time?


There is a black humour to be found in your carryings on. And yes, there has been great anger at your mad theories , particularly claims that the bombers were innocent. But now I just laugh at you, for you are nothing but fools.

[numeral]

Has anyone seen reports of the funerals of Khan and Lindsay?

[Pikey]

Brian states:-

[freebird]

hello rachel, i'm fairly new to this site, i joined because i have some concerns regarding 911, never really looked into the london bombings but i seriously can't see the likes of two jags,gordon,tony and co slaugtering the people there charged to protect. The whole point of a terrorist attack is to generate fear and apply political pressure,as i remember the goverment promoted a carry on as normal, stiff upper lipped response.I can see where the bush cartel would benefit from generating that fear can't see how our goverment would benefit from playing it down. Out of interest do you think the investigation into 911 should be reopened ? do you have any concerns yourself?

[numeral]

Rachel said:
"If its questions but not answers you seek, here's a few for you. Why are the bombers dead? Blown into bits? How come their families have buried them, accepted their deaths?"

Where are the reports of the funerals of Khan and Lindsay?

[alkmyst]

As Rachel is on a mission for justice, not vengence, it would be reasonable to assume that any financial gain, achieved as a result of her 7/7 related media activities, is donated in full, to an appropriate 7/7 victim support fund.

Confirmation that this is the case would certainly help to establish the sincerity of Rachel's motives for putting up such a vehement defence of the official account.

Rachel, would you please confirm that this is indeed the case?

Thank you,

Al K Myst

[brian]

Rachel, now that you have answered me directly would you be so kind as to say why you have ignored my previous posts made directly to yourself?

One in particular asking how after been shown evidence of intelligence agencies involvement in similar type supposed terrorist attacks can you ignore the possibility that London may be such an event? NB - this does not in any way mean it was, merely that it is a possibility that demands consideration in light of the absence of evidence in the public domain as to the guilt of the accused.

There is at least three eyewitnesses whos evidence suggests the bombs were under the trains which you counteracted with the witness who, after weeks in a coma, claimed he recognised one of the bombers sitting opposite him prior to the blast. Under normal rules of evidence it is plain what version would win out. No?

Then we have Aswat - what if any was his part?

"ITN: Security sources told newspapers the alleged al-Qaeda planner had up to 20 conversations with Khan and another of the bombers, Shehzad Tanweer, one just hours before the blasts."

Then after the Loftus (CIA) interview it all changed - Aswat was not a suspect. This even though he was wanted by US intelligence for supposed al Quaeda activities and the UK let him enter and leave the country apparently at will -

"John Loftus: "The entire British police are out chasing him, and one wing of the British government, MI6 or the British Secret Service has been hiding him. And this has been a real source of contention between the CIA, the Justice Department, and Britain."

http://www.officialconfusion.com/77/mastermind/mastermind.html

"Loftus points out that several weeks before the London Bombings, Aswat was again located by the South African Intel agency but was again allowed to slip away, this time to London:

"He was a British intelligence plant. So all of a sudden he disappears. He's in South Africa. We think he's dead; we don't know he's down there. Last month the South African Secret Service come across the guy. He's alive...the Brits know that the CIA wants to get a hold of Haroon. So what happens? He takes off again, goes right to London. He isn't arrested when he lands, he isn't arrested when he leaves... He's on the watch list. The only reason he could get away with that was if he was working for British intelligence. He was a wanted man."

http://www.officialconfusion.com/77/mastermind/aswat/230805newcrimaswa tdoubleagent.html


London 7/7 Terror Suspect Linked to British Intelligence?

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHO200 50801&articleId=782

Can you honestly say that the official attitude to Aswat gives you no cause for concern?

The questions go on and on and how you and your colleagues find it all so amusing says a great deal more about your attitude than it can ever say about those that do not.

Humour I have aplenty, it is just innappropriate on some occassions.

Pikey, not encouragement, simply trying to keep the record straight and indulging the vain hope that Rachel will actually address the issue that she claims motivates her.

[freebird]

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- !!!!

