Tube Closure Versus Rachel's Story - The problem

[astro3]

Tube Closure Versus Rachel's Story - The Problem

From Arnos Grove, all the way down to Caledonian road, tube stations were closed that morning due to a fire alert - the sole exception being Finsbury Park where Rachel got on, which stayed open because the Victoria line also passed through there. All these stations closed at 8 o'clock and re-opened at 8.30.

The problem is, that the tube takes 26 minutes to go from Arnos Grove to the point where it blew up near to Russel square station. I just did it in rush-hour. That does not give enough time. It especially does not give enough time for Rachel to catch the third train: the first two, she explained were so crowded due to the delays that she just let them go by, even though it would make her late for work, and squeezed onto the third one (Out of the Tunnel, p3).

The blast was at 08.50, according to Transport for London (though some sources say 08.51/08.52), so that would put the train leaving Arnos Grove at 08.24 or 08.25. I reckon that is too early - but, please do contradict me here.

Northbound trains can (one gathers) reverse at either Arnos Grove or King's Cross, while they shuttle back and forth during the rush-hour. The J7 site accepts the official data that the train which blew up had come from the depot at Cockfosters, ie had travelled all the way down. Is there maybe an alternative, that it reversed at King's Cross? How plausible this is, depends on how convincing you reckon are the testimonies of survivors, as to where they had come from, on that train. The latter scenario would have the train not very full.
...................................................................... ...........
Rachel's testimony here is anyway problematic, because she describes the heaving hordes waiting on the Finsbury Park platform waiting and waiting as two trains went by, when all they had to do was walk over to the Victoria line platform which is anyhow much quicker, to King's Cross . There was no point in them waiting on that platform, no need for them to be late, or to endure that awful crush.
........................................................
I got on Arnos Grove at 08.53 this morning and reached King's Cross at 09.17, Russell Square at 09.20. Given that Rachel says 'this is the most crowded train I have ever been in,' you might want to add on a minute or so to the 26 minutes it took me.
...................................................
Transport for London gives blast time: 'However, we can also confirm for the affected Piccadilly line train that the explosion occurred simultaneously at 08:50. Our evidence is based upon the precise time the Tunnel Telephone system on the Piccadilly line went out of service.'

If perchance the train did reverse at King's Cross, then clearly there is a lot that its driver Tom Nairn has to keep quiet about. Ray wright sat next to him, and both of them alluded to the train as number 311 in their accounts. Rachel knows these two: 'I know the train driver who did not leave the train, who stayed and helped the injured while his co-driver, who had been travelling in the cab with him led the pasengers who could walk ...' (p.77).
..................................................................
Here is an account on the J7 site that puts the fire a few minutes earlier: 'At around 07.57 Caledonian Road station was closed due to a fire alert caused by a report of a strong burning smell coming from a defective eastbound train. The passengers were evacuated on to the platform and Piccadilly line services were suspended between King's Cross and Arnos Grove until 08.28am. Whereas, ‘Edward Cowling’ testified, ‘I arrived at Wood Green station at 8:30 to discover it was locked and a notice saying the service was suspended between Arnos Grove and Kings Cross.’

Here is an account of Rachel's story, posted on Urban 75, cited on the J7 site which is more or less the same as that in her book:

[karlos]

From the Piccadilly line log supplied by Numeral:
At 0754hrs, E270 was delayed at Caledonian Road when a passenger alarm was operated. On investigation, the train operator found that there was an unusual smell in the 4th car of the train. Train services were suspended between Kings Cross and Arnos Grove The Kings Cross Train Maintainer, ERU staff and London Fire Brigade personnel attended. The traction motors and brakes were isolated and the train was worked empty to Cockfosters depot for further investigation. Initial indications are that brakes were hanging on in car 4. A 32 minute delay was booked. The train service was severely delayed as a result of the incident, particularly westbound from Arnos Grove with headways up to 12 minutes between trains.

[Nick Cooper]

[Rachel]

never mind, life's too short

[Rachel]

Perhaps if I don't respond you'll leave it, and me alone. That would be great.

[Rachel]

see above

[TonyGosling]

It seems to me that both the statements below by astro3 directly imply that Rachel is lying. A very serious allegation against a 7/7 survivor that needs to be backed up fully with all the evidence to back each and every contentious statement hyperlinked or noted in full before publication on this site.
All contentious claims discrediting terror victims, survivors or their families must be backed by hard facts or else removed by moderators as soon as possible. Repeated violations should mean suspension of users' accounts.

Please read the currunt UK defamation law here
Defamation is a false statement made by one individual about another. This statement attempts to discredit that person's character, reputation or credit worthiness. In order to be defamatory, such a statement must be communicated to at least one other person.
http://www.thompsons.law.co.uk/ltext/defamation.htm

[karlos]

[conspiracy analyst]

I was in Finsbury Park station that morning between 8.50 and 9.15 and the entrance I saw was closed. There are 3 entrances to Finsbury so I cant talk about the other two or whether people switching from the Overground to the Underground found trains.

During this time (I will try and get my mobile phone records if I still have them) I got a phone call from abroad telling me bombs had gone off in London and whether I am allright. I then switched on LBC 97.3 and heard power cuts had disabled the tube.

No one on this site will convince me that I did not experience any of the above.

I will continue to refuse to believe that this whole issue is based solely on trust or on who has seen the evidence and who has not.

[Nick Cooper]

[karlos]

I dont think anyone has called anyone a liar. All that is happened is people want answers to pretty simple basic questions.
Her legal threats are the only answer so far.

[guzman]

[guzman]

[paul wright]

Rachel seems to have "bought" a lot of victim status in her life, and continues and endlessly repeats, the process by actively entering potentially hostile environments and "baiting" vicious personal responses, while proffering legal threats as a result.
While people should have sympathy with Rachel's experience, and the horrible fear syndrome that has imprinted itself upon her, they should understand the skewed emotional platform she's operating from, and not seek to respond to her provocations.

[Nick Cooper]

[Nick Cooper]

[Prole]

[karlos]

Staraker lets not speculate about what might have happened.
We have the 'testimony' as provided by Rachel's book and the statements released by LU. And the press.
There is a clear difference of facts. Between these various information sources.
I would rather seperate this core issue from the threats and arguments over what is and isnt legal, because the fact is Libel is very hard to prove, lawyers get $100,000 on both sides and UK libel laws have been tightened to make it harder to prove.
This is why i am saying do not delete ANY posts. If Rachel tries to sue for libel, her own posts will have to be taken in context to demonstrate her own words which i believe were just as strong if not worse.

[Prole]

As for poor Richmal Oates-Whitehead, it's very easy to libel a dead woman who cannot defend herself. She did tell the truth about the second controlled explosion on the bus, which was strangely denied by the police.

[ianrcrane]

'This house believes that that the evidence, currently available in the public domain, does not support the official version of events (i.e. Goverment Narrative) which allegedly occurred on 7th July 2005'

I wish to offer Staraker the opportunity to publicly debate the above motion with me, in London, at a date to be agreed but no later than March 31st 2008.

Both Staraker and I shall have the opportunity to be seconded by persons to be announced by no later than 31st January 2008.

Each proposer to have 30 minutes to present their case and each seconder to have 20 mins to support/respond.

The debate to be opened to the floor for 60 mins.

All major media to be advised of the event (even though we know that they won't have the cajones to report on it).

The time has come to take this debate into the public arena ... and I am ready Staraker ... are you?

Ian R. Crane

Note to Staraker: I presented 'The 9/11 - 7/7 Connection' on 22nd July 2005; co-incidentally, I was giving this presentation at the exact same time as Jean- Charles de Menezes was being 'taken out' by 'Common Purpose' Graduate Cressida Dick's team of Mossad trained assassins.

I now have the benefit of a further two years of research and it is time to raise the game.

[paul wright]

Ian, you want to debate with a sadster who has no cajones. You'd be mighty lucky

[paul wright]

Deleted repeat

[ianrcrane]

Hi dh,

of course I don't expect the 'sadster' to rise to the occasion. The liklihood is that he/she is another 'internet obsessive' who is part of the team fighting a rearguard action to try to wear down the resolve of the hardened dissenters (seasoned researchers or conspiraloons, depending upon your perception of reality!).

However, I have reached the point where I am 'so sad' that I have the gall to take this debate off the internet and into the halls of an appropriate venue in London.

Let's take it mainstream!

Come on Staraker, here's your chance to put the full extent of your deep resources on public display. I am ready to stand up and be seriously counted ... are you?

Ian R. Crane

PS. This is my real name ...what's yours?

[karlos]

To be fair Staraker did come to the public meeting in September at the Indian YMCA. Although he was just as dogmatic on that day as he is here, credit where it is due he did come and argue his case.
So i would imagine he would be likely to accept the challenge.
Maybe him and Rachel together as supporters of the official conspiracy story and if you like Ian i can be your second?

Should be a good debate.

[ianrcrane]

Hi Stelios,

Now there's an idea... Rachel as Staraker's second? Gosh, that thought had never occurred to me!! Wow, now that really would be an interesting proposition.

However, on further review, it's not really appropriate as Rachel has a deep emotional connect in to the topic question, which would undoubtedly undermine her ability to present an objective case.

That said, if Staraker said that he would only participate if Rachel was his No.2, I would not be unduly concerned.

BTW, thanks for the offer of support; I would definitely value your input and readily acknowledge that your contributions on this forum have added to my education.

Kind regards,

Ian R. Crane

[paul wright]

I'd also second Ian in a debate
Who here is going to second staraker
Unfortunately he has no support apart from possibly Rachel.
Then perhaps he or she is far too immersed for her liking
It just cant happen
The one is from the insiders who know how things are more or less, the other is from the outsiders who go along with the OCT
There isn't any resolution or debate as far as I can see

[karlos]

We might be able to stage this event at the LSE

[Nick Cooper]

[Nick Cooper]

[Nick Cooper]