[numeral]

From the Official Narrative:

04.54:
The Micra stops at Woodall Services on the M1 to fill up with petrol.
Tanweer goes in to pay. He is wearing a white T-shirt, dark jacket,
white tracksuit bottoms and a baseball cap. He buys snacks,
quibbles with the cashier over his change, looks directly at the CCTV
camera and leaves.

07.21:
The 4 are caught on CCTV together heading to the platform for the
King’s Cross Thameslink train. They are casually dressed, apparently
relaxed. Tanweer’s posture and the way he pulls the rucksack on to
his shoulder as he walks, suggests he finds it heavy. It is estimated
that in each rucksack was 2-5 kg of high explosive. Tanweer is now
wearing dark tracksuit bottoms. There is no explanation for this
change at present.

In the 28th June dress rehearsal Tanweer has a dark T-shirt and white bottoms.

Go figure.

[paul wright]

Yes Rachel the same issues reassert themselves again and again over this thread as over Alex Cox's and others
I'm sure you must have accummulated a body of evidence to actually challenge the many small points that counter the official account
Many of us here can just go back to old posts and copy and paste our doubts to you
Surely you can go to some of your posts refuting the specific allegations, rather than just dismissing us all as risible conspiriloons
Or simply referring to the wholly unevidenced assertions of the police and security services
Perhaps the main difference between us is that you are wholly reliant on the apparatus of government, police, security,established media and state, while the most of us have seen through what we consider their lies, constructed stories and manipulated reality
We can still live survive and operate in this zone but recognise it for what it is
I understand that you've had some aggressive outpourings, which may have hurt, , but some of us would just like to see your specific responses to specific allegations
That can't be so hard to do, even though I understand you may be tired of doing it by now
By the way I welcome your idea of getting Louis Theroux of doing a job on us. However he played it it would be really good to see the theme introduced into the establishment media, however much ridiculed.
If Louis wasn't up for it then maybe Jon Ronson might take it on, or even, at a pinch, Rod Liddle
Do you really think the Beeb or Channel 4 would want to broadcast the idea?
That would be really good

[Belinda]

Re. RACHEL & VICTIMS: I hope by now Rachel has had enough lunchtime or other kinds of fun at our expense but in case she pops up again today could I strongly advise that from now on we ignore her.

a) from the jumbled and incoherent way she writes she may not be quite balanced (the impression I formed at first encounter with her when she started ranting at our meeting, I have to say after wading through this latest round of posts I’m returning to that view…);

b) she may be getting fun and laughs out of us but as she has herself observed we are indeed deadly serious; for us this is no game or sport, this is a quest for truth, justice and correct information which are vitally necessary since so many people have died or been injured in these horrible atrocities. The only hope of forestalling any future such attacks is to know EVERY DETAIL about how the previous ones were caused, so that all members of the public are thoroughly informed and can be on the alert;

c) I utterly disapprove of people who deride people’s personal belief-systems in the way Rachel apparently derives such enjoyment from doing. All belief-systems are by their very nature speculative but if they mean a lot to people and help them understand life, that should be a call to everyone else to exercise respect and refrain from ridicule.

(Actually, when it comes to belief-systems there’s little as fantastical as what’s written in the Bible, which the main religion of this country is based on! But again, those who can’t accept the biblical version of reality don’t around ridiculing those who believe in angels or in the virgin birth or the Holy Spirit or all the other extraordinary information relayed from pulpits up and down the land every Sunday.)

This whole futile and wearisome exchange with Rachel and having her hysterical and hyperbolic rantings clogging up our forum proves a point I intended to make when she was baiting us a few weeks back but fortunately she cleared off before I got round to it. However since she seems to be back with a vengeance here it is:

DON’T ARGUE WITH VICTIMS.

Victims are bound to be affected by what they’ve been through, hence cannot be completely rational or objective, q.e.d.. So whilst offering them our sincere sympathy and support we should refrain from entering into any kind of argument with them because
a) they’ll always have the moral high ground, having actually been through the experience, so we’re automatically in a ‘no-win’ situation;
b) the sheer enormity of their experience will render them incapable of seeing things from a wider perspective;
b) their only way of coping with their trauma may be to cling to a rationale which is comprehensible to them, regardless of whether it is factually correct or otherwise, by the same token they will view as a personal threat and affront anyone who appears to them to be seeking to undermine that rationale;
c) their experience might have thrown them off balance, as it appears has happened in this case

So for all the above reasons can we quit arguing with or trying to convince Rachel PLEASE!!!

In any event, it’s our job to campaign on behalf of ALL the victims, which in the case of 7/7 includes the entire Muslim community of this country and the alleged bombers’ families (does anyone ever spare those particularly unfortunate people a kindly and compassionate thought??), as well as all those who directly suffered physically or were bereaved on 7/7. If these various victims’ views of the events conflict, as we know they do, the best way we can help ALL these unfortunate people is to continue to press for comprehensive and consistent information, and the explanation of anomalies (which the government narrative hasn’t dealt with), so that there is no further confusion or arguments over what happened or how it happened. This is the only way we will begin to get proper healing and reconciliation between ALL parties who have suffered, as well as helping everyone to be on the alert and to know what to look out for in the event of anything similar happening again, as we are told repeatedly that it will.

PS I gather Annie wrote to Rachel three weeks ago offering to have a one-to-one to iron out differences but she has not responded

[Rachel]

AlKMyst your point has already been answered, impertinent though it is, if you read earlier in the thread. Go and read about what I said about the Red Cross.

Belinda, I can see you and others think I am unblanced. My NHS CBT trauma therapist and my GP and my employers disagree with you, so I have professional & medical opinion vs. the opinion of hostile internet people, and thus am entirely unconcerned by your allegation, or the allegations of anyone else here.

On the other hand, the vitrolic abuse, death threats, harrassment of my family, malicious comments left on my blog, anonymous emails and obsessive devotion to conspracy theories relating to an event that did not affect directly anyone on this forum, do strike me as unbalanced.

If you have, as a result of this engagement, decided to a) leave me alone b) leave the survivor/bereaved campaign for a public enqiry alone, then I shall be pleased, since that has been my strategic aim throughout. It does the campaign for a public enquiry no favours to be associated with people who think Mossad or the CIA or M15 did it, so that is why I have engaged, and taken the abuse, as we decided it needed to be done. Hopefully we can now move on and leave you to your endless speculations and DVD watching and googling.

Brian, and others, most of the points you raise have been answered already here, on my blog and on Alex Cox's forum. I do not want to reiterate it all over again. I am convinced of the key thing, that the 4 bombers suicide bombed their fellow citizens. What I seek to understand is why, whether the security services did their job properly, worked with the police properly, an examination of UK domestic, foreign and social policy in the pre and post 7/7 world, the growth of the threat of extremist Islamist terrorism and the measures acceptable to 'defeat' it, whether current measures to defeat it actually fuel it , and demonise Islam, the civil liberties debate and whether the strategies of our Government are effective. I do not think they are, myself. I also want to examine tube safety, victim aftercare, communication, compensation and so on. I am seeking, with others, a public enquiry, to learn lessons, save lives and spare suffering in th efuture. I do not, personally, think the current Government's tactics and behaviour are effective, nor the war on terror , nor the presumption that we are all potential terrorists and should be monitored with intruisive ID cards and punished with draconian laws

I am however satisfied as to the guilt of the bombers, for reasons that I have explained, but I want to understand more about their radicalisation, and how many more feel like them; again, this is to see again, what we can do to stop it.

When there is a murder case, the police are not required to put the bloodied knife and the corpse photos out for members of the public to peer at, to 'prove' the guilt. Nor are they required to disclose all the steps of their investigation. I am satisfied by the facts here, and I know that i have had more information than you, but not that much more. You need to start from a sensible place: and if you assume the entire thing is a giant lie and that the police investigating are stooges of a corrupt government, then you have lost most people and put the debate into the land of conspiracies and paranoia, which means it can be dismissed, no lessons learned, and the truth not fully engaged with.

I make no apologies for abhoring this scenario, and that is why you have found me a thorn in your side for the last 6 months, as you have been in mine.

I dare say you think I am implacably opposed to you and you cannot see why and are hurt. I hope you can understand a little more now.

I can see that most of you are well-meaning and sincere, but you unwittingly do harm, and the worst of you - the anti-semites, the insulters, the aggressive ones, have harmed your sincere intentions still further. You should be careful of the company you keep.

There might have been commion ground, but you are not going to get anywhere at all if you carry on as you have been doing. You might have a sense of purpose with all your camapigning, but the victims and bereaved I am in contact with, do not want your conspiracy theories to derail the campaign for justice.


And that is why I have done what I have done, and if we can draw a line now, I 'd welcome it.

Thanks.

[Belinda]

Thanks. No one would be happier than I to draw a line as you put it, for the reasons I gave in my last post and for the sake of your fellow victims for whom, yes, I can quite see it may be easier and more comfortable for the moment to fall in with the government line and blame 4 young Muslim men.

Since 9/11 though I've become a total doubting Thomas about all these terrorist incidents and Al Qaeda and everything that's going on, I've lost whatever faith I ever had that governments are full of principled, moral people, motivated for the wellbeing of the public they serve, stringent about internal controls, etc. - sorry but that's how I've become so until I can see with my own eyes the CCTV footage of Tanweer, Khan and Lindsay on the platforms prior to boarding the trains I shall remain unconvinced that they were even there at all and have no peace of mind.

Now - even if we agree to differ and go our separate ways which I agree would be best, on a number of occasions and repeated today you have made very serious allegations that members of this movement have been hassling and threatening you and your father, in fact you say you have received a death-threat/s.

We can't let this go and I must ask your help in identifying the perpetrator/s because such behaviour is totally out of order and we need to root it out from our movement.

My question is therefore can you supply us with the evidence and re. the death threat/s, when did those happen and did you report them to the police?

Belinda

[Annie]

Good - line drawn.

I would like it noted for that record that the 911 Truth movement is devoted to promoting peace. We absolutely condemn violence.

If anyone has been threatened with violence or death by someone purporting to be of our network, please inform us. Then we can take steps, up to and including passing any available evidence to the police to investigate and/or prosecute.

Similarly, the movement will take appropriate legal action should anyone make unsubstantiated, damaging or libellous statements about the movement.

Annie Machon
Secretary
911 Truth Campaign (Britain and Ireland)

[ian neal]

Rachel,

First you have provided no evidence that people supportive of the 9/11 truth campaign in this country are responsible for the alleged death threats, etc. Provide some evidence or retract your claims that this campaign is in any way responsible for these alleged acts.

Second

[Rachel]

I have passed all anonymous threats and the info I have on them to the police and the IP providers.

They, not you, are the ones I trust to see justice done. I cannot tell which of you, how many of you, even if it is peple who actively post rather than lurk here which have issued the death threats and general threats.Therefore I cannot work with any of you, for fear of compromising my safety: this matter is best left in the hands of the professionals.


The police and my legal advisors have adivised to me to temporarily remove posts on my blog related to matters that are sub judice. I have done so, when the trial is over they will be reinstated; again, I leave these matters in the hands of the professionals, not people I have met once, or not at all, who have proved themselves frequently hostile to me and may be linked with messages which concern the safety of me and my family.

It may be the company you keep: I am not accusing all of you. But in my position, what would you do? Would you really expect me to continue to work with you people? I doubt it.

I have done the job I was asked to do by many of those who want a public enquiry, and who do not wish to be attacked as conspiracists. I had no idea, when I agreed to do this, that I would be the subject of such venomous and personal attacks.

I find it astonishing and saddening; be assured, the police take it very seriously. If I had known, when I said I would help out with media, as one of the jobs that needed divinding amongst the group, whilst others took admin, organisation, web support and so on ) that I alone would be the subject of such venom, I would not have agreed to do it. Perhaps I was naive, I could not, and still cannot understand such hatred from strangers.

But unfortunately somebody had to take you on, for reasons I have explained, and at least I still have all my limbs, a legal entitlement to anonymity and some experience in these matters, having weathered a rape trial, before the suicide bomb. I was considered the best person for the job at the time by the group I did not think what you some of you said to me could be any worse than what had already happened.

I think I overestimated my abilty to cope: I never expected conspiracy theorists to contact my family, and that I am truly angry about.

This is not a game, and what some of you are doing, is not forgivable or even comprehensible.

But it is, I hope, over now.


Leave me alone, you cannot win this, and attempting to try does you no favours.

My line is drawn, I suggest you conduct some kind of internal review if you are seriously concerned about what some of your number have done in the name of ''9/11 truth and 7/7 truth''. And otherwise, I suggest you wait for the reports of relevant legal proceedings in the papers.


And I strongly, strongly suggest you a) apologise and/or b) leave me, and the campaign for a public enquiry alone from this point on.

Thank you.

[orestes]

I seriously doubt anyone has threatened you and I resent you qualifying those accusations by saying 'some of you might not be involved' as if you had the right to slur us all.

[johnnyhotshots]

1.
We shall overcome
We shall overcome
We shall overcome some day

CHORUS:
Oh, deep in my heart
I do believe
We shall overcome some day

2.
We'll walk hand in hand
We'll walk hand in hand
We'll walk hand in hand some day

CHORUS

3.
We shall all be free
We shall all be free
We shall all be free some day

CHORUS

4.
We are not afraid
We are not afraid
We are not afraid some day

CHORUS

5.
We are not alone
We are not alone
We are not alone some day

CHORUS

6.
The whole wide world around
The whole wide world around
The whole wide world around some day

CHORUS

7.
We shall overcome
We shall overcome
We shall overcome some day

CHORUS

[ian neal]

I agree orestes


Outrageous, evidence free accusations

To be blunt, Rachel, you don't know who is responsible, but you have no problem in pointing the finger towards the people you refer to as 'you' (as in I strongly suggest YOU a) apologise and/or b) leave me, and the campaign for a public enquiry alone from this point on).

This is outrageous behaviour. And you wonder why some people here have voiced their suspicions as to your motivations and genuineness?

I can only speak for myself (and not others) but I have nothing to apologise for and most certainly will not be leaving the campaign for a public inquiry into July 7 alone.

Rachel's suggestion of a review

If you reckon that some of our number are in some way involved in these death threats may I ask (as Annie has requested) that you share this with us. Otherwise we are powerless to undertake any meaningful review as you suggest.

In addition to this I will point out the bleeding obvious. This is a public forum which has no means or wish to vet and approve people before they post here. So even if it was shown that people who happen to post here happen to have been involved in issuing electronic death threats to you and your family, it means nothing. All political/progressive movements have been infiltrated by agent provocateurs and agents of the state and include in their number idiots. This is a fact of life and popular movements have no means of preventing this.


The possibility of MI5 involvement

Since one possibility that occurs to you (because you say as much on your blog) is that rogue elements of MI5 (via Haroon Aswat) may have been involved in July 7, does it not also occur to you that it is possible that these same rogue elements in MI5 (or people connected to them) could be behind the death threats as a means of dividing the July 7 public inquiry campaign and as an attempt to discredit those who are asking the really tough questions about July 7.

You say you may have been naive. Your words posted here and elsewhere show you are naive.

Assuming you are speaking the truth, you have my unqualified sympathy both with regards to the events of July 7 and the death threats. But you are blaming the wrong people. Individuals are responsible and not a collective network of campaigners. And you have no way of knowing who those individuals are (or atleast not that you are willing to share with us) just as we don't. So type all the nonsense and veiled threats you want, your words expose you as an essentially dishonest and untrustworthy person IMO.

Now shoo

[paul wright]

I guess Rachel needs us far more than we need her

[Ally]

Can you please delete Rashill's poisonous slurs if she hasn't got any evidence to support them?

[Rachel]